Netflix Streaming Coming to PS3 Next Month

[patsu]

It's convenience and library selection. Streaming library usually consists of old movies. Those that are available near day and date typically requires purchase (instead of rental). The situation will evolve, but this is the current picture.

Back to specwarGP2's comments, I don't think both of you are disagreeing. You mentioned that your friends no longer buy DVD. specwarGP2's point is that people may not run away from the extensive DVD library. As you alluded to, they may end up renting DVD disc one day, borrow from the library, or someone else (They have DVD player right ?).

As for Blu-ray, that's why the NetFlix + Blu-ray player combo is a good match for each other. It allows the owner to benefit from deals from all 3 media/channels. When prices continue to fall, more people will simply switch over (from DVD) because it's better value.

 

[-tkf-]

I already know of quite a few people who have done just exactly that. They no longer buy DVD's and have no intention of moving to BD.

Well congratulations to them

Some day it will be everyone that does the same, but that will take some time. And when we get there, hopefully we will be able to stream better than BR quality.

Until then, Blu-Ray is the only real HiDef format that is available worldwide at a fair price. And you can own your movies instead of renting.

 

[eastmen]

The problem is they are missing profits on the other products they are now bundling. You get what 'm trying to drive home to you ?

They could have sold the dvd for $15 or even $20 and then sold the DD for $10-$15. Giving them $25-35 in sales with then an option to sell the bluray at $20-25. Right now they are just making $20. They are loosing alot in sales.

Also on the flip side Disney is also loosing future sales with the vault setup because now many people who may not have bought the bluray and instead the dvd see teh combo pack and say hey I don't have a bluray now but by the time I get them they might go into the vault. So now they are giving up future repurchases.

Like I said it seems to me that this new product that is supposed to make them money is breaking even at best compared to the old products.

 

[patsu]

The problem is they are missing profits on the other products they are now bundling. You get what 'm trying to drive home to you ?

They could have sold the dvd for $15 or even $20 and then sold the DD for $10-$15. Giving them $25-35 in sales with then an option to sell the bluray at $20-25. Right now they are just making $20. They are loosing alot in sales.

It's not only about short term outlook. They have already done what you mentioned above for the past 2-3 years to target the enthusiasts. They need(ed) the high margin to help fund the initial cost in adopting new technologies. It works but it won't take Blu-ray into the mainstream.

Now, the studios' intention is to replace DVD with Blu-ray sales because the DVD market has saturated and declined. If they renegate Blu-ray to a premium product, they will lose more in the long run as DVD tanks. With the new $20 Blu-ray pricing, they may be hoping that even people who are not buying DVD will buy because of the cheaper Blu-ray (i.e., greater value). So the pie should be bigger. It's really up to how they model the demand.

Not to mention Blu-ray provides a better platform for the market to co-exist/transit to digital distribution (BD-Live instant streaming) compared to DVD. And as I mentioned above, they may introduce another premium level (i.e., 3D Blu-ray) in the near future. So they will still have their premium income, on top of a growing volume Blu-ray sales.

Also on the flip side Disney is also loosing future sales with the vault setup because now many people who may not have bought the bluray and instead the dvd see teh combo pack and say hey I don't have a bluray now but by the time I get them they might go into the vault. So now they are giving up future repurchases.

Like I said it seems to me that this new product that is supposed to make them money is breaking even at best compared to the old products.

I believe the studios' stand is DD and Blu-ray can co-exist. Look at your own consumption, you mentioned that NetFlix streaming stopped you from renting Blu-ray. Then again, you turned around and purchased Blu-ray Beerfest yesterday.

As long as the studios are diligent, both can co-exist.

 

[Arwin]

My wife bought a Junglebook 1+2 (digitally remastered) DVD bundle. I often put the DVDs my son enjoys the most on the PSP, but this one has some form of protection that prevents a proper rip. Suffice to say that this will be the last time and they would eventually lose us as customers. This all in one solution would be great for us (my wife could put the DVD in her computer), though BluRay in combination with digital copy support would be great also.

 

[bkilian]

Sure. A lot of people thought Blu-ray couldn't win the HD war too. ;-)

Really? I don't think anyone thought Blu-ray _couldn't_ win the HD war. It was never a slam dunk for either side.

So has anyone tried the PS3 streaming disk on a different BD 2.0 player yet?

 

[patsu]

Ah, I posted it in response to eastmen's claim that BDA/fanboys are spinning the $20 price drop as a gain instead of a money loser. It reminds me of old claims that Blu-ray could not win HD-DVD because it's too expensive, BD-50 cannot be done, SPU cannot render Blu-ray fast enough, there won't be enough standalone BR players, etc. etc.

From their point of view, Blu-ray couldn't win the HD war. Many of those people voted with their money, and bought a HD DVD player exclusively.

 

[Asher]

To be fair to them, Bluray didn't win because of anything you mentioned. Bluray won because massive amounts of money flew around to the studios, which no one could've reasonably predicted.

 

[-tkf-]

To be fair to them, Bluray didn't win because of anything you mentioned. Bluray won because massive amounts of money flew around to the studios, which no one could've reasonably predicted.

To be fair? To be fair that is a bullshit, unless you want to add the other bullshit claims into this thread.

The best format won, that is the only fair thing to say.

 

[zed]

Really? I don't think anyone thought Blu-ray _couldn't_ win the HD war.

Your memory is hazy or didnt read the topics, Check posts from a few years ago in these forums, some ppl that are still posting on these forums were a few years ago picking HD-DVD to win the format war, personally I remember posting the chance that blu-ray would triumph was 99%.
The reason being twofold.
A/ They had far more of the major studios compared to HD-DVD
B/ The ps3 trojan horse

 

[patsu]

To be fair to them, Bluray didn't win because of anything you mentioned. Bluray won because massive amounts of money flew around to the studios, which no one could've reasonably predicted.

Money were flowing on HD DVD side too. A lot of investments were needed afterall. Had HD-DVD conceded earlier, Toshiba wouldn't have to take care of outstanding payment to Paramount too.

Before Universal switched over, consumer demand was also higher on the Blu-ray side for a variety of reasons. Chief among them were the larger industry support and the better technical specs since the early adopters were all "specs" savvy and quality "freaks". I believe everyone understood Blu-ray pricing will come down over time, except for those who were on a different camp.

There were also FUD against Java. Ironically, BD-J (BD-Live) ends up being a majorly useful tool for taking Blu-ray players online today.

EDIT: Ah yes, I totally forgot about the PS3 trojan horse. Once it launched, Blu-ray adoption were already higher than the earlier HD-DVD base. It would count as the 3rd reason for Blu-ray's triumph.

Nonethelesss, pushing a media standard is not easy. The BDA will still face quite a bit of challenges ahead of them. Hope they continue to work diligently.

 

[makattack]

I can't quite get around the idea that Sony sacrificed the Playstation brand for BluRay... I suspect it would be a vastly different area now with regards PS3 vs. 360 if the PS3 had launched earlier and at the same price point as 360. Ultimately, that has nothing to do with this topic. My primary day job is a java developer. I love it, but I am very bemused by BDL java connection. Java is great for platform portability. That's the main reason they picked java for BDL, but it's got performance limitations because of that. That's why most BDL applications take a long time to load and probably aren't very responsive. Of course, I don't know what hooks they've implemented in it to allow access to hardware and software codecs, but the nature of java is to protect the developer from hardware implementation details.

I do love that I can modify existing java applications I have to work on my Google Android phone and deploy them easily using ant or eclipse.

 

[Asher]

To be fair? To be fair that is a bullshit, unless you want to add the other bullshit claims into this thread.

The best format won, that is the only fair thing to say.

But it's not -- I own both HD DVD and Bluray players and collections. You're deluding yourself if you think one is significantly better than the other.

It was a mixture of install base (PS3 did help significantly) and Sony simply spending more money than Toshiba to secure studio support. You'll recall the final nail in the coffin was Sony paying for exclusive Universal(?) support. It's completely delusional to think that Bluray won "because it is the best format".

There were also FUD against Java. Ironically, BD-J (BD-Live) ends up being a majorly useful tool for taking Blu-ray players online today.

I don't recall any FUD against it, to be honest. I do know that I've watched probably 60 Blurays to date (via zip.ca) and own a dozen or so Bluray titles, and I don't believe I've ever used or had a desire to use any BD-J functionality or BD-Live. I did check out BD-Live functionality on the first couple discs, but I ended up chuckling to myself to see it's inane stuff like IMDB integration or movie trailers. Do people not have computers? Perhaps ironically, HD DVD beat Bluray to the punch on network connectivity on titles in the first place.

I read threads about Bluray online and I see a LOT of Bluray "enthusiasts" waxing about how awesome stuff like Bluray Live is and BD-J functionality (like the Fast & the Furious Car Creator) but I can't think of anyone I'd know that would ever use that kind of stuff. Is it crazy to just use Bluray to watch, you know, movies? The BD-J/BD-Live kind of stuff look like solutions looking for a problem, they're inane and simple in all cases.

 

[patsu]

I can't quite get around the idea that Sony sacrificed the Playstation brand for BluRay... I suspect it would be a vastly different area now with regards PS3 vs. 360 if the PS3 had launched earlier and at the same price point as 360. Ultimately, that has nothing to do with this topic. My primary day job is a java developer. I love it, but I am very bemused by BDL java connection. Java is great for platform portability. That's the main reason they picked java for BDL, but it's got performance limitations because of that. That's why most BDL applications take a long time to load and probably aren't very responsive. Of course, I don't know what hooks they've implemented in it to allow access to hardware and software codecs, but the nature of java is to protect the developer from hardware implementation details.

I do love that I can modify existing java applications I have to work on my Google Android phone and deploy them easily using ant or eclipse.

Java is not necessarily slow. You should be able to google for numerical analysis applications (even supercomputing apps) written in Java, and they run efficiently and fast.

It is slow in the enterprise world because of the large J2EE libraries you load, not because the language is slow. Naturally, smaller devices will need to tune their run-time to remain efficient. The early slow loading problem was due to some bugs in the players. Newer players operate faster now.


As for PS3 launching early without Blu-ray, I remember there was a delay from March to November 2006 due to the diode yield issues. It may not make as much difference compared to the high $599 launch price, and limited software.

I don't recall any FUD against it, to be honest.

See above. ^_^ Even with instant streaming done today on BD-Live, people still think Java is slow, based on experiences elsewhere. I remember people also think that Java is an overkill for Blu-ray.

I do know that I've watched probably 60 Blurays to date (via zip.ca) and own a dozen or so Bluray titles, and I don't believe I've ever used or had a desire to use any BD-J functionality or BD-Live. I did check out BD-Live functionality on the first couple discs, but I ended up chuckling to myself to see it's inane stuff like IMDB integration or movie trailers. Do people not have computers? Perhaps ironically, HD DVD beat Bluray to the punch on network connectivity on titles in the first place.

HD-DVD is essentially a single-provider solution. Blu-ray started with multiple suppliers and is a much larger consortium. It will always be slower since things need to interoperate. But as history proved itself, slower to market doesn't mean worse or failure. Blu-ray and Wii both launched later than their competition.

I read threads about Bluray online and I see a LOT of Bluray "enthusiasts" waxing about how awesome stuff like Bluray Live is and BD-J functionality (like the Fast & the Furious Car Creator) but I can't think of anyone I'd know that would ever use that kind of stuff. Is it crazy to just use Bluray to watch, you know, movies? The BD-J/BD-Live kind of stuff look like solutions looking for a problem, they're inane and simple in all cases.

Yes... yes... [Looks at BD-Live NetFlix streaming on Blu-ray players and PS3]

You will see Java on tru2way settop boxes too.

Once people start to use it heavily, the implementations will be optimized further.

EDIT:
Don't get me wrong, I don't love Java. But it has its uses and should receive credit where credit is due.

 

[-tkf-]

But it's not -- I own both HD DVD and Bluray players and collections. You're deluding yourself if you think one is significantly better than the other.

Imagine that, and i might think your deluding yourself if you think HD-DVD was just as good . Maybe "good enough" for you and others. But that is a compromise which never was needed thanks to the death of the 30 GB little disc that couldn´t.

You'll recall the final nail in the coffin was Sony paying for exclusive Universal(?) support.

I recall someone called paramount suddenly dropping all bluray titles, including those produced and printed and on the way to shelves. Including MY preorders (grrr), ironic that i ended up buying those at a bargin when they were reintroduced.

The first studio to jump ship after the initial positioning and the first studio to screw their customers over was Paramount, and lets just pretend everybody was paid off, then HD-DVD shot first with their bribe and got killed when it backfired when universal was bought out.

I am still avoiding Paramount titles, i grew to hate them enough to do so. What i might have bought at launch now gets in the back of the line until i find a good offer.

How things really went down, no one knows, both "paid off" were rumours STRICTLY comming from the internet, i recall the source of the Universal buyout as a blog? by someone that was in the know?, and the amount was 500 million, and that was known pretty much the same day it was announced.. incredible ehhh. Not a creditable online paper backed that up, afaik. And that shouldnt be a surprise, the deals made on both sides should and could only be secret.


I rarely use special features, of course i get the loaded versions but what i have seen from Blu-Ray looks to be ok to me, and with what have been shown possible i think the potential is very big. And since i always have used a PS3 the speed has never been a problem for me.

And honestly i only care about the movie to begin with, the rest is purely fluff.

 

[Shompola]

HD-DVD didn't have the DRM issue asssociated with it, which bluray has. That was a clear advantage for the HD-DVD in the eyes of the consumers.

 

[deathindustrial]

From an end user point of view, using Java for the interface on blu-ray discs is a pox plain and simple. They have basically thrown away the reasonably consistent menu structure of DVDs for a random, feature reduced bit of eye candy. No more disc continue (the virtual machine state is lost at power down), no standard menu mechanism ("root menu" is a thing of the past), the player's remote control now has a large array of buttons that do nothing consistent, etc. Other than picture / sound quality pretty much everything else about blu-ray is a step backwards.

Personally I cannot wait for this format to die.

Cheers

 

[NavNucST3]

Really? I don't think anyone thought Blu-ray _couldn't_ win the HD war. It was never a slam dunk for either side.

So has anyone tried the PS3 streaming disk on a different BD 2.0 player yet?

Dropped it in my sons BD1500 just to see what messages I would get, I thought it would almost immediately yell at me but it kept going until it began looking for an active net connection. I'll try an active connection later.

 

[Asher]

Java is not necessarily slow. You should be able to google for numerical analysis applications (even supercomputing apps) written in Java, and they run efficiently and fast.

It is slow in the enterprise world because of the large J2EE libraries you load, not because the language is slow. Naturally, smaller devices will need to tune their run-time to remain efficient. The early slow loading problem was due to some bugs in the players. Newer players operate faster now.

I've done a LOT of Java, C#, C/C++ development over the years...and yes, Java is s.l.o.w. It's by design. Interestingly enough, it's actually in the enterprise and appserver (TomCat, etc) sector where it's faster because a lot of the necessities for Java's "write once, run everywhere" mantra are neglected for performance.

But in terms of desktop apps, yes, it is slow. It's very easy to see why -- you're running a complicated language through a bytecode interpreter. If you cherrypick some numerical analysis benchmarks, as I'm sure the benchmarks you will cite will do , it won't look too bad because the amount of code present will be negligible and it'll end up being cached and reused. But in the real world, it is noticably slower than most other environments.

See above. ^_^ Even with instant streaming done today on BD-Live, people still think Java is slow, based on experiences elsewhere. I remember people also think that Java is an overkill for Blu-ray.

This isn't FUD. Java is slow, BD-J is noticeably slow even on the PS3. If Java isn't slow, it's not going to be Java (I'm looking at things like gcj...). Instant streaming really has nothing to do with BD-J, as Java being slow doesn't make the internet connection slow?

Yes... yes... [Looks at BD-Live NetFlix streaming on Blu-ray players and PS3]

Let's not kid ourselves -- the only reason that was implemented was because it had to be as an interim solution. That's going to be gone as soon as Netflix's contractual obligation to MS is up.

BD-J/BD-Live are capable, the problem is the utility of them are massively overstated by Bluray enthusiasts. The vast majority of people don't care about spending $20-30 on a Bluray so they can stream movie trailers from their disc. It's not a terribly useful feature, and I've yet to see a single Bluray disc out or announced that truly does something useful with either.

The only thing remotely useful I've seen out of BD-J are the "enhanced menus" that were possible on HD DVD, and even predates Bluray's.

Once people start to use it heavily, the implementations will be optimized further.

EDIT:
Don't get me wrong, I don't love Java. But it has its uses and should receive credit where credit is due.

Man...I've met James Gosling and listened to his hardcore philosophy re: Java first-hand, I've programmed in Java on and off since 2001. By it's very nature, it'll never be a speed demon. You're going to be running bytecode interpreters on all of these devices, and the CPUs they're putting in these dedicated Bluray players are actually not that beefy.

I'm not saying it'll be unacceptable, but it is a bit annoying. I was hoping we'd be done with the laggy-feeling experience we're used to with DVDs, but so far on Bluray it's still there. The custom menus are more responsive on the King Kong HD DVD than they are on most of the Blurays I've seen, for example.

The biggest problem with the "power" of BD-J is the inconsistency in menus and control of movies. It's kind of maddening to me, actually.

-tkf-: I'm not even going to try to debate you, it's not worth my time.

 

[obonicus]

Other than abandoning the whole idea of a programming language for media, what would people want to see in the place of Java? It's not really slower than say, the .NET runtime last I checked (and considerably faster than say, the Python interpreter), and you'd need some sort of VM/interpreter anyway given how heterogeneous the player landscape can get.