Hd Dvd --- R.i.p.

[Neildo]

Even if it could work from an environmental standopint i don think it is any better than buying single disks because the resources needed to run the servers

I don't know anyone who has environmental reasons for their stance on the issue, it mainly all comes down to a matter of convenience.

the sheer number needed for uncompressed HD content would be incredible considering billions of users...good luck with that.

Well yeah, with current over-the-air and broadband connections, downloading an HD movie would suck, but speeds are increasing all the time. Once the public is able to use the private Internet2, that's when it'll totally rock. Heck, back in 2004, a speed record was hit between Geneva and Los Angeles with a speed of 6.25 gigabits per second, which is almost 10,000x as fast as current broadband speeds, heh.

- N

 

[John99]

It is not only bandwith it is server capabilities.

6.25gb per second is not a sustained rate. And just downloading is one thing but to view an 2 hour HD movie being streamed is where the real action is.

 

[Syzygys]

yes, except which person, corporation, or government will control these "huge" databases?

I don't know, but they already exists. I assume those websites are quasi-legal and most likely Russian or Chinese.

I don't really see the problem. just like you can use songs for a monthly fee, you could watch movies too, there is really no difference, and the studios would get their part according to what movie was downloaded...

 

[Avatar]

There is a difference, a huge one at that - you have no control over the content, you can access it only if they want it, and with one del command nobody can access a particular file any more.

With normal distribution censorship is a lot harder.

 

[Xelios]

One problem with getting movies from a server is the file sizes @ 9GB for standard def to 15gig for hd so the HD is much less compressed and that woud require a lot of processing power on servers and there are so many movies that to encode them all to HD would be some task.

A 720p movie can be encoded with MPG4 to a filesize of about 4.3 gb with very little quality loss. 1080p is overkill for a computer monitor, you'd need a 50+" HDTV to see the difference between 720p and 1080p, and even then it's small.

Encoding a film to MPG4 720p wouldn't take long on a small cluster of machines. On my Core2 Duo it takes about 1 hour per 15 minutes of film, but spread that work out over 20 machines and you're looking at maybe 10 minutes to encode an entire film.

The biggest problem for a central server cluster is the sheer bandwidth needed to stream 4+ GB files. It's not impossible, Stage6 gets 25,000 new videos per week with filesizes up to 2 GB, but once you get a few million people using the service I doubt any connection will be able to handle the bandwidth. The only reasonable way to do it is to spread the bandwidth out over millions of computers, which is exactly what Bittorrent and other P2P systems do. You lose control over your content, but that can't be avoided anymore.

Hollywood will have to adapt to this, and if they can't then they need to move over to make room for people who can. Trying to destroy P2P isn't going to work, there's already an improved version of BitTorrent ready if/when they succeed in killing BitTorrent off (I doubt it). And the new version, Freenet, is completely anonymous with no need for trackers and no way to know which files a person is sharing, who requested a file or who uploaded a file.

Point being, P2P networks are here to stay, and so is pirating content. As long as you allow content to be played on an electronic device of any sort you will have pirating, that's just the way it is.

 

[cosmictraveler]

I'm still waitng for my Betamax to make a comeback!

 

[decantemix]

I'd like to see flash media better developed.
It's obvious withing head-gear, you can run a small microprocessor, for the MP3's, you know.

I'd like to see a self contained unit, that has more function than storage. Say you go for a rental, you get all sorts of stuff. Games, music, movies, and such...

Be neat...

 

[Syzygys]

Microsoft discontinues the HD drive extention to its Xbox 360, and drops the price. Time to pick one up, just to play normal DVDs....

"it's fairly cheap now ($50), it upscales DVDs and it works with your PC. Plus if the deal still stands (which I think it does till the end of march) you get five free HDDVD movies with your purchase of one. Not to mention the fact that a shitload of HDDVD's are going to be marked down to like $5-15 a pop."

Suddenly I fell like buying one. Why? Because it is as cheap as a DVD player, shitloads of cheap movies coming to Ebay, and I only need it to work for 5 years tops, because by then we will have something newer/cheaper/better...

 

[§outh§tar]

Why don't people just watch movies on their computers? In many ways, it's much cheaper

 

[shorty_37]

Why don't people just watch movies on their computers? In many ways, it's much cheaper

Personally I don't want to all gather around a small computer screen. I couldn't imagine watching a movie like Rambo on it, it would
be a waste. Some movies to get the full effect must be seen on a big screen.

 

[Stryder]

A 720p movie can be encoded with MPG4 to a filesize of about 4.3 gb with very little quality loss. 1080p is overkill for a computer monitor, you'd need a 50+" HDTV to see the difference between 720p and 1080p, and even then it's small.

Encoding a film to MPG4 720p wouldn't take long on a small cluster of machines. On my Core2 Duo it takes about 1 hour per 15 minutes of film, but spread that work out over 20 machines and you're looking at maybe 10 minutes to encode an entire film.

The biggest problem for a central server cluster is the sheer bandwidth needed to stream 4+ GB files. It's not impossible, Stage6 gets 25,000 new videos per week with filesizes up to 2 GB, but once you get a few million people using the service I doubt any connection will be able to handle the bandwidth. The only reasonable way to do it is to spread the bandwidth out over millions of computers, which is exactly what Bittorrent and other P2P systems do. You lose control over your content, but that can't be avoided anymore.

Hollywood will have to adapt to this, and if they can't then they need to move over to make room for people who can. Trying to destroy P2P isn't going to work, there's already an improved version of BitTorrent ready if/when they succeed in killing BitTorrent off (I doubt it). And the new version, Freenet, is completely anonymous with no need for trackers and no way to know which files a person is sharing, who requested a file or who uploaded a file.

Point being, P2P networks are here to stay, and so is pirating content. As long as you allow content to be played on an electronic device of any sort you will have pirating, that's just the way it is.

Actually the term for dealing with Bandwidth problems is 'Satellite networking', this doesn't necessarily mean using satellites but actually creating a network where everything is constantly on the move being circulated and cached. Obviously P2P networks already encompass this, so it's not much of a change.

I've actually got the preliminary plans for such a setup, I would of taken it further but at the end of the day it requires backing which I as an individual is less likely to achieve than if I was doing the project with like minded people (Partners). I will likely lose my chance/market share just to bad luck, since the ideas been with me since around 2000/01.

 

[§outh§tar]

Personally I don't want to all gather around a small computer screen. I couldn't imagine watching a movie like Rambo on it, it would
be a waste. Some movies to get the full effect must be seen on a big screen.

You can always burn to a DVD-RW

 

[Neildo]

You can always burn to a DVD-RW

Or stream it.

Or better yet, hook your computer up to your entertainment center so you can have a bigger screen from your TV and better sound from other speakers. My PC is my entertainment center, everything goes through it, music, movies, etc mostly on my hard drives. Got my PC hooked up to a projector for movies, otherwise I read and surf the net on my monitor. Seeing some of these loud crazy posts would scare me on a big screen.

- N

 

[Xelios]

Actually the term for dealing with Bandwidth problems is 'Satellite networking', this doesn't necessarily mean using satellites but actually creating a network where everything is constantly on the move being circulated and cached. Obviously P2P networks already encompass this, so it's not much of a change.

Sounds a bit like Freenet. Every PC sets aside a portion of HD space to be used for data storage, then the network as a whole decides what gets stored. The most popular data gets stored often on many machines. Every file gets assigned a key, when a user wants that file he requests the key from his neighbors in the network, they forward the key to their neighbors and so on until the file is found and gets sent back along the chain to the person who requested it.

It was designed to be completely anonymous, so the information transfer isn't as efficient as a direct P2P connection, but it's similar to what you're describing.