chimera991
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2010
- Messages
- 1,170
and how long is it gonna take you to pirate or much worse stream a 200gb version of avatar?
btw did you know the new BR limit i believe is 100gb?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Microsoft: Blu-ray is Going to be Passed by as a Format
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
btw did you know the new BR limit i believe is 100gb?
I wonder what the coaster rate would be if you tried burning 100gb video to blu-ray. bleh.
BTW, I download 1GB in 7 minutes, on my $35/mo 18mbps/1mbps Time Warner connection. So downloading a 12GB - 15GB Blu-Ray rip would take less than two hours. News is win.
(I pay $60/mo for a second identical connection for everything else.. but... you get what I'm saying)
But I don't download movies or buy DVDs. IMO, if it's worth seeing, it's worth seeing in the theater.
Mr. Pedantic
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,707
Hardly makes a difference. I normally take about 5 months to download 150GB of data.
I don't disagree, streaming won't kill Blu-Ray or a successor and streaming/digital won't be killed, either.
As far as 150GB goes, besides discs written on both sides and multiple discs, how many systems are really going to be able to use that data to surpass a 50GB Blu-Ray and not have a bottleneck? Or will the human eye be able to distinguish the difference or enjoy the viewing experience more?
That said, I'm waiting for the Baraka sequel, Samsara, and an insane resolution even at 1080p.
Blu-ray's absolutely not going to be "passed by as a format" just because streaming exists.
That's like saying Morton's Steakhouse will never survive because McDonald's has started delivery service. People with the means and the priorities will probably still go to Morton's (and occasionally pull through McDonald's drive thru for convenience).
Even when everyone's bandwidth is big enough to have real blu-ray quality streamed to your screen (this is five or ten years away), there will still be people who prefer to own a disc that won't be accidentally deleted, won't be interrupted by a loss of connectivity, is something they can hold in their hands and loan or trade with friends, etc.
That's like saying Morton's Steakhouse will never survive because McDonald's has started delivery service. People with the means and the priorities will probably still go to Morton's (and occasionally pull through McDonald's drive thru for convenience).
Even when everyone's bandwidth is big enough to have real blu-ray quality streamed to your screen (this is five or ten years away), there will still be people who prefer to own a disc that won't be accidentally deleted, won't be interrupted by a loss of connectivity, is something they can hold in their hands and loan or trade with friends, etc.
Maybe. It seems quite opulent for watching movies, usually action flicks or animated ones. Most people that would consider a Ferrari aren't waiting for them to greatly benefit from more speed or acceleration. And the studios could be too stingy for DRM, hurting them.
BladeVenom
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,707
Sure in the lab they can make prototypes that can do that, but the players people already have couldn't read those disks, so they aren't going to put out 100gb movies.
Can you imagine how expensive a four layer disk would be.
WBurchnall
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2009
- Messages
- 2,622
Not to mention, everyone knows how hard it is to convince current blu-ray owners to buy a 2nd blu-ray player just b/c it does '3D' as:
'3D' is a gimmikc, '3D' makes my eyes sore, there's only a few movies worth watching on 3D. 3D will never take off, it didn't take off in the __ hundreds/decade'
I can just imagine people with 1080p 3d blu-ray players being told to buy another player so you can play extra-long length movies like Earth on fewer discs or so you can have 4k resolution which most home consumers would be unable to distinguish from 1080p.
One nice thing about streamed media that one doesn't have to worry about vs. getting a physical disc is about damage. I rented a DVD last night from Redbox and it was unplayable about halfway through the movie. If the movie was streamed, then obviously I wouldn't have had that problem. Too bad some people don't take care of such rented discs. The play side of the DVD looked pretty scuffed up.
70 Chevelle SS
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2010
- Messages
- 40
Good thing about blu rays is their disk coating that resist scratches that easily occur on dvd's .It takes a lot of abuse to make a blu ray unplayable.
I didn't know about that. That's nice about the BR coating to resist scratches. DVDs are as scratchable as CDs.
I always put discs in cases and protect them, so my brand new purchased stuff always plays fine. But it's the rented stuff that can be a crapshoot.
Neurofreeze
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2002
- Messages
- 2,523
I find it hilarious that nearly every single company that claims Bluray is a failed format because of DIGITAL DOWNLOADS was a part of the HD-DVD group.
Somehow I don't think they'd be singing the same DIGITALDOWNLOAD4EVAR song if HD-DVD had won the war.
Somehow I don't think they'd be singing the same DIGITALDOWNLOAD4EVAR song if HD-DVD had won the war.
Why doesn't anyone think of blu-ray as a storage medium? Im sure as long as we have a need for storage blu-ray will stay around. The format needs to live long enough for us to get affordable record able discs. DL dvd's can barely hold enough these days.
Its cheaper for me to just buy more 2TB HDDs
HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
and you don't have to worry about disc degradation that way either.
Yes because HDs last forever, especially the newer 2TB drivers.
I now have 15 year old optical media I burned as backups and they are still good (but I have backups on newer media as well). Who is running a 15 year old HD?
Buy good quality Media, store it properly and you should have no problem getting a decade out of it.
I would love it if we had some 1TB blu rays for backup. If disk were $50, I would buy it right away.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?newsid=3242540
Then get two 2 TB HDDs and periodically clone one to the other. That will all but guarantee that your storage will be safe since it's highly unlikely that both 2 TB HDDs die at the same time, barring something crazy like a fire or flood.Yes because HDs last forever, especially the newer 2TB drivers.
I now have 15 year old optical media I burned as backups and they are still good (but I have backups on newer media as well). Who is running a 15 year old HD?
Buy good quality Media, store it properly and you should have no problem getting a decade out of it.
I would love it if we had some 1TB blu rays for backup. If disk were $50, I would buy it right away.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?newsid=3242540
BladeVenom
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,707
They promised even longer than that, but it isn't true. Lots of my CDs had gone bad by the time I went to DVD. Right now some of my older DVDs are failing.
I'd rather use a pair of big hard drives than mess with hundreds of optical disks. The hard drives may wear out, but they are faster and easier to back up. For me they've actually been more reliable in the short term.
Yes I also do the dual HD thing rather than mess with hundreds of opticals, which is a size issue, not a reliability issue. If I had 1TB opticals. I would use optical for backup.
My new 2TB failed inside of 3 months. If you read reviews they have fairly high failure rate, you need 2 just to stave off catastrophe that could happen anytime.
If you want to use optical it is incumbent to research media/burner and verify and test your backups. Do this and a decade should be easy. You should be re-burning before then anyway.
None of my quality media has failed.
I've never had a disc go bad either, and have burned discs going back to 1999 (in 1998 I was actually playing MP3s on audio out and recording them to CASSETTE!). I don't actually need any of that old shit, since I'm backing up work and not media files, but occasionally I fire up the old discs for a blast from the past. I also of course have made duplicates of said discs in the time since then... but I hold onto the originals basically out of curiosity and because I'm half-autistic and do stupid shit like bond with the first CD-ROM I ever burned.
4saken
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2004
- Messages
- 13,198
just an update, Nielsen source, BD sales are up 274% compared to week ending this time last year.
Also, DVD sales were up 88% as well for the last week ending, compared to same week a year ago.
Digital may be slowing it down, but its nowhere close to reversing the sales of physical media yet.
Also, DVD sales were up 88% as well for the last week ending, compared to same week a year ago.
Digital may be slowing it down, but its nowhere close to reversing the sales of physical media yet.
I've been told many times (and seen through experience) that you can't stream compressed 1080p over WirelessG.
WirelessG = 55mbps, half-duplex
Avg. Internet connection = 7mbps, half-duplex
Huh?
The only people who consistently say this are people who's downloading mkvs and think that because they can stream it over their network then anyone should be able to do it. mkv's look good, but it still has quality loss from the original BD.
Facts:
If a mkv is being streamed off a DVD, then the max bitrate you can pull off that medium is 11.08 Mbit/s. 18 Mbit/s if it's an AVCHD disc.
Bluray's max bitrate is 53.95Mbit/s Wireless G typically can't do that unless you are just a couple of feet away from the router, close enough that you could just run a cable. N is better, but you still need to be reasonably close. The average broadband speed in the US is 3.9Mbit/s, so maybe you can pull off mkv quality which is decent but not without buffering.
Where in the original quote did he say most people can stream the straight blu-ray content? The original quote said that most people can handle a "compressed 1080p stream" not "blu-ray 1080p stream" You can indeed stream a compressed 1080p stream through a wireless connection though it certainly might not be videophile quality it's doable. [Stereotype] Not to mention someone using a wireless G connection for their set top box likely won't care too much about video quality anyways [/stereotype]
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...1-surround-disc-less-netflix-your-move-ms.ars
Seeing as how netflix will be rolling out 1080p streaming to the ps3, I think at the very least netflix seems to think there's enough of a market to offer "compressed 1080p streaming".
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...1-surround-disc-less-netflix-your-move-ms.ars
Seeing as how netflix will be rolling out 1080p streaming to the ps3, I think at the very least netflix seems to think there's enough of a market to offer "compressed 1080p streaming".
Seeing as how netflix will be rolling out 1080p streaming to the ps3, I think at the very least netflix seems to think there's enough of a market to offer "compressed 1080p streaming".
People will also watch DVD streaming services and think that is good enough. For a quick rental, quality is pretty much irrelevant.
It is for movies that you really like and watch more than once where Blu Ray will matter. I have a BD-ROM for my HTPC and I only buy movies in the sub $20 range and I think it is very worth it to have a superb 50 GB highest quality hardcopy for not much more than a theater ticket.