The Future of Digital Video? 308
An Anonymous Coward, in name only asks: "I've been asked to write about the Future of DVD technology for a newsletter and I've been doing some thinking and research regarding this. It seems pretty clear that DVD is a dead-end technology, due to be replaced by Video On Demand. Already Disney is launching a VOD service, albeit through traditional broadcasting. It's to be a brief piece, and I plan to touch on how VOD will affect viewers as well as professionals. What is a realistic timeframe for beefing up broadband (such as Powerline Broadband?) and smartening compression (On2's VP5 , MPEG7?) to create a workable VOD system that will replace DVDs? Is delivery more likely to be based on an open or proprietary standard? What do you see as the future of Digital Video? Any input is greatly appreciated." While I don't think that Video on Demand will spell the end of DVDs, it would be interesting to know how far the technology has progressed, and how much further it would need to be developed before you could can pick-and-choose your movie-of-the-night from your own living room.
VOD is DOA (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:5, Insightful)
Dead on!
VOD is the tech that will fail. People want to have phyical copies of things. VOD means you own (or lease) a virtual copy. It's much the same reason getting music by buying MP3's (say from apple's new service) will not fly in the end. People want to have the CD, a real cd, not a burnt copy. Sure I will buy a cd and rip it and play mp3's on my computer but I want to own a real tangiable version to. I want my movies on DVD, there for me 24-7 and can take them anyplace I want. Buy it once, own it forever.
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:3, Interesting)
If people wanted physical copies of things why do things like netflix and Blockbuster (shudder) exist? Video on demand with a decent price and selection will do as well as these traditional rental companies. People don't buy copies soley to view them or listen to them, many people are interested in the extras (CD Labels, DVD extras, general packaging).
Personally I feel the future of Digital Video is in DVD players with ripping capabilites. Once HD space is cheap enough that a DVD player can hold 50+ h
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:4, Insightful)
RonB
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:4, Interesting)
I want to be able to get whatever form of entertainment when I want it. That isn't to say that I want pay per use, but rather that I want to pay a yearly entertainment fee and get whatever I want to.
If I want to find out what's so great about a particular show that I've heard about, I want to see it now. I don't want to wait for it to come on or to buy a collector's set. I'm even willing to deal with commercials, but I want things to be on my schedule rather than the networks'.
I like the idea of everything being at my fingertips. I'd like to be able to summon any obscure movie at whatever time I choose. Or any song. Or any book. Or anything. If some sort of flat-rate content on demand service were available it would give me the control I desire. Peer to peer services already do this to a degree, although not quite legally in some circumstances (I see no wrong whatsoever in sharing shows that have been publicly broadcast already though; they've already been given away).
I don't like the idea of pay-per-use, but to say that I don't like getting what I want, when I want it would be like saying that I don't like caramel. Everyone loves caramel.
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
Sure, having net storage is cool - but basically the same thing.
But don't forget - HDs crash.
RonB
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
I think VOD will have its place in the market - rental DVD and VHS might be the ones to suffer - provided that the infrastructure can reliably be put in place. I don't see how it competes with owning a DVD or VHS. I can't imagine that every film ever will be maintained by my particular VOD distributor. Why would I run the risk of not being able to watch "Peewee Hermans Big Adventure" at 3am on a Sunday when I can gaurantee it by owning a copy (which I don't by the way) for not very much money. However
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:2)
Anyone remember when Disney said that they were NOT going to release their movies on DVD, because DIVX (that's the buy-cheap-limited-play-crappy-resolution-happily-
R-i-i-i-ght.
The Mouse (tm) is good at entertaining children and building theme parks, not so great at picking the Next Big Thing.
Re:VOD is DOA (Score:3, Insightful)
Disney can do just fine by re-releasing it's old stuff in newer formats, even digital video.
As a corporation, they're pretty greedy and paranoid, but the fact is that people will buy Disney DVDs even if they own the VHS tape of the exactly the same movie.
Later, when HDTV's start becoming really popular (i.e., when their price dips below about $1000) and we all gripe about crummy 480p output from the back of the old DVD player, a new, higher resolution format will become available, and people will flock t
Re:VOD is DOA [More Importantly...] (Score:2)
Not so sure that DVD is dead... (Score:2)
VoD is nice, but what about when you're in a situation where you have no connectivity?
Re:Not so sure that DVD is dead... (Score:3, Funny)
That's what suicide is for.
Re:Not so sure that DVD is dead... (Score:2)
That's what suicide is for.
LOL, I get that same feeling when I visit the units in the country and can only get 24k dialup.
Not clear at all.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The era of video rental stores demanding a return within 48 hours will eventually end. If given a choice, I don't think anyone will choose another system where they have to hurry-up-and-watch something, even if it's video that they ordered whenever they ordered it.
Look at Apple's recent music offering. People can purchase music and keep it as long as they want. Whether you like the idea or not (and whether you plan on buying music that way or not), it's a sign that we won't be limited in our purchasing options to such restrictive pay-per-view watch-it-now methods.
DVD's will be around a while, and when they're gone the replacement will be something more akin to a permanent download into a huge video jukebox appliance than some watch-it-once-and-never-see-it-again model.
Then again, that's just my opinion.
Re:Not clear at all.. (Score:3, Interesting)
But the reality is disconnetion trumps all. (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, it SOUNDS great that I can just get that video anytime I like... of course, to equal a DVD all of the following things have to be in place:
1) I have to be able to get to commentaries/deleted scenes/etc, on the fly, just like a DVD (I suppose some of that is a bit optional, sometimes people really just want to see a movie)
2) I have to have the player I want to watch on connec
Re:Not clear at all.. (Score:2)
The laws of marketing are. Unless of course you are prepared to pay say $100 per film, then the companys might be interested in doing such a thing.
Re:Not clear at all.. (Score:2)
Hi, I'm your cable company and I'm deploying VOD and I intend to not screw the customer like I did when I rolled out Data Service. I mean I intend to not screw the customer like when I rolled out Digital Cable and conviced you it was better for you than analog. I mean... Screw it. I'm going to screw you as many different ways that I can, including VOD.
The cable compa
Re:Not clear at all.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed!
Consumers like having some control over what they have purchased. If they are going to dish out some cash for something, they do not want to be told what to do with it.
Compare this to Tivo. For about 10 bucks a month, the user gets the equivalent to video-on-demand. But in addition to this
One word: bandwidth! (Score:5, Funny)
How did you conclude DVD is deadend? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have VOD now (surewest broadband), and there is still plenty to be desired. I don't always watch a movie all at one time, some movies I want to watch a little today and some tommorrow, and DVDs never fail to play when the network connection goes down. The ownership model of video delivery will always exist in some form or another, but the business models and technology will change.
VOD a diversion (Score:5, Informative)
There are those in the industry that have been dipping in the VOD technology pot for some time with no success (blockbuster). And there are also those that want the industry to adopt the VHS rental model with DVDs released exclusively to rental (at a much higher cost to the rental store) and eventually releasing the disc for sale at a devalued price. This is unlikely because the cost to produce DVDs is next to nothing and the studios want to capitalize on high volume sales, which is exactly what has happened. It has been the revenue sharing companies pushing that model--cheap DVD's hurt their business.
Also there has been talk in the past of a business model where Theater, Video, and VOD are all released at once, and there is always talk of shrinking windows between sell-through and theater releases.
DVD's will continue to evolve, in the next couple years you'll have High Definition DVDs-- which are the next big thing (HD-VHS already exists for those with the cash, but its still very pricey).
The fact is studios are paranoid about piracy, they've seen what's happened to the music industry and will continue to try to pump out encrypted product at as high a bit-rate as possible- in turn, making it more difficult to pirate high quality movies.
Video on demand is just not going to happen like some people think, it will really just become the next incarnation of Pay Per View and really only eat into that customer base. The technology exists, and there have been tests of services from different companies all over the U.S. but it still isn't a business anyone is interested in.
It all comes down to corporate interest, Sony wants to sell high priced HD-DVD players, so then they can also sell the HD-DVDs to go with it. How will Sony, for example, make money from a VOD service when they are able to make more selling DVD players. You also have Panasonic/Matsushita, JVC-- and all the other major electronics companies foaming at the mouth for the missed financial opportunities on DVD player sales (due to some cheap players coming out of the south pacific). In the end it all comes down to how to make the most amount of money.
High quality movies (Score:2)
in turn, making it more difficult to pirate high quality movies.
It's difficult to pirate high-quality movies because it's difficult to find high-quality movies. Even the best transfer from a film or digital master to a high-definition digital consumer format can't rescue a crappy script or crappy acting.
Even then, as long as players continue to provide a 480p component video output (which they will have to provide for compatibility with current available TV sets throughout the next decade or so), the
Re:VOD a diversion (Score:2, Informative)
I'd love to buy a good-quality 'brand name' DVD player and even pay a bit of premium for it, but I won't buy a crippled product. Yes, there are workarounds and hacks for most major players, but why bother (and most of the time pay extra to some small company doing the physical mods) when I can buy a cheaper 'noname' brand player that is outright region free (or the region is switchable thru menus via '
What about collectors? (Score:2, Insightful)
VOD isn't the future - HD-DVD is (Score:5, Interesting)
In fact... while MPEG4 may result in smaller file sizes than MPEG2, there are probably going to be some people who don't like it, anyways. Dolby Digital has better compression than DTS, but... audiophiles insist that they can hear a difference. In fact, enough people prefer DTS to Dolby Digital that many movies are released with both DTS and Dolby Digital tracks! And also, let's not forget SuperBit DVD's... DVD's which sacrifice the special features to give the video a higher bitrate. If these didn't sell well, the company wouldn't *still* be releasing SuberBit DVD's, but they are. So... even if the compression *did* manage to shrink the video down to managable amounts, it still might not be enough to give VOD a "nudge", so to speak.
Further, any VOD system will be riddled with DRM. Some people will no doubt complain that they can actually see this DRM manefist itself in the movies they download, and still others will no doubt have problems with the playback.
I believe the future lies in the HD-DVD. There are a number of proposals for this, including one that uses MPEG2 on a Blu-Ray disc (~50gb, if dual layered) and another that uses MPEG4 on a DVD (~9gb, if dual layered). you can read about them here:
http://www.dvdsite.org/ [dvdsite.org]
Re:VOD isn't the future - HD-DVD is (Score:5, Insightful)
Horizontal resolution is traditionally measured in lines per picture height (not width), so that the horizontal and vertical resolutions have the same scale. (Note that film resolution is normally measured in "line pairs", but video resolution is not.)
A DVD normally has 720 pixels horizontal by 480 vertical (interlaced). If it is mastered with Academy Ratio (4:3) video, that means it has 720 * 3/4 = 540 lines of horizontal resolution. By comparison, VHS has about 240 lines of horizontal resolution. Note that the horizontal resolution is different for anamorphic widescreen DVDs when played on suitable equipment, because of the different aspect ratio.
HDTV at 1080i has 1920 pixels horizontally, and 16:9 ratio, so it has 1920 * 9/16 = 1080 lines of horizontal resolution. Since the horizontal and vertical resolution are the same, the pixels are square, unlike most video formats.
Re:VOD isn't the future - HD-DVD is (Score:2)
But the majority doesn't care. The other question raised is how many people who prefer DTS do so because of indoctrination and the elitism that occurs with it? Afterall, in some ways, Saying you only like DTS is like saying you only drive Porsches
And also, let's not forget SuperBit
Re:VOD isn't the future - HD-DVD is (Score:2)
DTS has a higher bitrate then DD you twit. Orginally 1536 kps for DTS (but now 768 kps) vs 448 kps for DD. That's analogous to listening to a (crappy 44Khz/16bit) CD, then hearing the same music on a DVD-A (192Khz/24bit). Whole WORLD of difference. Now granted, there are decreasing returns which can't be ignored, but still, there is subtational less degradtion with DTS.
If y
Re:VOD isn't the future - HD-DVD is (Score:3, Interesting)
Dolby Digital has better compression than DTS, but... audiophiles insist that they can hear a difference.
I've done a fair bit of comparison between the two technologies, just listening. Here's what I've decided. It's all in the quality of the sound engineer.
Consider a good sound engineer, of the sort that produces most mainstream movies. I'm talking about things like Princess Bride, Fifth Element (okay, bad example), Buffy, or Shrek. He can produce better sound using DTS than Dolby. He gets better f
Obstacles are more political than technical... (Score:2, Informative)
The technology is already there -- codecs like DiVX and its MPEG-4 based counsins can deliver near DVD quality video at bitrates around 1.5 Mbit/s, within range of most residential broadband technology. Server infrastructure, on the hardware and the OS side, has matured as well. With IP multicast, this could be even made more
Look who's talking (Score:2)
Nintendo Troll wrote:
I personally think that if the movie studios didn't tie everything down with their endless squabbling about DRM, we could and would have been enjoying VOD right now for a few years.
Then why didn't North America get the NES disk drive ("Famicom Disk System") or the N64 disk drive ("64DD") that came out in Japan? Simple: after Nintendo test-marketed those formats in Japan, the company decided that they were too easy to pirate.
With IP multicast, this could be even made more effic
Re:Look who's talking (Score:3, Informative)
He wouldn't know, considering that he's a fraud [slashdot.org].
Except that few ISPs implement multicast because they don't know of a fair revenue model.
I think one of the biggest obstacles is the fact that there aren't any services that use multicast. The reason for there n
Re:Obstacles are more political than technical... (Score:2)
Don't underestimate the psychological aspect (Score:2, Insightful)
The VOD is in a way very similar to the previous DVD standard called DIVX where you'd "buy" a movie but after you started watching it you had to finish watching it within 24 hours and after that it was locked up. The DIVX players had to be connected to the phone line for that very reason.
And DIVX disappeared. Although I believe that he is right in saying that VOD will be very important in the
My homage to Charlie Heston (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, VoD is nice as an alternative to the video rental store but look how DVD sales have sky-rocketed in a few years in comparison to VHS sales over 2 decades of trying. People want to have high-quality libraries of movies that they can hold on to and claim as their own. And they definitely don't want to have to pay for them more than once.
DVD's are dead (Score:2, Funny)
Look at audio (Score:5, Insightful)
You could edit digital audio on a home computer years before the computers were powerful enough to let you edit video. You can stream quality audio to your home over the internet today, but the pipes are still a bit too small for quality video. That will change eventually.
My suggestion is to look at all the cool things you can do with audio today and extrapolate to video. That should give you a good idea as to where things are going.
Except for that darn extra dimension to audio (Score:2)
However, the number of bits for "good enough" audio is a LOT lower than for video. For any reasonable extrapolation of high-end stereo system, (like a full home 7.1 system that can usefully deal with dynamic ranges and frequcies well beyond what speakers can do), we can already get to the "so good golden ears can't hear the difference" with a typical broadband connection. For people with typical systems, even 48 Kbps with some modern codecs like HE AAC has been shown to be as good
The premise is certainly questionable. (Score:2)
If the assumption is that media interest can somehow force this issue then the important thing to look at is not whether or not that is possible, but to look at whether there are examples from the past that we can look at to learn from and see if that will be a profitable business model.
In this case there
Music on demand now, video later? (Score:2)
One thing that lends this a tiny bit of credibility is that ripping all those DVDs takes time. They've been working for the past year and a half to build up a library of 200,000 songs for the music service they launched Monday, so finding out this far in advance of a similar movie service isn't a totally wild idea.
Dead end (Score:3, Insightful)
And there will always be a demand for a fully private media, the consumption of which can't be logged by an online service. Whatever finally replaces the DVD, it won't be VOD.
Re:Dead end (Score:2)
CDs have been around for a long time now, with nothing really endangering them; yeah, there's the whole p2p thing, but don't forget the MP3s/OGGs came from somewhere, namely, CDs. Listen on demand with micropayments isn't happening yet for audio. Putting audio on DVDs is possible, which makes the audiophiles happy, but Joe Blow doesn't need any higher quality music. CDs are good enough.
In t
Pure Crap (Score:5, Funny)
I bought a Strawberry Shortcake video for my girl last week (just before I heard about Penny Arcade's mix-up with American Greeting), and she has watched it at least two times a day since then. One day she watch the video 5 times! If I hear one more "Have a Berry Lovely Day!" I swear there will be @#*! to pay.
Quite frankly, when I purchase a video it is only because I plan to watch it so many times that it is worth having around where I can get my mitts on it. If the entertainment industry thinks that I am going to fork out money each and every time my little girl wants to watch Strawberry Shortcake, then they have another thing coming. Even at $0.50 a viewing I have saved money by purchasing this particular movie outright, and I didn't have to sign up for an expensive cable system either.
I think I will go read a book now.
Re:Pure Crap (Score:3, Informative)
Enjoy that while you can; the publishers are trying to come up with a Pay-per-Read system. Of course, those of us with any sense will refuse to buy such stuff, just as we refused to buy the original DivX.
When I first read Stallman's story The Right to Read [gnu.org], I thought it was quite far-fetched, but considering events of the six years since it was published, it now seems like a legitimate concern.
DRM (Score:4, Funny)
Welcome to Microsoft DRM-enabled DVD-XP. In order to activate the video you have inserted, please call 1-8MP-AAO-WNSU.
*place telephone call... get authorization code... enter code into player*
Welcome to Microsoft DRM-enabled DVD-XP. Video activated.
Warning: unknown television set detected. If you are using this player with a new television set, you will have to call to re-enable this product. Please call 1-8MP-AAO-WNSU.
*user mumbles, "aww, fuck it" and grabs an old VHS tape*
Bandwidth is not the only issue... (Score:2, Insightful)
If I decide half way through a DVD tha
Re:Bandwidth is not the only issue... (Score:2)
Actually... yesterday I was watching a movie on demand and my father had to go get his new car. So I was kind of annoyed, stopped the movie and changed the channel (my mother was going to watch TV.) We went to get his new car, drop off a rental car, got some lunch and ca
VOD is not even new... (Score:3, Funny)
Then Mosaic got too popular and distracted everybody.
Re:VOD is not even new... (Score:2)
Heh, I hear you. I've often wondered how much further along VOD would be if it hadn't been for the web to keep us busy.
I got to play with one of SGI's set-top boxes at EPCOT around 1995. While it was a stripped down version (for demo only, it was only wired to a small server, not the actual Orlando VOD network), it was still very impressive. The GUI was snazzy, but easy to use and fast. Movies would start playing almost instantly, though there was a
Quality and "ownership" is Important (Score:2)
1. Quality. The quality of VOD is likely to be less than that of DVD for some time. I'm watching analog cable broadcasts of television, and I'm seeing more compression artifacts as satellite providers try to cram as much content in their pipes as possible. VOD is likely going to strain the bandwidth of providers, requiring more compression, reducing quality.
2. Ownership. Th
better compression doesn't matter (Score:3, Informative)
MPEG-7, incidentally, is not a compression standar, it's a standard for video meta-data (allowing content-based video retrieval).
Asking the wrong people... (Score:4, Insightful)
VOD serves a different market (Score:2)
This is like saying that instant streaming audio online would stop me from buying CD's. Last I checked, I don't have an internet connection everywhere I want to listen to music, I can't loan that st
All Hail DivX... Remember that revolution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Reminds me of "Singles"... "But people *love* their cars..."
Ugh. Remember Divx (the real one) anybody? (Score:2)
Video on Demand, ala iTunes Music Store? (Score:3, Interesting)
Notice though that Apple isn't marketing it as a pay per view system, but a pay for the convenience of finding what you want when you want it system.
So in a world with fatter pipes, more aggressive encoding, and a defined distribution system, I can't see why Video on Demand can't work, as long as consumers have the ability to play an unlimited number of times, download at will, and burn to CD/DVD at will.
This doesn't mean DVDs are dead, it merely leverages the internet as a more efficient distribution method, without any of the political doublespeak of DivX or content leasing, or EULAs.
Though if you thought about it carefully, the success of Apple's model does demphasize the medium, it only does so because you have content you don't care to purchase, like other tracks, or because it's hard to find. A similar video solution, then, might not have the multiple languages, subtitiles, commentary, etc, which you would still want a DVD for.
Re-think your premise (Score:5, Insightful)
In a similar way in which a regular book gives me the security of knowing that I don't have to worry if the company that published it goes belly up, if I buy the DVD, I own it (for my own use, of course). I can watch it when I want. I can watch it on an airplane, I can take it with me on business trips overseas. It's going to be a long, long time before everyone in coach can watch "on demand" flicks on an airplane.
When you have a DVD, you're not dependent on the whim of a company. Consider shows like The Family Guy [fox.com] or Futurama [fox.com] where Fox never gave them a fair chance, then pulled the plug. They treated these shows like shit the first time; what possible reason do I have to believe that they're be treated any better "on demand?"
What about British shows like I'm Alan Partridge [bbc.co.uk], Good Neighbors [tvvideos.com], or Father Ted [bbcamerica.com]? At best, I can watch them on BBC America or PBS, but unless I buy the DVD (or VHS, or whatever comes next), what are the chances that I *know* I'll be able to see these shows, when I want, here in the USA?
Then there's the content itself. What happens when the company that owns the rights to these shows goes out of business? What happens if a bunch of Jeezoids [texasgop.org] decided to buy the rights to something just to kill it (for the chillllldren, of course)? Or what if they just decide that something is insensitive and cut it. Jesus, what if they alter the original: Colorizing it or adding those fucking "informational" popups like they do when they show Double Indemnity on the Lifetime network?
What happens when some soulless bean counter decides that since I'm the only one who wants to watch Seriously Dude, Where's My Car? [imdb.com], they should just save the server space and dump it? You already see this sort of thing in video stores, when they decide how many foreign films can fit in that little section. The Internet Movie Database [imdb.com] lists 268,836 movies released theatrically, 35,200 made-for-TV movies, 23,625, TV series, 21,420 direct-to-video movies, and 3,081 mini series. How many of these are going to make the cut? Which do you think will come first, some of those films, or "on demand" sports, so folks can have "Classic Games of when the Red Sox blew the World Series" nights?
Finally, why should I keep paying for the content through a subscription or a download fee each time? Compare the price of DVDs with rentals and pay-per-view -- if I think I might watch it three times in the rest of my life (or I might want to loan it to a friend) why not buy it outright for the extra ten bucks?
Re:Re-think your premise (Score:2)
So... you can buy a dvd. And, what... watch it 35 times because you like that eposide?
What happens when some soulless bean counter decides that since I'm the only one
Re:Re-think your premise (Score:2)
It won't be on VOD. The small amount of very cheap disk space will go to another, more popular movie which will be VOD'd much more often and therefore will make more money. Beancounters will find and solve the usage/viewage/price ratio for each movie in their catalog, and you
Never (Score:2)
Think about this way: in order to view VOD, there is recorded media somewhere that is being transmitted. Now unless you are willing to say that the transmission takes no additional time, then you can always get more information from a local recording.
And as long as you can get more, why wouldn't you?
Now, that's not sa
DVDs, VOD, and in-flight movies. (Score:3, Interesting)
Consider this:
First, the wide release in theaters. $10 out of your pocket for a ticket (a majority, if not all of your ticket price, goes to the studio).
Then, the in-flight movies, the hotel rooms, and other "semi-controlled" environments by which a studio can license to third-party vendors. $5-$10 tacked onto your plane fare, your hotel room, etc.
Then, the movie networks-- HBO, Showtime, Skinemax, etc. Another dollar or so that you pay, indirectly, to the studio by way of your cable bill.
Then, the DVD/VHS release. $25-$45 (if it's a "special edition").
Finally, the major networks -- ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox. No money directly out of your pocket, but the networks pay out of the nose to the studios to be able to show a popular movie in primetime.
All of these selling points take place a few months or so after the previous one. You don't get current movies on the plane, but you get movies that were in theaters just a month or so ago.
etc etc, I hope you get my point. There are many points along this chain by which the studios can collect money for the movie. By saying "DVD is dead" you're eliminating one of those sell points. That will never fly with any studio exec.
Instead, think of this: insert the VOD service somewhere in that timeline. Let's say, in between the in-flight/hotel room and the major movie networks. Pay $5-$7, and you can see the movie you want when you want. Pay-per-view is somewhat like this, and if any selling point changes, it'll be the pay-per-view system. No longer will you have to wait until 4pm to see the movie you want to watch, you'll be able to have it start at 3:47 if you want.
As far as codecs go, that is the absolutely last thing on the studio head's mind. I guarantee you that whatever the major cable operators are using, that's what you'll see. Right now it's mostly MPEG-1, with a smidgen of MPEG-2 in some systems. For VOD, you'll need a more intelligent head-end system and a better set-top box. There might be some concern around conserving bandwidth, but I highly doubt it. You're getting HD streams of ESPN these days on the current systems, so we won't require a more efficient codec to do VOD.
The Technology is Here Already (Score:3, Informative)
With fast P2P content delivery technology, MPEG-4 compression, and PVR-like time shifting devices - the speed, storage, and economics are there today to provide DVD-quality VOD.
The only problem is that it is taking the studios a long time to roll out there VOD solutions, but trust me, they'll be upon us in the near future.
For more information on the protocols that underly these P2P content delivery systems, please check out the Open Content Network Specs [open-content.net]
I personally can't wait.... (Score:5, Funny)
Then again, the video store's not far away, so I could always just get there with my jet pack to avoid the parking hassle, so maybe I can live with video on demand anyway.
Some thoughts. (Score:2)
I think you have that back to front (Score:2)
It seems pretty clear to me that Video On Demand will never get off the ground. There are a few plainly obvious reasons for this: .au, but the geography problems are somewhat similar).
Availability. It wll be a long, long, long time before there is sufficient bandwidtch available for a decent viewing around the country (I'm actually in
Cost. The prices will never be reasonable. Most likely they'll cost about
This will never happen... (Score:2)
Pay per view, a few dozen channels as they do on a DBS system is about the best you are going to do.
No the future is not going to be blue laser (this really has a good chance of being another betamax and minidisk for sony), it is goi
it's the same as anything else. bits are bits (Score:2)
It's just a matter of Moore's Law. When terabyte hard drives and gigabit networks are common, you'll be swapping movies just like you swap songs today.
Anything else is just (as everyone else is saying about VOD) a distraction. The end to end principle wil
I'm glad . . (Score:2)
There is largely enough posts against VOD for various reasons, but I'd still like to add that, for me, VOD will only stand a chance when it answers the following conditions
- always available (talking connection stability)
- always perfect (talking streaming quality)
- very cheap (like $0.05)
- very large catalogue (like, everything)
Compare the situation to viewing a DVD : it is always there, there is no delay in viewing i
VOD _IS_ the future (Score:3, Interesting)
First of all, people are confusing delivery method with reproduction technology. VOD is delivery, DVD is delivery (as in a shiny disc) AND reproduction (as in MPEG2 and AC-3): A DVD is in fact VOD. It plays whenever you want it to. So basically we are comparing Apples and IBMs here. VOD, as per definition, does not mean that you don't get to keep a copy on a local storage device.
Now for VOD failing because of
- Quality: "people will want better quality"
Not really. People had CDs and moved down to MP3s; obviously people care more about convenience than about quality, especially since quality is arguably more important in audio than video. In any case, some day digital video _will_ reach a state where a human can not distinguish technically better quality.
- Physical Media: "people will want to have a hard copy"
Same argument as above applies, I don't think anyone downloading their MP3s from Kasaa cares all that much. But think of a world where you could play the movies you had paid for anywhere and anytime you wanted to. Now does VOD still sound bad? Who the hell cares about physical media??!!
People that use this argument have become slaves of the RIAA and MPAA. This is EXACTLY what they want. But in all reality, the future has no place for things like CDs and DVDs. At the end of the day, the real value is in the movie or the music, not the booklet or the silver disc. The music or movie's what you want to get, so who the fsck cares where it comes from?
- People want to keep their own disc
Yeah right, ask blockbuster how adament people are about that.
I think people are confusing licensing issues with the true defninition of VOD, which is to watch video when you want to. I think VOD could be just as popular as internet for the very same reason: information when you want it.
Or not... (Score:2, Insightful)
I disagree with your other points, though. People don't always want just the music or the movie. Sometimes they want liner notes, documentaries on the production process, a poster for their wall, or simply a physical presence so their small pre-literate child can let them know WHICH movie or show they want to watch with a minimum of whining. Not only that, but when we bring home a DVD m
Video on Demand v/s DVD (Score:5, Insightful)
The strengths that VoD has are
* Access anytime
* Access "anonymously" (atleast the store owner does not know your perverted viewing habits, which I must mention I do not have!)
The strenths of DVD are
* Its everywhere now...
* Its cheap -- US$50 players can be found (they sell for US$20 here on the border in Hong Kong)
* Its international and not legislated by telco / Disney / whoever
* Its collectible. I have two 300 DVD players stacked with DVDs I've purchased over the last 4 years for the simple reason that I love movies and want to keep them around for a bit.
* You can pass your DVD along to friends to watch
* Progressive SCAN + DTS / Dolby 6.1
* Amazing data transfer rates
* Rentals are getting cheaper. In the US you can rent using Netflix (quasi anonymous again)
A big weakness with the VoD service that I had subscribed to was the ability to watch the movie again in a couple of days time (or pause and continue watching the next day) as the "rental period" was 24 hours.
I really don't think VoD is going to replace DVD. It has potential in the pr0n industry for ummm impluse viewing, but not in the mainstream world. Sorry... been there done that, paid the bills and don't see myself going back.
DVD (Score:2)
So if I only want to watch a film once if might be worth it. Twice maybe not. Also taking I would lose DB5.1, Extras,
Heh, DVD is the bulk of VOD (Score:3)
That was several months ago. Netflix has had negligible market penetration (think... how many of your family have even *heard* of Netflix or dvdbarn?). In the next few years we're to expect action by Blockbuster in this niche. Some are predicting 30 percent or more of households will have an 'unlimited rental' membership somewhere by the time the market saturates.
Meanwhile, the regulated residential broadband providers are resisting/lobbying/preventing any competition, telecom reform has just taken it in the teeth, and most home users I've talked to have seen stagnation or degradation in the measured bandwidth per buck they're getting in the last 2 years. A lucky few are seeing alternative providers and the beginnings of competition, but I'm betting a decade goes by before we see enough alternatives that prices drop hard and performance soars.
As much as I love 802.11b and other wireless protocols, that mediocre pipe ain't the answer to a whole neighborhood of VOD-loving customers without some astounding cell-like protocol improvements to get a couple dozen 8mB/s (based on my replay/tivo experience; I'm likely wrong on this detail) streams of data per Access Point out to all them suburbanites.
From there, a buncha me-too's on stuff like people liking ownership of dvd's, the effect of PVR's, market-stifling price structures, fingers pointed at how well Music-on-Demand is working (see market stifling price structures), DivX as a cautionary tale, etc etc. that everyone else is saying.
Troll (Score:3, Funny)
Cliff, was this a screwup, or do you plan to pick fun Troll questions like this regularly? Cuz if you do, I'll start writing some questions....
Based on the success of Tomb Raider, it's clear that sex is superfluous and I have decided to write a paper on this. Can anyone talk to me about the overall trends toward the entire species dying off due to lack of interest in anyone else in comparison with Laura or Angelina, and what's the consensus on how quickly this will happen?
A cousin of mine who works on an Free Software project just got hired by Microsoft and I'm wondering just how long it'll be before everyone doing free software gets hungry, gets real jobs, and Linux dies off?
My cat just hurled up something truly horrendous. Has anyone tried using this stuff for case modding or overclocking? If I do, where should I submit my story? Tom's hardware seems the obvious choice, but this goop smells suspiciously like the Register's style of investigative journalism.
Well, the overclocking didn't work quite as planned, but the heat and electrical jolt seem to have spawned a new life form. Am I required to get a patent on it, and if so, is there a GNU-like document for preserving li'l blobby's rights without exploiting him/her/it?
I already have VOD in my home. It rocks! (Score:2)
MPEG-7 is, for the record... (Score:5, Informative)
See the description from the MPEG group's page [telecomitalialab.com] for more information.
To quote:
It was assigned the number 7 under the assumption that MPEG-5 and MPEG-6 would be used for future video compression technologies.
For additional information about MPEG-7, see the MPEG-7 home page [mpeg-industry.com]
Re:MPEG-7 is, for the record... (Score:2)
And, of course (must I even mention it) Windows ME?
On demand is a lie... (Score:3, Interesting)
Its never been _on demand_. Its been on request. If I demand I want repeats of an obscure late 80s comedy show shown on uk television (called Absolutely), theres no chance I will get it.
And it will never knock out recorded technology.
Yet again the MPAA wants a shift away from anyone owning their content in the end. Maybe its the future, but its a future where they will sell less, and get less money for their product. And in the end, it just means we record it off the television rather than buy it legitimately from them.
Didn't they learn from the original DVD-subscribe idea of DIVX?
As for Video On Demand itself, its been one of those "killer app" technologies which the telecomms companies have built since 1995, and never hugely deployed because the customers don't really want it. It offers them little, and local rental shops can always deliver (or post rentals to you). Its a novelty, and probably the last choice of the consumer. So they don't demand anything in the end...
Standards (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft will make a massive push with Windows Media, and rightly-so too - their codec is probably the best right now and includes it's
A VOD User Says 'No Way' (Score:2, Informative)
MPEG7 (Score:2, Informative)
DVDs will survive until DVD-rot tarnishes its rep. (Score:2, Informative)
If DVD rot begins to appear in large numbers in a few years, some consumers will begin to distrust DVDs, feeling betrayed that the one-thought infallable format is potentially self-destructive.
MPEG7 (Score:3, Informative)
DVD replaced by VOD? Not likely! (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, wait! What am I thinking? It costs as much to go see a movie as it does to buy the DVD and hold a cookout for all my friends and then sit down and watch the DVD.
Problem is, the market won't support it. MP3 players are a fine example of this. There's already growing resistance to RIAA trying to control all channels of what people can view. When people pay to own something, they expect that they will have material possession of that item, to use wherever and whenever they choose.
VOD is more akin to video rental.
If you want to find out about what will replace DVDs, you should look at the budding technologies coming out of data storage. Holographic cards the size of a credit card that can hold multiple terabytes of random access storage at high throughput data speeds.
Don't forget about quantum computing approaches. I know of at least three major computer manufacturers that are in a quiet race to develop quantum-level computing for the consumer market. It will be a while before we see a functional CPU, but the storage capabilities may show up sooner. Rather than have bits that can only have two values, 0 or 1, a quantum bit can have many more values. How about 0 through 9 -- a true decimal computer. I'll leave it to the math gurus to figure out the storage density of decimal over binary. My guess would be multiple terabytes in something the size of a grain of salt, and all data accessible instantly (forget about discussing xHz).
In the end, VOD is only about control of distribution. If people have to pay every time they want to view something, or pay on a regular basis, it will get old real fast. Look at pay-per-view. It's exactly the same thing as VOD, just using a different moniker. Only, I can't use VOD/pay-per-view when I'm sitting on a plane with my computer. Or, if I'm on the road. Or visiting relatives who don't have cable/broadband/satellite/some-form-of-modern-com
The end of movie rental (Score:3, Insightful)
hardly! (Score:2)
Yeah, the same way that no one buys tapes and CDs because radio exists. Oh, wait...
OK, there's a little difference, in that radio isn't quite On Demand. OTOH, do you think there's enough bandwidth and storage space in the universe to make it so that every single person in the world will have instantaneous access to every single movie ever made? Not to mention all the shows that are on DVD right now, includin
Re:I'm sure DVD will die... (Score:2, Insightful)
VOD will die once it is discovered that you can capture video streams.
Re:Already Have It (Score:2, Funny)
j/k
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:2, Funny)
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:2)
Reminds me of the Simpsons episode parodying The Cosby Show:
"Kids these days, with their hippin' and their hoppin' and their bippin' and their boppin', they don't know what the jazz is all about. Well I'll tell ya. The jazz is like a cup of Jell-o pudding. No, it's like a roll of Kodak film. No, it's like the New Coke. It's gonna be around forever."
DVD's aren't going anywhere. (Score:5, Insightful)
- No degradation through normal viewing.
You can watch your DVD as many times as you want and it will look the same every time. They are however less damage resistant in that 1 deep scratch in the right spot will turn the disc into a beer coaster.
- Near-instant access
You can fast forward or rewind to almost any point in the feature with the flick of a finger. With on-demand tech, this may never be an option. One of the biggest complaints with VHS were that you had to rewind them, and this took a long time. As did fast forwarding(or slow, I should say). Finding a particular scene took quite a while with VHS. Try doing this over a latency ridden network! It wont work. I don't think my cable company is going to install multiple, seperate gigabit networks for each neighborhood or street. If they did, I'm afraid of what I'd have to pay for it. Bandwidth costs. The cost structure to support it would be unfavorable to most consumers.
A high percentage of the cost of a DVD is the content, bonus content, profit, and packaging. The DVD disc itself is a small percentage of the cost of a DVD. If an on-demand service let you buy rights to view an on-demand movie whenever you want, however often you wanted, there would be continual costs incurred as well as initial investment. Even if I only pay $5 to buy a movie the first time, I won't pay another dime to watch it again. The recurring costs for the cable company to let you watch a movie again and again for free is unprofitable.
I'm not saying Video-on-Demand is built to fail. It can work in the same capacity that Pay-per-view does. The infrastructure required to suport VoD will not be put into place until either it comes over the preexisting copper or wide adoptance will make it profitable.
In short, VoD must provide the same features as a DVD at a lower cost before most consumers will consider it over actually purchasing a DVD. There are also those who, given both options, would choose the DVD every time.
Re:DVD's aren't going anywhere. (Score:2)
Wrong wrong wrong.
I have bought a number of DVDs where the fast-forward and rewind options don't work. It's as if there were no key-frames in the entire scene. (I'm not sure how DVD works but I imagine that deltas come into it). Fast-forward by 2x works, but by 4x goes to the next scene.
So I went back to buying videos instead. At least the video player is under my control, not the control of the content producer. I am assuming that this was done because of incompetance at the (small)
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:2)
Still popular in broadcast though.
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:3, Insightful)
Still, VOD is going to share the space for sure, but definitely not replace. It's probably the end of Blockbuster more than the end of DVD.
Re:DVD's still a little life left in them (Score:2)
RonB