Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Digital Video?
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.
Pay per view only makes up a very small portion of the entire media universe. There is no reason to believe that VOD will make significant headway against DVD. DVD, VHS, and CDs have the fundamental benefit of being able to be watched/listened to any time that it is convenient. VOD requires too many infrastructure improvements to be a viable media delivery system for years to come.
I have been pwned because my
It seems pretty clear? I hardly think so (at least not with the traditional definitions of video on demand). People want content they can keep around as long as they want, whether it be a VideoTape/DVD they purchase, or a TiVo recording they keep on their unit for months. Even Netflicks lets you keep the DVD for as long as you want before sending it on to the next person.
:) ..Jeff Keegan
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.
..Jeff Keegan
seven syllables explain TiVo: kee gan dot org slash ti vo
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station-wagon filled with DVDs!!!
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.
Working in the video industry for 7 years-- from my experience things will never go the way of VOD. The Video industry believes they have found a sweet spot with DVD's at sell through price.
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.
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/
Video always lags behind audio by several years because it has a much higher bandwidth requirements.
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.
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.
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*
Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
SGI and Time Warner installed a mpeg VOD over cable system in Orlando, way back in 1994 (Scientific Atlanta did the cable modems). SGI later helped design and build a VOD over fiber-direct-to-the-home system for NTT near Tokyo in 1996. This was back when supercomputer CPU's clocked slower than some of today PDA's, so the set-top boxes were pretty pricey.
Then Mosaic got too popular and distracted everybody.
You're asking slashdot? For the future of video, you should be asking the porn industry. Whatever the future is, they're probably the first ones who are going to be implementing it.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Look at why DVD's are popular:
- 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.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
I agree with the parent post. I think DVD is all about "owning" a movie while VOD is all about renting. Some people will always want to "own" their favorite movie.
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.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Video on demand won't replace DVDs for the same reason that proprietary (and possibly all) e-books won't replace regular books.
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 or Futurama 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, Good Neighbors, or Father Ted? 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 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?, 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 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?
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.
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
I was a subscriber about 5 years ago of Hong Kong telecom's Video on Demand which delivered VHS quality content to your televsion. I watched a total of 3 or 4 movies in the 2 years I had it (it was also Hong Kong's first broad band internet service).
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.
See the description from the MPEG group's page 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
Its another one of these misnamings, such as Moores law (a marketing term coined by the head of Intel to sell their product philosophy).
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...
You're missing one key point. To use VOD (aka pay-per-view w/o the time constraint -- in theory), you have to pay each time you want to watch it. At least with my DVD's, I can watch them any time and as often as I wish. If I want to pay once to view something, I'll go to the movies where I can enjoy it with more people than can fit into my living room.
m unications/two-tin-cans-with-a-string....
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
Whew! This water sure is cold!