Does it matter who "wins" the format war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray? Will we have moved onto non-physical formats to deliver movies (and other content) by, by the time there is a victor?
Did Andrew sign up for a new account under another name?
There is going to be a winner in this format war (or an armed truce where backers of both formats cross-license their technologies so that universal players can be built) within two years, three tops.
Is everyone going to have gigabit internet connections by then? Hardly.
Various on-demand movie systems, delivered by cable, satellite and broadband technologies like DSL, can barely handle regular resolution TV, much less 1080p HD. Cable TV HD signals (which originate as either 720p or 1080i from the networks) are heavily compressed. You can movie on demand systems via cable are self-erasing. (So forget about rewatching a movie, or sharing it with somebody else.)
Physical media remain the most efficient, cost-effective and portable means of delivering certain forms of information and entertainment. That's why books still exist and are selling better than ever, despite computers and periodic declarations that "print is dead". I don't know anybody who would rather pay more money to download
King Kong - without extra features - and then wait for the download instead of just buying the disc for less. (I preordered it and it was waiting for me at home on the release date when I finished work. How would downloading the movie been any more convenient for me?)
I love having 100s of DVDs at my fingertips in my
own system, ready to be played whenever I want without delay and without taking up huge amounts of storage space on my computer network. For that matter I like to be able to noodle around on the net
while rewatching a favorite film on DVD, which wouldn't be possible if I were streaming/downloading a huge data stream.
I just don't see any of the non-physical delivery systems taking over anytime soon, if they ever do at all. I know the studios would actually like it, because it cuts out manufacturing, delivery and storage, while giving them the illusion of more control, but I don't seen enough benefit to enough consumers to generate any demand. The industry tried to do a pay-per-view version of DVD back in 1997 and it died because it was a solution to a problem the studios perceived, but not to any problem that consumers were having. They voted with their wallets for "open" DVD and the pay-per-view version (called "DIVX", from which the compression codec derived its name as an in joke) died a quick and inglorious death.
Like I said - give me a call when everyone has a seemless and massive data connection from the source to their computer and we'll talk. Until then bet on the discs.
BTW, Sony's strategy is becoming clearer with the introduction their
first Blu-Ray laptop capable of playing, capturing, editing and recording hi-def DVD content. I thought HD-DVDs earlier launch, lower price and broader hardware support might give it the early edge, but if Sony captures the desktop and the laptop markets, that could change the battle for the living room. And $500 for a recordable format with greater data density is not a big premium to pay over Toshiba's read-only HD-DVD laptop offering, especially for first-generation technology. Sony could well make up in the computer market for its higher price in the CE market and push early adopters (who tend to be tech junkies and gadget freaks, and therefore as likely to buy a drive for their HT-PC as a stand-alone player) into the Blu-Ray camp.
Should be interesting to watch this play out. From my comfortable spot on the sidelines.
Regards,
Joe
