Will Internet Video Replace Blu-ray?

[kq6qv]

Is it free enterprise when billions are spent on expanding the internet, which is then given free to Netflix, who will use it to try to drive DirecTV and the cable companies out of business, which might be possible due to a very minor convenience improvement? Real free enterprise is when Netflix (and others) pay their own way. -Ken

[hharris4earthlink]

Was it fair to Netflix that NASA spent billions developing satellite technology which was given free to DirecTV who want to use it to drive Netflix out of business? Was it fair to DirecTV that the US spent billions on a postal service so that Netflix could deliver low cost movies to the US. In "real" free enterprise, DirecTV would have developed their own satellite launch technology and Netflix would have instituted their own mail service.

Come on, Ken. These kind of arguments are pointless and not germane to the subject. I'm sure you know better.

Henry

[allchemie]

The need for speedy and "wide" internet pipes is obvious and those that live where Verizon delivers fibre optic connections (FIOS) right to the dwellers residence are already in good shape---but this is mostly happening in big cities. The advantage that small European and small Asian countries have is just that--they are small and far more easily wired for fibre optics. I'm sure both coasts will be wired forfibre optics well before the sparsely populated areas in the middle of the country. Heck, even in NY if you live in upstate areas or the Adirondacks it may well never happen. It is far easier to wire the majority of people in Denmark, The Netherlands, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, etc. than it is to connect every place in the US, Russia, India, or China. These smaller countries also use cell phones to a much larger degree because it was far easier and cheaper setting up a speedy cell phone infrastructure.

But there will undoubtedly be new technologies (such as Wi-Fi and others) that will eventually have speedy connections.

Now, back to the present. There is room for any number of formats to coexist and while they may not peacefully coexist, it will mostly be up to the consumer which path they choose to go. One can download lossless from iTunes if they wish, but the "real estate" that movies, videos, and tv shows take to provide a lossless video and audio experience is very large. In the future, many people will own daisy-chained multi-terabyte hard drives, but for the majority these aren't affordable and feasible at present, or in the near future.

People will be upconverting SD DVD's for a long time -- so get your new OPPO DV-983HD and enjoy the best that SD can offer both visually and sonically:-)

Within 2 years there will be considerable sales of Format 2.0 Blu Ray players, but it will never come close to the success of the standard DVD. There will be too many competing formats and technologies to allow that. But I think Blu Ray player sales will eventually be quite successful. I would estimate that between 10% and 33% of SD DVD owners will eventually buy Blu Ray.

Anyway, the next decade should be very interesting to see which technologies become the most used and which technologies become the audiophiles and the videophiles favorites. Stay tuned.......

Greg

[allchemie]

"Is it free enterprise when billions are spent on expanding the internet, which is then given free to Netflix, who will use it to try to drive DirecTV and the cable companies out of business, which might be possible due to a very minor convenience improvement? Real free enterprise is when Netflix (and others) pay their own way. -Ken"

Many companies have benefitted from using the reasearch from government agencies and from current laws. The government likes when start-ups and alreadfy functioning companies utilize the technologies that all taxpayers have funded. DARPA financed the beginning of the internet. While NASA financed launching capabilities, thereare numerous cheaper countries that already get our launching business from private companies to put satellites in space. And the satellites and their internal parts are bought from many companies--thus mulching the economy.

Cable was given non-competingcable franchises by local governments. Obviously local governments can't control who recieves programming from satellites from companies such as DISH, DirecTV, Sirius, or XM.

The government gets back plenty of new taxes from these companies and their employees for the dollars they invested. It is far better than giving mega-farms enormous subsidies (almost $100 billion over 10 years) for no new technology and little, if any, public benefit. Sure, it mulches local economies in small areas, but it takes out the risk that the corporate technological companies have.

Netflix does most of their buisiness by mail. When they use the internet to send downloadable shows and movies they need to buy a ton of servers and to rely on having people buy high speed internet connections.

Why download inferior product without 1080p and the best audio codecs when you can rent (at about the same price with no late fees) from Netflix and other companies, like Walmart and Blockbusters?

And when you rent a movie you want to add to your permanent collection, you can always buy the Blu Ray version or miss some excellence in ausio and video and buy the SD version and play it through the new OPPO DVI-983HD.

There is and will be a whole smorgasbord of rental and buying opportunities from various deliveries of software and programming.

I use DirecTV, and while I watch movies from the service, I mostly use it for watching tv shows, sports, and various specialized programming, such as HBO and Showtime serials. While watching HD on DISH, DirecTV, or digital cable isn't as good as a Blu Ray disc, it is probably superior to any current downloadable services. I doubt I will use DirecTV for downloads or Pay on Demand, unless it is something I am so anxious to see I refuse to wait any longer. To say that rarely happens would be an understatement.

I'll be getting a new Blu Ray player by the end of the year and can't wait until some truly excellent models arrive.

Greg

[dihatten]

"Our family habits can require the ability to watch a movie in segments over several evenings if necessary and that is one feature none of the new kids provide unless you purchase the download."

If I may be candid, Mr. Fisher, you do the films a big disservice. A film is made to be viewed as an uninterrupted story. The emotion a director hopes to elicit from the viewer would be all but impossible if watched in segments. On network TV, nothing ruins a movie quicker than the intrusion of commercials. I understand that G-rated children's movies may be tough to view uninterrupted. The attention span of children can be a challenge. But watching a more adult film should be scheduled when it can be viewed in its entirety.

This is just my humble opinion.

Richard

[Richard]

You have assumed much

When a movie goes beyond two hours we might split it up and that is going to be highly likely for the 3-4 hours ones. As an example we have always watched Lawrence of Arabia over two nights, split at the intermission. Some recent and lengthy Bollywood movies were handled that way. Sometimes we may start with good intent to complete the film but one of us gets sleepy.

The point of the statement is if you start a movie you have 24 hours to complete it and only each end user can determine if that might be a problem for them. This is not a problem for prepackaged media that you buy or rent.

[franknspud]

First of all, the entire civilized world doesn't live in an urban, highly populated area. Thus, not everyone has high-speed internet access. We live in Vermont (after living in California for 20+ years), and while a limited portion of the state does have cable or DSL, much of the state is limited to slower connections--like satellite. And trust us, it's awful. Granted, they are working to put a fiber network in the entire state, but that is a ways off and I know Vermont isn't the only state in the union with limited internet choices.

Additionally, people like their 'things' and companies who sell those 'things' like people's money. Blu-ray is a new marketing device (one I personally love) and there is way too much money to be made from its existence. At this point there is barely even any content available on Blu-ray--it's not going anywhere anytime soon nor is the need for our society to continually collect more tangible stuff. Ego is a strange & powerful thing! So, why not enjoy the beauty of what we have in the moment? Go Blu-ray!

[hharris4earthlink]

I guess I'm confused. I've lived in California for 27 years and I've used satellite (DirecTV) for about seven years and the service now in HD is very good in terms of both quantity and quality. I have hundreds of channels. It certainly isn't slow. I would have assumed that the same service is available in Vermont.

I also rent Netflix Blu-ray disks and have found most popular movies are available in that format now and even the less popular titles are fast being filled in. I'm also a big fan of Japanese anime and I've been able to order most titles I'm interested in in the Blu-ray format (Highly recommended: "Ex Machina"}. I'd suggest going to the Netflix online catalog. I think you'd be surprised at the number of Blu-ray titles available even at this early date.

Welcome to the future. I think you'll like it.

[akirby]

I guess I'm confused. I've lived in California for 27 years and I've used satellite (DirecTV) for about seven years and the service now in HD is very good in terms of both quantity and quality. I have hundreds of channels. It certainly isn't slow. I would have assumed that the same service is available in Vermont.

Henry - he's talking about satellite Internet service, not television.

[hharris4earthlink]

Of course. At least I was right about being confused.

The point is well taken. The easy availability of fast Internet service in California for a long time now made me assume it was available everywhere by now. I'm shocked to find out it's not.