| |
Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category
Thursday, December 2nd, 2010
For movie fans, home video looks a lot different than it did in the late 1990s. Back then, DVDs were the hot thing, and the format quickly proved itself to be affordable, high-quality, and idiot-proof.
But as the last month of 2010 begins, video looks dramatically different. We see Blu-Ray attempting to supplant standard DVD as the physical delivery medium of choice. Meanwhile, downloads and streaming video are making inroads, both online and via services such as Comcast’s On-Demand. For consumers, it’s tempting to wait out the battles and see what becomes mainstream. DVD is still an incredibly viable choice for many people, since it’s nearly high-def (thanks to anamorphic transfers), cheap, compatible across all discs and players, and after almost 15 years of use, comfortable for everyone.
A format’s user-friendliness is the key ingredient to success. Quality may be the deciding factor for true videophiles, but not for the general public. If a format does not present a truly different, easier alternative for the consumer, the consumer will not embrace it.
A good example is the CD/MP3 and iPod war. CDs were popular for many years, for many of the same reasons as DVD. But MP3s and the iPod managed to decimate this nearly-perfect product because digital music is just plain easier. MP3 files don’t take up any physical space. You can take tons of music anywhere with no bulky CDs or audiotapes. In other words, MP3s and the iPod provide a fundamentally different–easier–alternative…even though there is no discernible quality difference.
 So in this light, is Blu-Ray the answer? Blu-Ray got off to a rocky start due to its format war with HD-DVD. Fortunately, that ended when HD-DVD was declared defunct a couple years ago. Statistics show that Blu-Ray is finally making some progress (see our recent post). But while Blu-Ray definitely offers a better-quality, high-definition picture and more interactive extra features, it’s no different to operate than a regular DVD disc.
A few years ago, Jeffrey Katzenberg of Dreamworks stated, “Blu-Ray and HD DVD are a niche business….They’re not going to become the next platform. I think for the general consumer, there is not a big enough delta between the standard DVD in terms of where it is today and the next generation.” He could be right. We posted recently about the little-known dustup between SACD and DVD-Audio:Â the reason these formats didn’t go anywhere is because they were not different enough from regular CD. Consumers didn’t see a good enough reason to switch. It’s not impossible that Blu-Ray could become the “SACD” to standard DVD in the same way.
So what about streaming and downloads? Yes, this method of video delivery would seem to be the “MP3″ counterpart for movies and TV. But remember the basic tenet of success: it needs to be simple. You can’t beat the ease of buying a movie at Best Buy and plopping the disc in your player. A good portion of the population still gets hives when they have to interact with a computer. I give credit to Comcast for its On-Demand system, which is undeniably easy to use–but it does operate via the traditional cable box. When a manufacturer manages to seamlessly connect the computer to the TV, that’s when we might see some changes.
Personally, I’m betting on Apple.
Monday, November 29th, 2010
We all know how awesome DVDs are for video. But have you ever heard of something called DVD-Audio?
If you haven’t, it’s not surprising. DVD-Audio is not exactly a household name.
 The story of DVD-Audio actually starts with a different format: Super Audio CD. Following the success of the DVD format in the late 1990s, electronics giants Sony and Philips partnered to create an “improved” version of the well-loved CD. They called it “Super Audio CD,” or SACD for short. The theory was that the large capacity of a DVD disc–which can hold the data of approximately 6 CDs–could hold very high-quality audio. (Essentially, this is the same comparison as DVDs and Blu-Ray, the latter of which has a much higher data capacity than CD, thus making HD video possible.)
Not to be outdone, Toshiba developed its own high-quality audio disc, and called it “DVD-Audio.” And a (very) small format war ensued.
The problem was, both formats required new players–or at least, compatible DVD players, which in the late 1990s were much more expensive than they are today. While SACD discs could be played in regular CD players (due to two separate data layers), DVD-Audio discs were limited to DVD players. Dedicated SACD players, by contrast, ran a few thousand dollars! To make matters worse, the manufacturers rushed their products to stores, resulting in digital compression issues and other tech problems. But most importantly, consumers, who had spent a decade acquiring libraries of CD players, stereos, and Discmans, didn’t see a strong reason to switch to a format that “felt” the same as CD.
In this format war, neither format won. Ultimately, the rise of MP3s and the iPod made physical audio delivery largely moot. So despite their compatibility and technical glitches, it’s arguable that both formats would have failed anyway, just due to bad timing.
However, you can still see the remnants of DVD-Audio. Ever notice that “Audio_TS” folder that’s in the file structure of a DVD disc? That folder is there to hold DVD-Audio. Although DVD-Audio is technically irrelevant and useless, most DVD players still require that folder to be present so they can read a DVD correctly. It’s basically the tailbone of a DVD disc!
Saturday, November 27th, 2010
Earlier this month, Blu-Con was held in Beverly Hills (yes, there is a conference for everything!), and Andy Parsons, the chair of the Blu-Ray Disc Association’s U.S. Promotions Committee, updated the crowd on some statistics. In short:
– By the end of this year, 25 million U.S. households should have at least one Blu-Ray player connected to a TV. This number equals about one-fourth to one-fifth of the 115 million households in the United States. It also nearly matches DVD’s market penetration after its first five years (DVD was in 30 million homes at the end of 2002).
– Over the next five years, Blu-Ray is predicted to be in nearly half of U.S. households, and about a quarter of those players should be 3D-capable.
– Speaking of 3D, there are currently 19 Blu-Ray player models that possess 3D technology. By the end of 2011, most Blu-Ray players should be 3D-capable.
– There are about 3,000 programs currently available on Blu-Ray in the U.S. Sales numbers for Blu-Ray titles double every year. The sales of one recently-released title, Avatar, broke down as 80% DVD and 20% Blu-Ray (which is consistent with the household numbers mentioned above).
– Blu-Ray is also popular abroad. Europe has an estimated 10.9 million players, and is expected to have 30.7 million players by 2014. And the technology is huge in Japan, where 65% of all “video discs” are Blu-Rays (as opposed to only 35% regular DVDs).
What does this all mean? Well, first, that Blu-Ray is definitely here to stay for awhile. It’s doing well compared to standard DVD, and especially well considering the current economic climate. It certainly seems to be avoiding the fate of laserdisc.
What is more questionable? The 3D aspect. At the same convention, James Cameron discussed “autostereoscopic” 3D displays–largely considered the Holy Grail for 3D, because they would not require glasses. But at the same time, he cautioned that consumer deployment of the technology was probably a decade away, mainly because TVs would need to be double their current resolutions to handle the imagery. So while all these Blu-Ray players are 3D, that feature is going to have a much harder time catching on than regular HD.
Friday, October 29th, 2010
When my family went to Disney World in 1989, it was the first time we had used our new 8mm video camera for more than two days straight. And it was a wake-up call: those batteries did not last long! I still regret not being able to videotape more rides, since many of the best old-school ones at Epcot have since closed.
My current Mini DV camcorder can now tape for hours and hours without needing a recharge, but battery power still remains the last frontier of wireless devices. How many times have you been videotaping an important event, only to see that blinking battery icon light up on the viewscreen? By the same token, how many times have you been in the middle of a long cell phone conversation, only to have the device cut out and die? (My Apple mouse is also a huge battery hog!) From audiotape Walkmans to iPods, batteries are both a great convenience as well as a pain in the you-know-what. The simple truth is that scientists simply haven’t been able to find any materials that can fit a decent power supply into a tiny little part.
 Fortunately, if some scientists have their way, these problems may soon be a thing of the past. Scientists at Washington State University recently crushed xenon difluoride to a pressure that is 1 million times that of Earth’s atmosphere. By doing this, they transformed the chemical into a super-powerful, long-lasting battery. To apply the required amount of pressure, the scientists placed the substance between two diamond anvils, which created the gray square metal battery pictured at right. All the energy used to crush the chemical can be stored in its chemical bonds for eventual usage, which makes the battery extremely strong as well as very compact.
While not available publicly yet, this battery should represent a major development for cordless devices. Imagine shooting for 8 continuous hours without having to swap a battery! Imagine days and days of battery-powered laptop use without recharging! Long-term battery power will be the perfect complement for the wireless communication that has become so prevalent in our society.
Thursday, September 30th, 2010
Unlike most folks today, we work with VHS tapes every day here at Timeless DVD. But it wasn’t that long ago that rewinding and fast-forwarding tapes was a common occurrence for everyone. We’ve moved from tape to DVD to various types of digital storage quickly over the past ten years. The technology always gets smaller, cheaper, and easier to use. A few posts ago, we discussed potential successors to DVD: cloud storage, Blu-Ray, and computer video on demand. Today, Flash memory cards take a turn.
 Flash memory has mainly been used for digital cameras and quick file-sharing between computers over the past ten years. But recently, the technology has migrated to video as well. The most popular camcorders these days are arguably Flash camcorders. Flash memory, with its quick read/write times, durability, and small size, offers advantages that traditional tape- and disc-based camcorders can’t match.
And more importantly, Hollywood is paying attention. Recently, Kingston, a primary Flash manufacturer, paired up with Paramount Studios to begin selling feature films on Flash cards and USB drives. No disc required: just plug in the card and you’re good to go! And a company called Portomedia is developing kiosks where you can plug in a Flash USB drive and download movies. (Similar in theory to the popular Redbox kiosks, just without DVDs.)
Naturally, the small size of Flash memory cards is incredibly appealing–especially to those of us who have shelves and shelves full of DVDs! Is Flash the upcoming king of movie delivery? What do you think?
Thursday, September 23rd, 2010
Without a doubt, the biggest pain of enjoying a 3-D in your home is having to wear the glasses. (Isn’t this why so many people who need glasses prefer contact lenses?) So why aren’t television manufacturers working on 3-D TVs that don’t require glasses?
Actually, they are. Samsung and Toshiba, among others, have already announced that they will release glasses-free 3-D televisions in the next few years. And they already have televisions that can produce 3-D images that don’t require glasses.
The TVs just aren’t ready yet. The problem is threeefold. First, the current screens are only capable of producing low-resolution images. In addition, the TV panels are expensive to produce. And finally, and most important, watching 3-D video on these screens requires the viewer to remain motionless. Move just a little, and the 3-D image suddenly appears distorted.
Nevertheless, many companies are investing in 3-D technology. So it’s a sure bet that eventually, the problem of glasses-free 3-D TVs will be surmounted.
Wednesday, September 8th, 2010
While Timeless DVD will be adding HD transfer service in the near future, we’d be lying if we didn’t admit that the vast majority of our orders and queries involve transferring plain old analog video tapes to DVD (or video files). But that’s completely normal, considering analog tapes were the primary format used by consumers over the past thirty-some years.
 But as a business that intends to be around for a long time, we also frequently examine where DVD technology is heading. Manufacturers would like us to believe that Blu-Ray is the natural progression from DVD. But the fact remains that the consumer adoption rate for Blu-Ray is much slower than it was for DVD. In a recent poll, it was discovered that only 7 percent of American homes have a Blu-Ray player. Americans are still not sold on the idea of Blu-Ray, even though its picture quality is twice as good as regular DVD. Why is this?
In all likelihood, more polling research holds the answer: 51% of people of all ages watch at least some video content online. If television shows and movies are easily downloadable and takes up no space in your home, why invest in a new generation of optical media?
Internet video is a great idea, and likely explains why Blu-Ray has not taken off. Nevertheless, service providers have not cracked seamless Internet video yet. Bandwidth remains spotty with many providers, service plans, and areas. Plus, devices such as Apple TV and Roku have not yet mastered a simple and convenient user experience. Cable and satellite on-demand boxes are currently the most reliable providers in this area, especially for HD content–but they aren’t exactly “internet video.”
But who could have predicted the explosion of DVDs way back in 1990? Here in 2010, we have no idea what the prevailing video delivery method will be in 2030. But we’re sure looking forward to finding out!
Wednesday, September 1st, 2010
 “Cloud computing” is a current hot trend sweeping the computer industry. The basic concept is simple: Instead of storing your data on your computer, DVDs, or an external hard drive, you would upload it to a server on the Internet. It doesn’t matter where that server is located physically, and in fact, parts of your data might be located on multiple server computers. It doesn’t matter–the data is just up in a “cloud” somewhere. All you need to do is purchase server space from companies that host your media on their computers.
As long as you are connected to the Internet, you can get your data–photos, documents, videos, whatever–from anywhere you happen to be. In theory, you could use a laptop, cell phone, or even a web kiosk at an airport. No more copying files to Flash drives or purchasing huge hard drives to back up video files. In the future, it’s a good bet that DVR-ish devices will be able to connect to your “cloud” data and instantly access any movies you own. So no need for DVDs at all…right?
Hold on. The future of Timeless DVD aside, it’s worth considering if having all your videos “up in a cloud” is wise. If you purchase a movie or TV show, shouldn’t you own it without any limitations? Shouldn’t you be in control of your files at all times? One serious drawback to cloud computing is the ability to connect to the Internet. If your service is slow or unreliable, you may not be able to access your files whenever you want. And shouldn’t 100% accessibility be a given for files that you have purchased?
In addition, how is cloud computing affected by hackers? It’s not unimaginable that unsavory types might find it quite easy (and irresistible) to break into and mess around with your personal files and media. Or worse yet, plant viruses capable of wiping out all your data. Will cloud companies be able to deal with security issues? And if they do, will their safeguards make it more difficult for their actual customers to connect to their data?
Finally, how much access will the cloud hosting company have to your files? It’s a sure bet that once service providers have your data, they’ll search for ways to lock you in to contracts to prevent you from moving your files to another company. It also raises issues of who exactly controls your data: you, or the company? And similarly, what kind of consumer protections will there be? Data miners will be salivating to crawl through consumers’ videos and music to learn likes and dislikes and sell that information to the highest bidder.
While cloud computing may be hot, we don’t see it as the best place to store your data–simply another place to store your data. It’s a good solution if you travel frequently, or want to easily share the same files between work and home computers. But as a replacement for the good old movie or home video DVD? Sorry–the technology’s simply not there yet.
Monday, August 16th, 2010
If there’s one constant in home video, it’s that camcorders constantly get smaller. But is this a good thing or a bad thing?
 In the late 1970s, the first video cameras actually came in two pieces: the actual camera and a “portable” VCR, which were connected by a thick cable. Suffice it to say that these “camcorders” were a little too big, heavy, and awkward for the average person to use!
However, large video cameras actually had a side benefit: due to their size, they were not too difficult to hold steady (at least for short periods of time). And by resting on the videographer’s shoulder, they gained the natural steadiness inherent in a person’s stance. These were the days before image stabilization features, so any stability a camera could gain, the better!
 Fast-forward twenty years, and now we have camcorders that are not only in one piece, but can be as small as your hand. Some “video cameras” don’t even look like camcorders at all, but rather like a still camera or phone (and many are in phones!). These camcorders do have amazing image stabilization features that their earlier counterparts lacked, but the downside is that since they are so small, they are often difficult to hold steady.
However, the benefits of small camcorders are many. Most of today’s current camcorders don’t use videotape, so you never have to search for blank media–you just pick up your camcorder and go. Batteries last much longer than they used to, and if your video camera is in your phone, you only have to worry about one device being charged. And it is much more convenient to shoot video on the spur of the moment, because small video cameras are often easily at hand.
Plus, small camcorders are much easier for camera-shy folks to become used to. All of us know people who don’t like to be on camera. But the bigger the camera, the more self-conscious these people usually are. Tiny camcorders, on the other hand, can be so unobtrusive that people don’t even know they are being taped–and as a result, helps them act more naturally.
So what about the main problem with small camcorders: stability? It’s likely that camcorder and electronics manufacturers will keep on working on solutions. For now, a tripod is your best option for situations in which you need to keep your camcorder as stable as possible. And look for tinier tripods, wireless mics, and other equipment to be developed that is specially geared toward small camcorder users. Small camcorders are a great innovation–as long as you keep their main drawback in mind!
Wednesday, August 4th, 2010
Philo’s birthday is in just two weeks – have you picked out your gift?
 Philo T. Farnsworth may not be a household name, but without him, Timeless DVD wouldn’t exist! That’s because Philo, born August 19, 1906, is considered the father of television. As a teenager in Utah, Philo brainstormed the idea of picture transmission, and in 1927, he successfully transmitted an image of a dollar bill. He soon submitted the patent applications that established him as the inventor of the all-electronic television.
Two years later, Farnsworth created Farnsworth Television, which later became Farnsworth Radio and Television. He counted patents for amplifiers, electrical scanners, and cathode ray and vacuum tubes among his many accomplishments.
What would Philo T. Farnsworth think of the many video gadgets we take for granted these days, such as the DVD player, the video iPod, and Flash camcorder? It’s breathtaking to realize that all those devices can be traced back to Farnsworth’s groundbreaking conception of deflecting beams of electrons in similar rows.
|
|
|
