backtop

Print 29 comment(s) - last by Royalnine.. on Feb 4 at 12:02 AM
Even though digital content is becoming even more popular, it likely won't overtake physical media this year, analysts indicate

Despite digital downloads continuing to increase in popularity, analyst predictions indicate the sale of Blu-ray movie titles to increase 150 percent from $1.1 billion up to $2.9 billion this year.

Research firm Media Control GfK International said the $2.9 billion estimate is almost twice as much as the $1.5 billion that was generated from digital content, including VOD and broadband.  Although sales struggled in 2008, dropping prices of both Blu-ray movies and standalone players should help convince customers to adopt the format.

As more services such as Netflix and Blockbuster begin offering streaming content directly into the living room, there was growing concern that the Blu-ray format would die off faster than anyone anticipated.  But there are several factors that will help Blu-ray survive despite the increasing pressure from streaming formats.

"The bandwidth required to stream any type of HD video is way beyond what most households have," In-Stat analyst Michael Paxton told Home Media Magazine.  "The convenience factor is still not there for streaming media, unless you are watching on a laptop and it is the only option you have.  The packaged media business model is the one that the consumer is very comfortable with."

Although I agree with what Paxton said, the Netflix streaming catalog is growing quickly, and it offers us the ability to watch any content we want on-demand.  As more Americans have faster broadband internet connections installed in their households, digital distribution will continue to attract users.  Until then, both Blu-ray and DVD will be able to benefit, even if Blu-ray has a premium pricing that has helped inflate revenue.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, 2009 should prove to be very interesting when it comes to Blu-ray and streaming content.

Do you support Blu-ray more than online streaming content?  Why or why not?

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Yes
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/30/2009 8:52:56 AM , Rating: 3
Streaming Content while I like it for lowdef stuff, tends to lack in the High-Def category. I have/had HD-DVD, and now have Blu-Ray simply because its easier to pop in a movie and jump to specific points and watch it whenever I want. Streaming provides a slightly lower quality (although not a whole lot) and takes a long time to stream in even on a fast connection. Only the higher end cable packages and FIOS are capable of consumer speeds and bandwidth in the range necessary for fast streaming of large high quality movies. Adoption of this is slow due to price and availability.




RE: Yes
By bighairycamel on 1/30/2009 9:49:18 AM , Rating: 3
I use Netflix's streaming service on my HTPC fairly often. On a 7Mbps connection it can sometimes take up to a minute to buffer a standard-def movie. So even a 720p movie would take a heck of a lot longer to buffer enough data to avoid playback issues.

I'm like you... give me a disk, it's much easier. I only using the streaming service if I'm really bored and haven't got a physical disk to watch. Plus, the Blu-Ray anti-scratch coating is pretty tough. As long as you aren't sliding it around on it's surface or using it as a coaster it should last indefinitely.


RE: Yes
By Reclaimer77 on 1/30/2009 9:59:15 AM , Rating: 3
The first set top Blu Ray players had a start-up time of almost a minute and a half. I don't know about newer ones.

A minute or two of waiting for a stream buffering won't kill you.


RE: Yes
By bighairycamel on 1/30/2009 5:06:16 PM , Rating: 4
It takes a minute now to stream a 480i/24 movie, so a 1080p or even 720p would take substantially longer at current data rates.

1080p movies can be around 15 gigs on average without extra audio tracks or bonus features. Say you get a steady download rate of 800KB/sec, which is good by current standards. It would take 312 minutes to download a 90 minute movie. It would need to buffer 222 minutes of data to playback without hiccups. Even if it was compressed to 5GB you're still looking at a 104 min download, meaning you would need a 14 minute buffer.

Correct me if I screwed up the math. I calculated everything in Bytes. Maybe my numbers aren't even real world; I've only streamed a 580p video and it took a few minutes to buffer a 15 min clip.


RE: Yes
By someguy123 on 1/31/2009 5:38:30 AM , Rating: 2
i think it only takes 15 seconds or so now.

i never had that problem though; ps3 seems to load very quickly.

i don't think digital will over take hard media for a while, at least in the U.S., considering the current speed of internet in the U.S. most people don't even have fast enough connections to stream a conventional, not overly compressed 720p video (19mbps), except the lucky ones with verizon fios. I've got the regular comcast plan and I only get 6mbps. I don't know if netflix uses heavy compression, but if they did that would be another good reason to stick with discs for now.


RE: Yes
By clovell on 2/2/2009 1:46:03 PM , Rating: 2
I've never had more than a minute buffer-time on Netflix streaming into my xbox 360 over my 1.5 mbps DSL, but I agree that the slow adoption is primarily the fault of the infrastructure.


RE: Yes
By tallcool1 on 1/30/2009 12:36:40 PM , Rating: 5
Kenobi, remember your comments (and Masher) from back in the HDDVD/Blu-Ray war... gotta laugh looking back...
quote:
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/21/2007 8:10:12 AM , Rating: 2
I hope your willing to pay up as Transformers will never be on Blu-Ray, anything to the contrary is wishful thinking.

By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/21/2007 7:14:37 AM , Rating: 2
Remember those words when more studio's switch to HD DVD exclusive.

By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/20/2007 6:29:34 PM , Rating: 1
Transformers will be absolutely sexy in high def. I just bought an HD-A20 last week... and now this... haha theres a gamble that paid off quite well.
Side note... HD DVD FTW!

By masher2 (blog) on 8/21/2007 8:22:43 AM , Rating: 2
> "Guess what, I am not buying either one - period, until there is a winner."
Then you're likely to be without HD for a long, long time. At this point, its doubtful there will ever be one "winner". Both formats will likely remain for the longhaul, as dual-format players predominate.


RE: Yes
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/30/2009 4:37:55 PM , Rating: 3
Given the time frame, those were all accurate statements. It's not my fault Sony has a vertical monopoly in the movie/media business. Maybe we should call the EU to investigate them?


RE: Yes
By FuzionMonkey on 1/31/2009 2:52:08 AM , Rating: 2
I was rooting for HD-DVD the whole time. I really wish Blu-Ray didn't win. Stupid studios.


RE: Yes
By piroroadkill on 2/3/2009 10:37:14 AM , Rating: 2
Same. I own a HD-DVD player but no blu-ray player. HD-DVD players actually became fantastic value, and it was clear that HD-DVD would have been the choice of the consumer, lack of region protection is win, but Sony used its influence to toss about blu-ray, which was more expensive to produce in every way, and although larger for data, who the hell actually uses optical media to back up their data now?


RE: Yes
By psychmike on 1/31/2009 9:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
Puh-leze. You weren't just making statements of fact. You were making predictions. At least have the character to admit that you were wrong and to show a little more restraint and humility when making bold statements in the future.


RE: Yes
By masher2 (blog) on 1/31/2009 10:45:40 PM , Rating: 2
I certainly felt it very likely that both formats would continue to compete for many more years, and I have no problem admitting I was wrong. Toshiba's shock early capitulation surprised most everyone.

However, though HD-DVD is certainly the loser, I think it may be a bit premature to call BD the winner. The lack of competition in the HD sector has helped it much less than its proponents believed, and now its unclear whether Blu Ray will ever surpress normal DVD, before digital downloads and/or some newer competitor (4K?) supplants it.

Note: this is not a prediction; I am merely noting a potentiality, rather than ascribing any particular probability. :)


RE: Yes
By theflux on 2/1/2009 5:22:26 PM , Rating: 2
Whether Sony has or doesn't have a vertical monopoly is irrelevant to why Blu-ray won. Blu-ray was supported by nearly the entire CE industry and the majority of the content industry. It was a no-brainer who was going to win. If it weren't for Microsoft's half-hearted attempt to stymie Blu-ray, HD DVD was DOA.


RE: Yes
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/2/2009 10:10:47 AM , Rating: 2
I think Sony's refusal to release in any other format regardless of the outcome gave them significant weight. For all the players that waited before jumping in, Toshiba was only a hardware company, where as Sony not only released hardware but titles in said format, allowing them a vertical monopoly end to end. Their vertical monopoly allowed them unprecedented ability to control what format was supported. Since the end goal that killed the format war was to unify the market under a single format, it was determined that it was easier to get Toshiba to budge than Sony. Hence the outcome. As we have seen though, unifying the industry didn't do anything for Blu-Ray sales.


RE: Yes
By theflux on 2/2/2009 1:15:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think Sony's refusal to release in any other format regardless of the outcome gave them significant weight.

That refusal alone would have meant very very little if all other content providers were on HD DVD. The combined refusal of Disney, Fox, and Sony was substantial, which was my earlier point. A single studio can't carry a format, as Universal showed with HD DVD. Lets not forget they were essentially in Toshiba's pocket and had also refused to release on any other format.
quote:

For all the players that waited before jumping in, Toshiba was only a hardware company, where as Sony not only released hardware but titles in said format, allowing them a vertical monopoly end to end. Their vertical monopoly allowed them unprecedented ability to control what format was supported.

Sony's catalog paled in comparison to Disney and Fox. Was it a factor? Sure. But Universal and later Paramount also had extremely impressive catalogs. All exclusive studios had issued numerous statements that they had no intention of joining the other side. Finally, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that Blu-ray is a "Sony format", despite Panasonic owning more patents in the pool, and the Blu-ray Disk Association having more CE members than the DVD Forum.
quote:

Since the end goal that killed the format war was to unify the market under a single format, it was determined that it was easier to get Toshiba to budge than Sony.

That was determined (I assume you mean by Warner) not because of Sony pictures, but because Blu-ray disks had sold nearly double their HD DVD counterparts, and their player sales (pretending the PS3 didn't exist as they often liked to do) had been matched by Blu-ray player sales despite the free disks and constant fire sales. Add back in the PS3 and you have an obvious victor. Warner made the easy choice.
quote:

Hence the outcome. As we have seen though, unifying the industry didn't do anything for Blu-Ray sales.

You may own a Blu-ray player now, but it's clear your still going to HD DVD only websites for your data. Is your definition of "didn't do anything" disk sales up 300-400% year over year as recorded by Nielsen and revenues upwards of $700 million dollars? Gaining consistent > 10% market share against the most entrenched and successful consumer product of all time? In one of the worst economic recessions the world has seen?

Kenobi, you seem like a smart guy, but I can't help but think your bitterness is getting the best of you.


RE: Yes
By JAB on 2/3/2009 1:28:42 PM , Rating: 2
Yea this was more of a religious debate. Statistics were used with little regard to facts. HD DVD did not have a chance and it isnt Sonys fault. They lost all by themselves. I dont think Blu-Ray really won HD DVD just gave up the ghost.
I never understood why they did not just have x264 and a regular DVD it is good enough for most people. I would rather have full it can still do 1080p on one dual layer disk if you dont have too much other crap on the disk.


RE: Yes
By The0ne on 1/30/2009 2:08:23 PM , Rating: 2
I think both can play well together; streaming if you don't mind the lower quality and hiccups in streaming once in a while, and CD's for movies you do want to enjoy on your entertainment system :)

BD is still expensive. It's still expensive to manufacturer both the media and players. This needs to come down before there's ever going to be a huge change. Either that or the Porn industry driving it, which is unlikely seeing as how they don't know how to fill the capacity, yet. They could, of course, offer 50 movies on one disk like they do with VHS and CD's :)

Add to that the selection of BD movies available and their prices as well and the average consumer isn't going to cough up that much cash, especially not this year. I'm hoping for the best though.

As for streaming well, if companies like Comcast exist to create policies to restrict the amount of data you have per month then this really isn't going to go anywhere, anytime soon. That 50Gig, 250Gig limit will be depleted long before you're satisfied watching your movies. HD streaming movies you say? I think not :(

Just my take on the issue...


Was there ever any doubt?
By masher2 (blog) on 1/30/2009 9:57:57 AM , Rating: 2
Did anyone ever seriously think digital downloads would beat standard content in 2009? Or 2010 for that matter? I have my doubts about 2011 also, but its at least possible by then.




RE: Was there ever any doubt?
By kattanna on 1/30/2009 10:15:12 AM , Rating: 3
well hopefully it will come into being a standard before dec 21 2012 cause after that it willnt matter

;>)

but seriously, with our current net infrastructure i dont see streaming taking over until 2011/12. even then, people just love to "own" physical media.


RE: Was there ever any doubt?
By G2cool on 1/30/2009 12:00:22 PM , Rating: 2
All things considered, I don't think streaming will be the standard any time soon. There are too many things that lack a unified multi-platform standard such as DRM or compression method. Also when will we see a widely adopted consistantly fast internet connection. Maybe by 2011/2012 we'll see 10 TB SSD's below $100 or dual core atom processors in our cell phones, but Blue Ray disc sales still will not have taken significant market share from DVD sales, and my parents still won't know what streaming is.


RE: Was there ever any doubt?
By Screwballl on 1/30/2009 1:59:12 PM , Rating: 2
If the government stops its "lets delay DTV" and the analog signals get opened up, and when the "free" or low priced broadband providers start allowing usage of the service, I suspect we will see a much larger demand for streaming media, and less of a physical media demand.
Granted this is still several years out but I suspect by the next presidential election we will be close to seeing 50/50 sales/usage, and the next election after that physical mediums will be the rarity as more people move to digital downloads and streaming...
Also with the Net Neutrality and similar bills being attached to the current stimulus and to be voted on over the next few years, I hope this means that usage caps, throttling and similar ISP tactics will be outlawed.

Just my predictions and opinions...


RE: Was there ever any doubt?
By theflux on 2/1/2009 5:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. Digital downloads are like the HD format war on steroids. So many competing standards that are all 100% incompatible with the others. Throw in draconian DRM, difficulty of delivery, and lack of true ownership and you truly have what Mr Jobs would call a "bag of hurt" for consumers. 2011 is wishful thinking unless some massive, massive changes hit.


No brainer
By amanojaku on 1/30/2009 10:32:44 AM , Rating: 4
How could digital content overtake discs? Here are some contributing factors:

1) Content providers are doing their best to limit the availability of popular titles (try to find Spider-Man or the Matrix on NetFlix)

2) ISPs are doing their best to limit bandwidth use (Filtering? Prioritization of data? Rate limiting???)

3) Content providers want DRM, which generally limits the players to a Windows platform or vendor A's set-top box that's incompatible with Vendor B's.

TVs, cable and discs are much easier by comparison.




RE: No brainer
By mattclary on 1/31/2009 9:08:19 AM , Rating: 2
Another factor: Torrents were probably not included in this analysis. A lot of tech savvy users go there for all their digital needs.


RE: No brainer
By Alphafox78 on 2/2/2009 12:33:16 PM , Rating: 2
also try to get TrueHD or DTS-HD MA using any kind of streaming service. you will likely just get stereo with maybe some prologic encoded. I guess that if there was enough bandwidth they could encode an AC3 stream but unless you have your pc hooked up to a receiver...
I even gave up using my htpc as a bluray player as you cant easily get HD audio to a receiver.


Doesn't Matter
By Flunk on 2/1/2009 10:24:58 AM , Rating: 2
This analysis is mostly superfluous because they neglected the number of people still using DVDs. Bluray has not exactly been a success with only a very small market share, it's not very important to say which of two unpopular formats is doing better. The real story is that the majority don't care to switch and just use DVDs.




RE: Doesn't Matter
By someguy123 on 2/1/2009 4:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
it's not that people don't care, it's the high price of adoption.

you need and HD TV, a bluray player, and a bluray movie. compared to just buying a dvd disc it's much too expensive.

once the price comes down drastically in two years or so there will probably be much higher adoption.


By Jason H on 1/31/2009 3:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
Blu-rays and DVDs are digital too...




Strongly Agree
By Royalnine on 2/4/2009 12:02:45 AM , Rating: 2
I extremely doubt that the streaming format will overtake blu-ray or DVD even by 2012.

Not everyone in the world has access to instant streaming video, let alone HD due to their bandwidth or the infrastructure in their community and even they do, think of the amount of storage they will need in the long run.

If a typical HD movie is about 15GB, 100-200 of them will require TB's of storage and not many people have that much storage available in their computer, media centre, eta. You may think 200 movies sound insane but if you have a good look at a movie-junkie's collection, you will be surprised and hard drives will eventually break and if it does happen then they will lose a lot of movies.

Blu-ray will eventually be adopted into the mainstream audience and it will take a couple more years to do so. Remember when the DVD format first launched in the mid 90's, it was expensive at that time but it eventually appeared it everyone's home by 2001-02. Blu-ray is currently doing that with the PS3.




"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki