@Junginator: Eh, kinda. At least, not anytime soon. Giz had an article on it a while back that explained the technical details of it ([gizmodo.com]) but basically, until our bandwidths are much fatter, we'll still be settling for a less-good HD than Blu-Ray when using streaming/downloads.
That being said, I think most customers that aren't videophiles care more about availability and price than they do about bitrates and resolution. That being said, Blu-Ray has plenty to worry about in terms of market dominance, though it's certainly gonna be the high-end physical format of choice for a while.
@OCEntertainment: By the time 1080p streaming overtakes Blu-Ray, there'll probably be some other format out which makes Blu-ray obsolete. And it'll take even longer to surpass that. I mean, Japan is looking into Ultra-HDTV aren't they? That's gonna be a bitch to stream.
DVD standard comes in at around 5Mbps. HDTV at 8-15 Mbps. Blu-Ray clocks in around 40Mbps (which means my new internet connection clearly won't have a chance at handling that). When we start moving to some kinda 4K tech in the next decade or two, what kinda bitrate is that gonna have? If we can assume the same kind of 8-10x jump, we'd be sitting somewhere around 3200-4000Mbps, or 3-4 Gbps.
Yeah. Suffice to say, streaming has a hard road of beating any kind of physical format.
Then again, how long will it be before we've got Supra-ultra-mega-higher-def-o-vision... movie cubes?
Edit: My math sucks. An 8-10x jump from Blu-Ray's 40Mbps would actually be 320-400 Mbps. Given that it's at least theoretically possible for CERTAIN countries to get Gbps speeds, Supra-Def might have a bit of a shot. But I'm unrealistically hopeful.
@OCEntertainment: I'm not so sure that they can update the definition of movie/TV content much further. It's going to reach a point very soon where there is literally so little difference that no one will want to buy into it. I mean, would you be able to tell the difference between, say, 2160p and 1080p on a 37" TV?
@OCEntertainment: I suppose so.. but there is definitely a limit to all this. Of course, there'll always be new display technologies to sell, like OLED and SED.
@Michael Scrip: probably not based on the spec sheet: [www.lge.com] However you might be able to figure out some kind of transcoding delivery with soemthing like TVersity.
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
That being said, I think most customers that aren't videophiles care more about availability and price than they do about bitrates and resolution. That being said, Blu-Ray has plenty to worry about in terms of market dominance, though it's certainly gonna be the high-end physical format of choice for a while.
09/09/09
09/09/09
DVD standard comes in at around 5Mbps. HDTV at 8-15 Mbps. Blu-Ray clocks in around 40Mbps (which means my new internet connection clearly won't have a chance at handling that). When we start moving to some kinda 4K tech in the next decade or two, what kinda bitrate is that gonna have? If we can assume the same kind of 8-10x jump, we'd be sitting somewhere around 3200-4000Mbps, or 3-4 Gbps.
Yeah. Suffice to say, streaming has a hard road of beating any kind of physical format.
Then again, how long will it be before we've got Supra-ultra-mega-higher-def-o-vision... movie cubes?
Edit: My math sucks. An 8-10x jump from Blu-Ray's 40Mbps would actually be 320-400 Mbps. Given that it's at least theoretically possible for CERTAIN countries to get Gbps speeds, Supra-Def might have a bit of a shot. But I'm unrealistically hopeful.
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
05/15/09
Any idea if it will play VIDEO_TS folders from your computer?
05/15/09
However you might be able to figure out some kind of transcoding delivery with soemthing like TVersity.