Edited by Darren H, 14 January 2012 - 11:50 AM.
Dish? Cable? U-Verse? OTA? Nothing?
Posted 14 January 2012 - 11:49 AM
Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:49 PM
Posted 17 April 2012 - 02:13 PM
Meanwhile, I unhooked the VCR from our TV the other night so I could hook up the antenna and watch broadcast TV, but the antenna didn't work. I tried a couple of possible fixes, but none worked, leading me to wonder if the antenna is -- gasp! -- broken. I keep telling myself that I did something foolish, that the situation will correct itself. But I'm not sure. And even if the antenna IS broken, I'm not sure I care enough to buy another.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 07:41 AM
Posted 18 April 2012 - 08:43 AM
Sorry if this is getting off subject.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 08:57 AM
Sorry if this is getting off subject.
Blu-ray is much better than the quality of streamed movies. Plus, it would be prohibitive (especially if you have a data cap) to download/stream blu-rays (which are 30-50 GB). But streaming is pretty much the same (or better) than standard definition discs (DVD), though I think you'll find that your blu-ray player will upgrade the visuals on many of your DVDs. I can see investing in a few blu-rays for the films that you really love, but for the most part streaming is great and takes up less space. The only thing you miss out on is special features and extras.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 09:29 AM
Posted 18 April 2012 - 09:58 AM
Posted 18 April 2012 - 10:13 AM
This is true, to an extent. The HD content that streams right now isn't quite the same as the digital content on a Blu-ray disc (streaming a HD film doesn't take 25-50 GB of data, more like 5-6 GB). I have concerns about the way that ISPs are throttling bandwidth and imposing data caps at the same time that they are pushing people to go streaming.
Streaming has a set of challenges ahead of it that are mostly logistical and economic, not technological.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 10:25 AM
Posted 18 April 2012 - 10:34 AM
Posted 18 April 2012 - 01:14 PM
Now letterboxing is commonplace, but that wasn't a foreseeable outcome for me when I was dropping my spare cash on those $50-per-movie-for-a-barebones-edition discs. That we can now be "content to wait" shows how far home-theater viewing has come in the intervening years.
Edited by Christian, 18 April 2012 - 02:57 PM.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 01:56 PM
The pro-streaming people seem to often miss a big point... cost.
Cost and ownership. Streaming means when you purchase a movie or tv series digitally? You have no control over it. This is why movie companies like streaming and digital copies. You cannot resell it. You pay for it-even if you buy it-the ownership is not yours. The movie company still owns it. And if they suddenly decide that there is a time limit to your access? They can make a change to the agreement and take that movie or tv series away. One of the thinks that damaged the Ultraviolet Cloud service was that your digital copy had a limited life span and they could take it away from you at their whim.
To buy a movie digitally is not much cheaper than buying a blu-ray or DVD-except you have no extras (less product for the same price-what a deal). Wo do you think will pay for the bandwidth issues? Those are not going away, in fact they are getting worse.
And Netflix could never survive on $7.99 unlimited streaming alone. They will move to a tiered system with limits to your streaming when they finally dump discs. Unlimited streaming will go away...and you will never truly own a movie again. As a movie fan? I say no thanks to streaming. Streaming is nice for nostalgia and watching movies I don't care about...but if the future is streaming, the future is bleak and costly.
Edited by Nezpop, 18 April 2012 - 01:56 PM.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 02:43 PM
To bring this conversation back to the original topic: I'm paying about $35 to store "my" copy of season 5 of Mad Men on the Amazon cloud. I'm happy to do that because the cable/dish model is dying, and because the explosion of new streaming technologies and over-the-air HD signals has allowed me to save the nearly $500 I would've sent to DirecTV over the past four months (most of it to cover the rising costs of ESPN's exclusive contracts with the NFL and BCS conferences). I bet I spent nearly $5,000 on DVDs during the 12 years I collected them, and I've only pulled two or three of them off the shelf in the past year.
Having said all that, I get the collector's mentality. I own hundreds of CDs and have no immediate plans to lighten that load. I love books and love to write in my copies of books. But if you think the streaming future is bleak, you must not remember the joy of watching a pan-and-scan VHS copy of 2001 on a 19" tube television.
Posted 18 April 2012 - 03:33 PM
What?! Those were the good old days!
I think the thing is, I will take the control a disc gives me over the lack of control Netflix gives me any day. Plus, I hate how movies appear and disappear from the streaming option. And that is a problem that will continue. The price of straming will go up because the fact is, just like DirecTV raises fees to cover costs, I cannot see any way the same problem will not hit streaming pricing. It takes a lot of negotiation to get the rights to movies for streaming...and it is shiny and costly.
Posted 29 April 2012 - 11:24 AM
Posted 30 April 2012 - 06:32 PM
Posted 28 December 2012 - 02:43 PM
Now that we know what we're not missing, a return label is on the way.