Well, I solve this by using Linux for my computers but I use a commercial streaming box for video.
But you can also solve it by just going the piracy route instead of ripping blu-rays.
> And besides, who would want to watch new releases these days.
Most people. I’m not going to just watch the same content over and over.
> Also keep in mind that 4K is not the same as 4K - bandwidth matters a lot and streaming providers tend to cheap out there.
Honestly, not anymore, not in any way my eyes can detect. Apple TV’s 4K content is given plenty of bandwidth. Vincent from HDTVtest did a comparison and the results are basically identical to 4K Blu-ray. And that’s with a fraction of the hardware cost, basically $0-99 on a streaming box versus a $400 player and a $25-40 disc.
Like I said in my Ghibli example, streaming bandwidth sounds bad in theory but in practice when a movie isn’t even available in 4K on disc and the streaming transfer looks better, streaming is obviously the best way to watch.
The ultimate issue is that there’s no money being invested in a nearly dead format.
As an analogy, I’d really like a minivan or a station wagon instead of an SUV. But if I buy a Volvo V60 or a Honda Odyssey I’m buying a car that hasn’t been redesigned in close to a decade because they’re not popular/profitable enough. In contrast, if I go buy a three row SUV like a Kia Telluride, I’m getting the best 3 row vehicle on the market. This is exactly the predicament the blu-ray market is in. I don’t really want a three row SUV but my hands are tied, I’m not going to buy an inferior vehicle.
For example, Disney isn’t even going to produce their own discs anymore, they’re outsourcing it to Sony. I can’t imagine the quality will be optimal going forward. They are giving the blu-ray market the cable television treatment: they’re making money on the last holdouts and investing nothing into it.
But you can also solve it by just going the piracy route instead of ripping blu-rays.
> And besides, who would want to watch new releases these days.
Most people. I’m not going to just watch the same content over and over.
> Also keep in mind that 4K is not the same as 4K - bandwidth matters a lot and streaming providers tend to cheap out there.
Honestly, not anymore, not in any way my eyes can detect. Apple TV’s 4K content is given plenty of bandwidth. Vincent from HDTVtest did a comparison and the results are basically identical to 4K Blu-ray. And that’s with a fraction of the hardware cost, basically $0-99 on a streaming box versus a $400 player and a $25-40 disc.
Like I said in my Ghibli example, streaming bandwidth sounds bad in theory but in practice when a movie isn’t even available in 4K on disc and the streaming transfer looks better, streaming is obviously the best way to watch.
The ultimate issue is that there’s no money being invested in a nearly dead format.
As an analogy, I’d really like a minivan or a station wagon instead of an SUV. But if I buy a Volvo V60 or a Honda Odyssey I’m buying a car that hasn’t been redesigned in close to a decade because they’re not popular/profitable enough. In contrast, if I go buy a three row SUV like a Kia Telluride, I’m getting the best 3 row vehicle on the market. This is exactly the predicament the blu-ray market is in. I don’t really want a three row SUV but my hands are tied, I’m not going to buy an inferior vehicle.
For example, Disney isn’t even going to produce their own discs anymore, they’re outsourcing it to Sony. I can’t imagine the quality will be optimal going forward. They are giving the blu-ray market the cable television treatment: they’re making money on the last holdouts and investing nothing into it.