Downloading HD material the way to go.....Nope.

I seem to hear an awful lot lately about how streaming HD material is the way of the future, and how supposedly this will be the demise of Blu Ray. So anyway I decided to download Michael Clayton this weekend over xbox live. The video was 720p quality, and roughly a 4.5 Gb file. The download over a Shaw high-speed cable modem took forever.

I started the film late Saturday night, but something came up and I had to turn it off. Because I had already started the movie, I had to watch it within 24 hrs or re-pay for the film (thanks DRM). So, last night even though I didn't feel like watching a movie, I did so anyway just so i wouldn't lose my money. The audio was decent quality, but just your basic 5.1 DD. The video was good, but not as good as HD DVD or Blu Ray quality.

I have to say, I don't like the way of the future if it is downloading movies. The way I see it a lot needs to change before the public will accept it as the norm.

Right now I see the following problems:

1) too expensive - especially over xbox live in Canada
2) too slow - internet technology has to come a LONG way before download speeds are tolerable
3) Basic audio quality, sub-par video when compared to HD DVD / Blu Ray
4) No freedom to watch the movies whenever you want, nothing to collect (ie: discs)

Just my two cents, but I will be sticking with disc media for a LONG TIME to come, as will most other people IMHO.

[Post edited by Bosshog7 on Mar 3, 2008]

First issue with XBOX live is that 4.7G is standard DVD quality or worse.

Second Issue, try Telus/Bell ADSL service. Cable providers in Canada are not that reliable yet. A DSl circuit will give you continued speed, and faster downloads especially for bit torrents. 3.0 or 6.0 is the way to go. Telus/Bell are using ADSL 2+ technology now. You can even stream HDTV through phone now... A 2+ circuit is capable of handling 18Mbs.

Third HD NET has to make its way into Canada. Not going to happen for a while.

You can bet that if in anyway it is more cost effective to only have downloads for the home entertainment market, it will most likly be the way of the future -- in about 20 years. For now, no, downloading will only be an option. Hollywood is all about the dollars, so if it's cheaper, production wise, to only have downloading available then that is the direction they will shoot for in the long run. Just imagine how much they'll save by not having the expenses of plastic cases and shiny discs, not to mention all the marketing BS that goes with them.

I see a future of downstreaming rather than dreary old downloading. Imagine a cable channel with as big a library as Netflix. You pay a monthly fee, pick the movies you want (unlimited amount) and simply click play and begin to watch -- all downstreamed so you don't have to wait. Netflix kind of does this right now with a limited selection of films, however, don't think for a second that they're not opening a bigger door to a brighter future filled with rainbows and saltwater taffy.

poster above. your thinking the way of the future, to be.. what is available now. lol thats now exactly what they mean.

they mean a more mature way of downloading.

Quote:
they mean a more mature way of downloading.

So, then the way we download now is childish?

Tim is 100% right. The sad thing is that hollywood won't see the savings of providing downloads over hard discs and pass on some of the saving to the consumer. No, they'll want to charge exactly what they've been charging and keep the rest.

I download a lot of audio books from places like audible.com. When I purchase a title, it is in my online library forever. There are books there I bought 6 years ago still there waiting to be downloaded if I want.

No one will consider building a library of digital only titles until a) the quality and features are equal to that of a physical disk. b) always getable. c) and priced in a way that reflects the fact that there is no physical manufacturing.

Hey, if they do that, I think anybody would be in, why not? Less space taken up in your house.

I realy wasnt aware the way we download reflects our level of maturity. wow, i guess i just didnt see it coming.

i download the standard versions on xbox live take like 15 min. I cant a difference from hd vs standard using the xbox service, to me they look the same. Every movie ive downloaded from the live service has been good, in PQ and audio i have no complaints.

Maybe we are moving quickly towards media download.

The speed in which Toshiba dropped HD-DVD surprised everyone. They said they didn't believe there was sufficient life in High Def discs to proceed. Now this may be sour grapes but there is no denying everyone was surprised with the ease they turned away from the next gen market.

Since music download really took off I've noticed the cost of music CDs has fallen. Is the same around the corner for Film?

Maxell have now announced they will no longer produce CD, DVD, Blu-ray and HD DVD discs.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/04/maxell-to-no-longer-manufacture-discs-blow-customers-away/

I prefer to own a disc - however for it to be financially worth it with HD, compared to renting I'd need to watch the film five times to break even. Those films are few and far between.

[Post edited by Scotsman on Mar 4, 2008]

Quote:
Hey, if they do that, I think anybody would be in, why not? Less space taken up in your house.

Call me old fashion, but i would prefer to have the physical media over the digital library, i mean things can go wrong, if your hard drive crashes would you have a back up?...then having high quality movies would take a lot of space, let alone without all the special features, that would even mean more space...i think its still a long way before downloads catch on...

Amazon pondering high def Unbox rentals?

Quote:
Respondents were asked to prioritize several interesting potential features, including HD downloads, instant streaming of DVDs ordered from Amazon, ad-supported free streaming, and the ability to browse your entire Unbox purchase history from a TiVo. Actually, several questions focused on the TiVo and other media streamers -- it looks like Amazon's at least considering developing the TiVo as its answer to the Apple TV and Xbox 360.

We'll see how this plays out -- hopefully the high-def download scene is about to blow up.

Looks like hidef downloads will be available from one of the biggest online retailers in the world. The movies will probably be cheaper than buying the disks because you don't get a case, disk, literature, art, etc. You don't have to buy a hidef player to watch it although you DO need a Tivo (a lot of people have these already) or whatever they're going to use.

I can't imagine this not having a positive effect on hidef downloads.

[Post edited by Falcon01 on Mar 4, 2008]

I think you'd need the box if you plan to store movies, and I have to admit Tivo boxes are a nice unit to have if you're a TV-aholic. However, with downstreaming you have the choice to just watch and not store. Plus with Tivo you can watch something else while downloading/saving a movie.

As I've mentioned before, it will simply be another "option" but I don't see it taking over the entertainment media for a very long time. Artsy boxes with colorful discs are like bling-bling to people, so they're not about to give it up.

Nevertheless, I would hope this kind of technology opens the door to other avenues in entertainment, such as interactive TV. Imagine not having to use your stinking cell phone to vote for your favorite American Idol -- you simply vote using your remote control. Imagine watching a football game and YOU can switch to which ever camera you want by using your RC. Imagine having the ability to vote for President right from your TV. Yeah, I am reaching for the television as the central home media center, but it just makes more sense to me to order a Dominos Pizza from my TV rather than my computer -- the idea being less movement as possible. Lazy minds think lazy thoughts.

i think a great service would be streaming. You can purchase a movie and it is marked that you have paid for it. no local storage. Basically what the cable services offer now only you buy the movie and you can watch it as many times as you like.

Even better would be you rent it - this allows you to watch during a 24hr period. If you then 'rent' it a second time it is 'tagged' as owned by you and you can watch it whenever you want.

Again, thanks to the popularity and easy of use of TiVo, they can make it happen. Again, it's for the average Joe, not most of us...

According to this story downloading HD movies could be viable within the next five years.

They claim they can use existing telecoms network and claim that their device will be able to download 15 full-length Hollywood movies a minute.

http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=29225

I watch Pirates on XBL(over 7 gigs btw) and I couldn't tell the difference between that and the Blu ray copy.

Using XBL to count out movie downloads as the future is retarded. Currently XBL can only be used for RENTING movies. So of course you cannot say that it will overtake Blu ray or any other physical media right now.

Snowed In = Download service....

So up here near Cleveland, Ohio we had quite a good bit of snow. We had received so much that they had closed down the streets and hence the family and myself were effectively stuck in the house. I had suggested downloading (or renting) a movie online and playing it through our TV (weak blu ray releases last week). The wife was quite excited about that. We decided to get Stardust (assumed it would be kid friendly) and our first step was .. figuring out how to get it to the TV. I figured I could use my laptop as the TV has a VGA input on it (sorry no DVI on the lappy and even if it did, no DVI to HDMI cable).

I happened to have a nice 720p encoded movie on my computer and thought it would be a good test. Well, that went south as my video out on the laptop (only used it a handful to times) was not working correctly.

Without that working and without a DVI to HDMI adapter my only other option would've been to get the movie onto the PS3 and play it through that.

So after checking Itunes, Netflix, Amazon(Unbox) I've come to realization that all require their own software players to play. Which leads to 1 big reason why the adoption of downloadable movies/services has a long way to go in my book...and that's portability.

My family consists of 5. My oldest child is 4, she has her own ipod shuffle and I'm sure will graduate to a nano (or whatever as she gets there). The point is, we ARE a digital and technically savvy family. In my entire professional career I've worked with standards (and the failure to comply with them) and every device that has failed to comply or complied to where they thought they should comply has failed.

So the point of this, if I'm going to move to digital downloads (and to note I would do so as a supplement to my physical library), I want to be able to send my movie to my PS3 (or Xbox, or AppleTV, or IPOD, or computer). I want to copy it onto a memory stick, take it over to my in-laws and watch it there. The idea of going digital is to facilitate a process that we used to do manually. A general rule of thumb, if things become more difficult with the application then the application is not justified.

Well, that's my .02

I hear ya unieye,

Unfortunately the studios' love of DRM is going to make the kind of interoperability and portability you're hoping for difficult, if not impossible. In order to satisfy this requirement, new DRM standards would have to be adopted by all future CE devices capable of video playback that prevent the transfer of the media to "unregistered" devices. This is enough to throw a wrench in the entire downloadable media gears for many, many years to come regardless of technology or bandwidth.

2 questions...

1. how does drm work?

2. have hackers NOT have not been able to beat this technology yet?

Blu_Bawla,

There are many ways that DRM schemes have been implemented, but usually involve some sort of decryption algorithm along with some sort of physical method to make copying diffucult. Obviously some have been more successful in their goal than others (try ripping an SACD!), but generally speaking most (if not all) of these tecniques have been circumvented by hackers. The trick is to make it difficult for the general public to get around DRM.

The hard part going forward is to allow managed copying while still allowing studios to apply DRM. We'll likely see downloads containing paired key encryptions (similar to secure sockets or HTTPS), where the host key must be somehow put upon the client devices that the user chooses to register (with a pay-per individual device in the works I betcha).

Although a hacker could get by this scheme by re-encrypting the file with a known host key for another specific registered device pool, it would be impossible to make a "one size fits all" unprotected copy that could be put up for bit-torrenting by the masses.

All this is just conjecture on my part, but studios love DRM and will implement it or simply avoid giving us managed copying ability all together.