UHD How are we going to get people to move to HD? never mind UHD.... (1 Viewer)

[Persianimmortal]

if it studios looked at blu ray software, like Microsoft does , it would have been easy, just move on and quit making the older format, you want the latest and greatest, then you need to upgrade

But that's not what Microsoft does. In releasing Windows 10 for example, it hasn't suddenly made earlier versions, like Windows 7 (which comprises 60% of Windows installations) stop working, nor has it ceased support for all older versions (except XP, but that really is ancient).


In fact the Microsoft analogy is more apt than you might imagine: MS has tried (quite aggressively too), first in Windows 8, and now in Windows 10, to get desktop PC users to switch to using mobile-oriented touch-centric "apps" instead of traditional PC-based keyboard and mouse-centric programs. It's tried to do this so it get can users into its walled garden and start earning money from app sales. But it's failed spectacularly thus far; Windows 8 had one of the lowest adoption rates of all Windows versions precisely because of this strategy.


Despite all this, MS recognizes that it would be commercial suicide to release a version of Windows which drops support for traditional programs and only supports the new Universal Apps model. Much the same as it would be commercial suicide for the studios to have dropped DVD support in favor of Blu-ray. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

 

[dana martin]

(except XP, but that really is ancient).

things do have their time, then pass, but my son still has a copy of Win95 that he is still running, its a game thing, but I do see your point, I my self just cant see investing in an hd display, to turn around and settle for 480p resolution, just doesn't make sence

 

[Persianimmortal]

It's not really 480p resolution though - upscaling a DVD doesn't just rescale the image, it also adds artificial information (interpolation) to make the image look nicer. I've seen some really nice upscaled DVDs on my HDTV. They can't match Blu-ray quality of course but they're more than adequate for achieving the basic objective of enjoying a movie. And again, the market is transitioning towards streaming, which provides a superior image to DVD (typically 720p or 1080p), and one that's close enough to Blu-ray, at very little cost and maximum convenience.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Many other hugely popular shows that have enjoyed Blu-ray issues, are now being released to DVD only, such as THE BIG BANG THEORY!

Tony: I haven't heard anything about Big Bang Theory being cut back to just DVD. Are you maybe thinking of Modern Family?

 

[bruceames]

I expect that as physical media continues to decline, the bulk of it will continue to be DVDs, Blu-ray will retain its niche, and UHD Blu-ray will die off quickly.

Don't know about UHD BD, but I expect DVD and Blu-ray to decline in tandem, at approximately the same rate. In fact, they have been doing so for over a year now (both declining at around 16 percent so far this year). It's possible though that Blu-ray could die off sooner than DVD, given DVD's staying power and that more titles are viable to release on that format, as well as the early release windows on Digital HD affecting Blu-ray sales more negatively than DVD.

 

[David Norman]

Took me by shock there -- BBT S8 is scheduled for 3 weeks so that seems to be going strong.

It's not really 480p resolution though - upscaling a DVD doesn't just rescale the image, it also adds artificial information (interpolation) to make the image look nicer. I've seen some really nice upscaled DVDs on my HDTV. They can't match Blu-ray quality of course but they're more than adequate for achieving the basic objective of enjoying a movie. And again, the market is transitioning towards streaming, which provides a superior image to DVD (typically 720p or 1080p), and one that's close enough to Blu-ray, at very little cost and maximum convenience.

Convenience for who -- not for the customer with slow internet or capped bandwidth. Of course looking at Digital copies that cost more than Blurays and even Bluray with UV copies always makes me laugh.

 

[bruceames]

Much the same as it would be commercial suicide for the studios to have dropped DVD support in favor of Blu-ray. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Obviously they can't drop a format that still has a 70 percent market share. That would be suicide. I think they did what they reasonably could to get consumers to switch. They had (and still do) combo packs, so consumers won't be forced to choose and can future proof if they don't yet have a Blu-ray player. They gimped the DVD versions, stripping them of extras. Disney even delayed the DVD of Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, by 4 weeks, so that more buyers would choose the Blu-ray version. The most telling result of that experiment? Disney never tried that again, and that was four years ago. Needless to say that experiment didn't work out in Blu-ray's favor.


At the same time, studios don't have the motivation to get consumers to switch, like they did with VHS. No backwards compatibility and high VHS manufacture costs were huge motivators. Studios are content to let DVD (and now, Blu-ray) die a natural death and their thoughts are mostly on the growth of Digital HD.

 

[Tony Bensley]

Tony: I haven't heard anything about Big Bang Theory being cut back to just DVD. Are you maybe thinking of Modern Family?

Hi Mike!


That's what I get from relying solely on what I saw at a Brick & Mortar recently--DVD sets of BBT, but NO Blu-ray Season 8 sets.


I just checked Amazon, and sure enough, Season 8 IS available on Blu-ray! The industry back pedaling from Blu-ray to DVD only for many current TV Series is still undeniable, nevertheless!


CHEERS!


Tony

 

[Persianimmortal]

Convenience for who -- not for the customer with slow internet or capped bandwidth. Of course looking at Digital copies that cost more than Blurays and even Bluray with UV copies always makes me laugh.

You only need a 5 Megabit/s connection to get Netflix HD, and how many people fail to meet that requirement these days? Ditto data caps - you only need around 100GB a month for frequent movie viewing. Realistically, if you can afford an HDTV, you can afford a 5Mbit/100GB Internet connection, and if you live in a remote area you're not a major part of the market demographic anyway. Add in the much lower cost ($10/month for all you can view), and the physical convenience - i.e., no need to get up and insert a disc, just browse through the titles, see one you like, one click and you're instantly viewing the movie. Do you really think we're going to get the average person to overlook all of these factors and instead outlay thousands of dollars on a physical disc collection?

 

[KeithDA]

You only need a 5 Megabit/s connection to get Netflix HD, and how many people fail to meet that requirement these days?

Me!!

That's another issue behind my concern - I live up a farm track and only get 1.6mbs, with no likelihood of an improvement anytime soon. I also prefer physical media.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I don't think films sold in blu-ray/DVD packs helps. I don't recall DVDs being sold in a pack with a VHS cassette.

 

[Persianimmortal]

Me!!
That's another issue behind my concern - I live up a farm track and only get 1.6mbs, with no likelihood of an improvement anytime soon. I also prefer physical media.

Yes, but how many people are like you - own an HDTV, interested in movies, but can't get 5mbit Internet? We're talking a small proportion of the market. The majority dictate market trends, whether we like it or not. And in this case, the majority are happy with DVD and/or streaming. There's absolutely no point in trying to convince the average person to drop hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on a physical disc collection. The battle's over, we lost that war.

Personally, I'm amazed and grateful that we've had so many titles released on Blu-ray. Many more than I ever thought we'd see, and enough for me to gather most of my favorites.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Took me by shock there -- BBT S8 is scheduled for 3 weeks so that seems to be going strong.



Convenience for who -- not for the customer with slow internet or capped bandwidth. Of course looking at Digital copies that cost more than Blurays and even Bluray with UV copies always makes me laugh.

It doesn't make me laugh as it allows me to enjoy movies in a different way. Late at night, if I can't sleep, I can turn on my bedroom HT without leaving the bed and watch a digital movie within seconds. As to those with slow internet or caped bandwidth, it's unfortunate for them, but there is such a large demographic out there that can take advantage of HD Digital viewings.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yes, but how many people are like you - own an HDTV, interested in movies, but can't get 5mbit Internet? We're talking a small proportion of the market. The majority dictate market trends, whether we like it or not. And in this case, the majority are happy with DVD and/or streaming. There's absolutely no point in trying to convince the average person to drop hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on a physical disc collection. The battle's over, we lost that war.

Personally, I'm amazed and grateful that we've had so many titles released on Blu-ray. Many more than I ever thought we'd see, and enough for me to gather most of my favorites.

Maybe so, but the number of software releases continue and probably so for the next ten years. By that time, most of my favorites I'll have on Blu-ray.

 

[Rick Thompson]

You only need a 5 Megabit/s connection to get Netflix HD, and how many people fail to meet that requirement these days? Ditto data caps - you only need around 100GB a month for frequent movie viewing. Realistically, if you can afford an HDTV, you can afford a 5Mbit/100GB Internet connection, and if you live in a remote area you're not a major part of the market demographic anyway. Add in the much lower cost ($10/month for all you can view), and the physical convenience - i.e., no need to get up and insert a disc, just browse through the titles, see one you like, one click and you're instantly viewing the movie. Do you really think we're going to get the average person to overlook all of these factors and instead outlay thousands of dollars on a physical disc collection?

Answer to Question 1: Anyone with no hard-wired cable/FIOS available and so dependent on wireless. In short, anyone not in an urban/suburban area.


Question 2: (A) That $10 doesn't include data charges, and if wireless ever achieves proper throughput, those charges would be through the roof.


Question 2: (B) Who makes the choices of what's available? The choices will be the latest and greatest, plus a few catalog titles. For the record, I wouldn't blame the choosers; it's what I would do, because I want to make my server capacity pay the greatest return.


Question 3: I wouldn't expect them to outlay thousands in one shot, but they might well over the space of several years for the ability to see films they like (even if not the biggest hits) when they want to see them.


And if you supposedly "own" a film in the cloud, what happens when the server company goes out of business or is hacked with everything deleted? Anyone willing to bet that would never happen? If so, Sony, Ashley Madison and the Defense Department's human resources division might differ with you on that.

 

[Worth]

Most people don't have the need to own films or television series, aside from one or two favourites and children's titles. They watch them once and that's it.


I have a fairly large collection of films on blu-ray and DVD - and if I want to own something, I'd rather have a physical copy of it - but even I only buy films that I've already seen and like, and know I'll want to watch again. I don't see the point in spending $20-30 on a film I'm more than likely to only watch one time. Or spend double that on a series I know I'll only watch once. Streaming and/or downloading and DVRing are more than adequate for that purpose.

 

[Alf S]

That's where I am in life. Back when DVD hit the street I was right there at BB snagging an open box Toshiba DVD player (mind u DVD had jus come out a month earlier) and started buying up every "cool" movie I could to show off this new tech. I bought a BUNCH of movies for years. But soon I started deciding that the $15-20++ cost of each movie was better spent on more useful things since as I reflected back on things, I realized I usually watched a DVD once and never went back to rewatch..the novelty wore off pretty quick.


So about the only dvd/blu movies we would pick up used was kid shows/movies when our kids were younger. Oh I mght splurge now and then and buy a movie now and them since my 7 year old boy likes rewatching his super hero movies, but those purchases are few and far between.


For the record, I was able to watch Netflix with ease using 3mb DSL for quite a while, so it is possible to do.

 

[RolandL]

Me!!

That's another issue behind my concern - I live up a farm track and only get 1.6mbs, with no likelihood of an improvement anytime soon. I also prefer physical media.

Wow that is slow. I was complaining to Comcast that I'm not getting there advertised "up to 105 mps". Found out its my PC that is too old and that's what I only get tops 80mps. I shouldn't complain.

 

[Persianimmortal]

And if you supposedly "own" a film in the cloud, what happens when the server company goes out of business or is hacked with everything deleted? Anyone willing to bet that would never happen? If so, Sony, Ashley Madison and the Defense Department's human resources division might differ with you on that.

This is an exaggerated argument. I could make the same exaggerations regarding your disc collection: what if someone breaks in and steals all of your discs? What if there's a fire or flood? What if your discs are scratched, warped, or develop disc rot? Possible, but not very likely.


Similarly, the companies that own the servers, like Netflix, Apple, Google, Microsoft and Amazon, are unlikely to go bankrupt anytime soon, and even if they do, their assets (like the servers and their contents) would probably simply be sold on to another large company. And sure, servers can be hacked into, but there are redundancies in place to prevent complete data loss: offsite/offline backups, alternate servers for load balancing in case one set of servers goes offline, etc. If you entrust your sensitive emails to the cloud (because that's where they effectively are), why not your movies?


Let's not forget that we're in the relative infancy of digital downloads and streaming. Things are rapidly improving in that regard, and a truly attractive ownership model for digital downloads still needs to be developed in my opinion. But for now we movie enthusiasts still have DVD and Blu-ray, and the average person who, as Worth said, is not particularly concerned with ownership or classic movies, has streaming for their (HD) viewing needs.

 

[Dave H]

My home internet service (Time Warner-Brighthouse cable) went out last night and the issue could not be resolved remotely. A tech is coming out this evening.


Just another reason I want nothing to do with streaming.