Qui Gon Jim

Then you would understand that if there is not enough horsepower serving the demand, then it doesn't matter how much bandwidth there is. If the server can't keep up, then the chain is broken.

I honestly doubt you are in the industry if you think that the "pipe" analogy is a joke. I hear this literally every day.

Aside from all that, you would not need the bandwidth that a BD utilizes between the source server of the download, you would need it between the playback device and display.

Again, streaming and downloading are two things, and I think you're a little confused.

Qui Gon Jim

Here I agree. There is some work to be done.

The way I see it is that this will be a service that rides not on the internet, but on cable services.

Gizmo

As it stands AppleTV and Vudu have more movies available in HD then Blu-ray - each (at my last check a few weeks ago).

Qui Gon Jim

Um. He gave an example. Netflix.

Gizmo

Congrats to you! Now, go to the DVD Forum and look at peoples "collection" and spot how many are still in the wrapper - your are going to see a lot of those.

Just like a lot of us, we see a good value and we jump. Sadly, sometimes life gets in the way and we have to put off watching a film for a while (or ever). I'm not talking about people that own 50-100 titles, but those in the hundreds.

The Man with the Golden Doujinshi

Here's why I stream HD VOD: It's a rental that I get for free from the rental service I'm using. I could wait for the disc which may or may not have a long wait, or I could just be in the mood to watch something but don't want to wait for the disc.

You aren't doing it to replace buying the movie, you're doing it to speed up a rental process.

People that like the movie can still buy it, they aren't going to stream it.

I highly doubt the "buy once, stream any time" model will occur. That's a lot of storage space for lots of movies that are going to be watched less and less as time goes on.

SHUT UP!!! GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!

Qui Gon Jim

Absolutely. I don't think that VOD is a replacement for owning media, I think that owning media is a "fad" (I can't think of a better word, but fad is not giving enough credit) that is fading.

bunkaroo

It's worth noting that while Vudu might have many more films listed in "HD" than BD has out, last time I did a count they only had ~240 films in the higher quality HD, which their site compares to Blu-ray. The rest are HD-lite.

SPRBD

I totally agree. I hope that VOD will live alongside packaged media, not replace it.

SPRBD

I was talking about digital downloads compared to packaged media in general, including SD. If you're talking HD only, packaged media is way behind.

Gizmo

Of course. But HD lite is still HD. 720p/1080i is still considered HD. And for many, that is "good enough". VuDus HDX titles look fanastic - watched one last week at a friends house. I want a VuDu box now but their $99 special ended While many (even HDX) won't look as nice as Blu-ray, I'm dine with spending the $4-$6 rental vs. $20 to purchase where it sits on my shelf to never been seen again (and BDs seem to devalue quickly - I have a hard time selling any BD thats more then 2 weeks old for over $15 shipped)

Gizmo

Yeah, packaged HD is way behind and it will only get worse as the years go on. Not including the offerings by AppleTV/VuDu/360/PS3, most cable/sat services have numerous films for rent or free on their movie channels.

jiggawhat

Someone brought up a great point about the relationship between CD sales and downloads in another forum and it should be food for thought. Album sales have definitely dropped off and that’s a given but what’s surprising that even in 2008 more than 350M physical albums were sold per Nielsen Soundscan. This is 8 years after ITunes came out. This should be an indication that people still buy physical media and will for quite a while. Even Vinyl of all things picked up to two million units. Nothing to sneeze at considering it’s Vinyl.

While CD and DVD are not exactly alike, I think this should be a good indication of where the market is headed. And note, there is still not a comparable version of ITunes for movies in terms of content and cost.

With all the turmoil in the world, I think Blu-ray will end up doing fine.

(http://76.74.24.142/81128FFD-028F-28...BF16A46388.pdf) – RIAA stats as well up to 2007

bunkaroo

It's just disappointing to an early adopter like me that so many of their HD films are not up to the standard of Blu-ray.

From my point of view, I already own a BD player, and can easily rent the majority of films Vudu has in HDX (the near-BD equivalent) from Netflix on BD and know I can get better quality. There is no incentive for me to go and spend hundreds of dollars on their product if it can't improve on the tech specs I am getting from BD. The only thing it can hope to improve upon is convenience, but that difference is marginal to me.

If all of their HD movies were true 1080p with lossless that would make me much more interested. I guess my point is tech like this needs to get the early adopter involved to become successful, and they are not appealing to someone like me who is an early adopter.

I mean hell, I spent $1K on the first Sony BD player which was profile 1.0. If that doesn't show I like burning money on new tech, then I don't know what does! And yet Vudu hasn't sucked me in. I also think buying a Vudu box is a lot riskier than buying a BD player was. They could be gone in a year if things don't work out.

Gizmo

The BDP1 was $1k when it came out? Thought it was $599?

bunkaroo

I think like a dope I paid near list for it but I can't remember. It was an impulse buy. I know it was selling for $999 but I may have had a 10% coupon. I seem to recall it went down to $799 within the first few months of 2007. it probably got marked down even more leading up to the S300 release.

matome

Paying over $2K for the BDP1000 & BD10 in 2006 And I agree on the long-term viability of streaming/internet related technologies. Those people that bought those DIVX discs from Circuit City are still watching those discs to this day, right? I'll stick to my standalone physical media where I can still watch my 18 year old laserdiscs to this day.

bunkaroo

There was a reason I didn't go for the BD10 but I can't remember why. I think it was out before the BDP-S1. If the BD10 didn't have 5.1 analog outs, that might be why, since the S1 did and I didn't have an HDMI receiver yet.

Mr. Cinema

$799 for the Samsung BDP-1000 seemed like a bargain at the time I bought it (Oct. 06). I paid $499 for the Panasonic DMP-BD30 (Nov. 07).

matome

Actually the BD10 was the only player to have 7.1 analog outs at the time. It might have been availabilty issues at release. I had to pick mine up locally from that Robert guy from Value Electronics as he was the only one to have it in stock at release. It was a great player though and lasted me almost two years till I replaced it with the S550 in October.

Mr. Cinema

I had the BD10 also at one point. Panasonic has made some great players. I'm looking forward to their new line coming out. However, those new Pioneer players look very slick. I may grab their "cheap" $300 model.

Gizmo

But as someone who rents VOD titles - who cares? I paid $4 for a film, watched it, now I'm done. Any movies I plan on watching more then once I'll buy, so no issues there. But really, how many times can someone watch GI Jane or End of Days?

matome

Oh I have no problem with people wanting to stream, as long as there is always a physical option as well. I just don't want to be subject to the whims of an external provider as the sole source for media content.

mmconhea

That's not what I said. I'm telling of an example how download infrastructure can't even meet demand for a news event, let alone HD home theater content.

mmconhea

No I'm not confusing them. BOTH were inadequate. And providers and such knew there would be huge demand, but couldn't meet it.
The problem magnifies when the demands of the user magnify with HD video and sound.