Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TV on DVD and Blu-ray' started by mrz7, Mar 4, 2018.
I'm sure they'll have it when it's finished.
How idiotic that is on her part-- to act like classical music would be on a list of top 40 rock hits!
(Then again, it might not be so much idiotic as misguided.)
If that one's new to you, click the spoiler.
Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Fat Ass Off[\spoiler]
HEY KIDS… BUYING MOVIES? BUY THEM ON DISC, NOT DIGITAL. HERE’S WHY... By Bill Hunt - September 13, 2018
Another reason why physical is superior. It's also a strong argument against region coding for both physical and digital.
Whoever said physical wasn't superior?
Right on the money, he is-- plenty of good common sense!
For certain definitions of "superior".
Shelves of discs are inferior.
Single-disc players are inferior.
No couch-surfing and playback selection of disc library is inferior.
Slow blu-ray load times are inferior.
Animated and/or cumbersome blu-ray menus are inferior.
Forced trailers are inferior.
Forced FBI warnings are inferior.
No resume after stopping a movie partway through is inferior.
The blu-ray software format is user hostile. And it was designed to be that way. Its saving grace is that it has superb audio/video quality. But everything else about blu-ray discs is a UX dumpster fire. Especially compared to the "10-foot" experience of couch surfing an entire library.
What I look forward to is disc's A/V quality with the user friendliness of streaming. In the mean time, I'll buy my discs, continue in my foolish infatuation with my HTPC, but also redeem those codes for the future of streaming.
• Not being at the mercy of the phone company to get the same resolution for the whole movie is superior, and so is not going from 1080p to 480p or less at the blink of an eye.
• Not having your ability to watch the movie taken away when the studio license runs out is superior.
• Not having the credits of your favorite TV shows squeezed into a box while they ask if you want to watch the next episode is superior.
• Lossless audio is superior.
• Supplemental features on the same disc or as part of the same set are superior.
• Being able to sell it for extra cash is superior.
Yeah, I had a feeling it was something like that and not just “Apple decides to be evil and steal your purchases”.
The entire digital ecosystem would collapse if there was a panic of purchases being removed arbitrarily. Apple (and the other digital companies) have an incentive not to do that. The linked article proves that this was never about Apple being evil but that your purchases in one region don’t necessarily follow you to a different one, which isn’t news.
I’m glad I didn’t panic.
While I absolutely prefer physical over digital I can't argue with most of those statements.
For the most part, the BR playback system is horrid. A *few* discs get it right by starting with a simple menu and minimal load time.
I detest animated menus, always have, even with DVDs.
I detest "forced" trailers on a product I've purchased - but I see these on digital too and they seem to be more difficult to skip.
The forced FBI and other copyright notices are laughable and insulting.
While many of my BRs don't resume, some do. DVD got that part right.
I don't like multi-disc players except in my car. I found them generally cumbersome and flaky with CD - I don't want a DVD/BR repeat.
The "library surfing" functions of every streaming service I've seen is simply horrible. Vastly inferior to browsing my database and then going to the shelf where the title is stored to select it for playback. If I had the same amount of digital titles as physical I'd need to use an external database for them too as the services I've seen and used don't offer any kind of usable search/sort functions.
I like my shelves of discs. BUT they can be cumbersome.
If you like digital, that's great. Someday it'll be good, possibly superior. That day is not today. My son loves his digital so gets all the codes I get with physical purchases. We both win.
But it should be. That a region code prevents you from watching a title purchased in one region if you are so unfortunate to move to another is ludicrous.
They don't just go by billing address but also IP so if you're a resident of the US and travel abroad it's highly likely IP restrictions will prevent access to your library.
It's nice that Apple is seemingly trying to get the guy access to his library, but, if I understand the article, it also means he'll still be region locked to Australia for iTunes even though he's now a Canadian resident.
Region coding is draconian. I just don't get why people put up with it. For digital to fully succeed that will have to go away.
It may be unfortunate that region coding can prevent purchases from working across the board.
But, at the same point, it's part of the iTunes terms of service that you're purchasing for a specific region. I'm clearly logged into the US iTunes store, and it's made clear that this has no relation to the iTunes store in the UK, for example. I can't see UK items and I can't purchase UK items while I'm in the US.
It's unfortunate if you make purchases based on a plan of living the rest of your life in one country, then move to another, and then find that you can't use your old purchases in your new location.
My big issue with any of this is that any restrictions which might cause you to lose access to a title need to be clearly stated. I believe the iTunes region thing is clearly stated, certainly well enough for my satisfaction, to consider this a non-issue. I know that if I were to move to the UK, I would not be able to access most of my digital content there. My big issue is when a company changes their terms and conditions after the fact, which I have very little tolerance for. That didn't happen here. The person made a purchase that was valid in only one location, and then tried to access it from another location where it was not valid.
That's right! On that fifth-and-final-season release of Hart to Hart (1983-84), for instance, I can see the credits through to CPT's 80s Torch Lady and not be pestered with having to choose to see the next show or not.
Then you definitely would have made Showtime's sixth-season Dexter release out to be a practical pain-in-the-you-know-what: on that one (on all four discs of that one), there was the same locked-in Showtime promo that you had to see in its entirety. Not only did it have to be seen through in its entirety, but from what I recall, it spoiled the end of that sixth season's worth of Dexter! You can imagine all the complaints on Amazon and elsewhere (and quite justified too, from what I hear)!
Region codes have been a thorn in the side for enthusiasts since DVD. No surprise it remains so with streaming.
That's true. But at least with DVDBR I can purchase a "region free" player and take my region locked purchases with me or purchase out-of-region titles to watch in my native region. It's not quite as easy to circumvent region locking with digital, although it can be done. I just don't get why, in this day and age, consumers continue to put up with such archaic and draconian practices.
And in the same way you can circumvent the locks on physical media, the locks on digital media can also be circumvented. If one wanted to have access to digital content outside of their authorized region, there are programs available for disguising and spoofing your IP address so that it appears you are accessing the service from a different geographical location. I don't know how many people do this, but more than zero. I'd be curious to know if it's in similar proportion to the number or percentage of disc-loving people who have region-free gear.
As for why consumers put up with it, I would venture to guess that it's an issue that doesn't affect the vast majority of consumers. The average consumer for media values convenience and low cost above all else and doesn't necessarily have a strong interest in viewing the same titles over and over; renting or buying a movie digitally still checks those boxes for that kind of consumer. This simply isn't going to be something that touches the vast majority of consumers using these services, which means that the average customer isn't "putting up" with anything.
I would venture to guess that most media consumers are more like my father. In the days of VHS, he'd go to the video store to rent a movie once or twice a month, and supplement that with an HBO subscription. When DVD took over, he'd use the Netflix-by-mail disc rental service for most things, but would also buy a disc on a whim if he saw it while he was out and about and it appealed to him. In practice, he'd watch these discs maybe once and then they'd just sit on the shelf. When streaming came out, he converted the Netflix-by-mail subscription to the streaming one, and will just pick from what Netflix has available. He still has HBO, which now includes free access to their streaming service, so that adds an additional layer of choice and flexibility. And if there's something he wants to see that's not available on Netflix or HBO, he'll rent it digitally using his Amazon account. He's watching the same amount of content as he always did, maybe even more, but he's paying less across the board. He feels more freedom with his choices now than previously because it's driven by what's convenient to him vs. having to rely on what was in stock at the video store or having to wait a few days for a disc to arrive in the mail. And he's certainly happier not to be adding discs to a pile that never gets watched.
There are a lot more people in this world who consume media like my dad does than there are people who consume it like I do.
Just went to my local Wal-Mart to purchase the latest McCartney CD and was shocked (yet not surprised) that the CD section is now down to one small section of an aisle (plus the end cap), while the DVD section has been cut by at least half. But hey, they now stock a pretty nice selection of vinyl albums!?!
CDs aren't really profitable for a retailer to stock anymore - the cost of the real estate for that section of the store usually far exceeds the profit margin on those items. So they can use this week's newest and biggest release as a loss-leader, but there's no benefit to keeping a larger catalog of older titles around. The vast majority of music consumers are no longer purchasing physical CD copies of music they want to listen to. I'm not even sure that they're paying for a digital purchase of a specific album. They're spending $5 or $10 a month on a service like Apple Music or Spotify and calling it a day.
Vinyl remains something of an exception. Even though it appeals to a much more limited audience, that audience is willing to pay a premium price for it, which means that it's not a race to the bottom on pricing, so a retailer can still make a profit on those items.
Perhaps customers at Walmart and Best Buy would have bought more CDs over the years if the people working there wern’t hired specifically for their lack of knowledge of movies and music!
Walmart has always been completely hopeless. The people working in the department have never heard of music.
Best Buy — customer asks for a new CD of a kind of music not played on the radio — clerk looks puzzled and it is obvious he has never heard of it — “I’ll look it up on the computer” he says — computer says they have 10 copies — clerk still can’t find any.