“and the release of the last optical disk format for entertainment content – Blu-ray.”

How do you know that?
If you know what CE trends will be in the future then I need to know who’s going to win the Super Bowl,World Series and the World Cup in the next ten years.

I think the biggest event to happen to Microsoft in June is the end of XP,after June 30 you will no longer be able to buy a CD.

As for Bill G:Thanks for bringing us the most bloated OS yet...Vista.If you are looking for charity to give away those $ billions then give me a call.

two things:

blu-ray wasn’t released in 2008. it has been around for a while...i guess you forgot?

second thing: blu-ray is on the road to failure. The last successful physical media was the DVD. It will be the last successful physical media, too. In two years time, blu-ray will be used to store software packages that are too big for a DVD, and HD movies will be basically download only or a small fringe of BR enthusiasts. Blu-ray will turn into PS3 game media only. It will not even be the next DVD-Audio or SACD...SACD is still being produced by small labels and classical/jazz labels. It is actually profitable on a smaller scale than Sony is willing to play on. But it’s also hybrid playable on regular CD players.

blu-ray players are on target to be “only 250-300 dollars” by the end of 2008. That’s about 100-150 dollars more than they will need to be for people to buy them.

Say hello to download-only movies. That’s the replacement for DVD, if you can call it that.

Blu-ray’s already peaked.

Enough with the downloadable content argument.  How many people do you know have a connection anywhere close to being capable of streaming 1080p and DTS-HD?  Or if they try and download it and save to their hard drives, how many people want to wait 2 days (being generous here) for the download to complete and then have the storage capacity to keep more than a handful of titles?  For downloadable content that rivals what is available on BD you will need to spend major money on storage and a connection that can even think about making it happen.  The “average joe” will be even less likely to invest in that than in BD.

You act as if Bill Gates invented media PCs.

Anyone who owned a Commodore Amiga or Atari ST from 1985 onward was *already* playing sampled music and watching videos on their PC.  Commodore and Atari were the first to bring multimedia to the home. 

Per usual, all Bill Gates did was “play catch up” when he saw himself falling behind the other computing platforms.  Other men created the vision; Gates stole the vision and took the credit.  There’s almost nothing that Gates can claim as his own original idea.

.

With corporate monopolies like Comcast and Time-Warner blocking access to sites like itunes.com and nbc.com, or imposing speed limits to make broadband look little better than dialup.....

.....I don’t see a future for Bluray-quality video via internet.  The network can’t handle the required ~40,000 megabit/second load for every home in America.  Most homes barely have 1 megabit/s which is nowhere near the 40,000 required to stream Bluray HD content!  In other words, there’s still plenty of need for physical media, and room for growth to better technologies… perhaps a “holodisk” that can hold 1000 gigabytes in the year 2015. 

+ There’s also the factor that people like to OWN their movies, rather than take the risk that their online videos will disappear when the company goes bankrupt, or decides it’s not profitable enough (as has happened several times already).  When the company disappears, so too does all the money you spent on videos.

I for one prefer having a disc sitting on my library shelf.  Something that is MINE and will always be mine.

Um Troy, Blu-ray’s max for video and audio is 48 Mb per sec. Why do you think you need one thousand times that bandwidth to stream the content?

People today are (nearly) streaming HD movies with digital surround sound. I click to download a movie from Xbox Live Marketplace and it is ready to start playing in less than ten minutes usually with the rest streaming to catch up during the film. It’s 720p with lossy surround but I am watching a movie from thought to film without leaving the couch. And, just like Blu-ray, the movies looks everywhere from just okay to phenomenal.

Ooops. I made an error.  Of course that’s not as bad as the idiot reporter who claimed Blu-ray was released in 2008!  Where’s he been the last few years???  It’s his JOB to do accurate reporting, ad if he can’t do that job, they should stop paying him.

My statement corrected:

[I don’t see a future for Bluray-quality video via internet.  The network can’t handle the required ~50 megabit/second load for every home in America.  Most homes barely have 1 megabit/s.  Many are still stuck with 0.050 megabit/s phone line dialup!  In other words, there’s still plenty of need for physical media to carry movies, and room for growth to better technologies.]

+

There’s also the factor that people don’t want the risk that their “purchased library” of online videos will disappear when the company discontinue sservice (as has happened several times already).  I for one prefer having a disc sitting on my library shelf.  Something that can not be taken away by greedy corporations.

As example: VHS and DVD. 

I have a large library, and that library will always be in my possession.  Titles I bought 25 years ago are still watchable… still in my possession… and the corporations can never take away that investment.

Troy,

This is Derek.  I am the so-called “idiot reporter” to whom you referred.  The bottom line is that you missed the whole point of my view and the correlation between an ERA that distributes content using a physical optical medium and the start of a new ERA that has the ability to get that same content in the future via a connected platform.

I do agree that Blu-ray Discs will be sold for the next several years as the primary medium for obtaining high definition content for those who want the pristine audio and video quality (which, in our business, hopefully is quite a few) or for those that still cling to the concept of owning content via a physical disk.  In fact, it may be required to have that physical medium available for consuming this type of content depending upon which approach Microsoft takes in allowing us to stream high definition protected content throughout the home.  Also note that I am not ruling out the potential use of technologies such as holographic disks being used for backing up all of these terabytes of stored content we are collecting or possibly having pocket-sized solid state disks or cards being used as an alternative method for “retail outlets” to sell content.

What I am saying is that I do share Bill’s vision in questioning why we need to proliferate the concept of using a physical medium for content distribution when viable alternatives are becoming available via electronic distribution.  Remember, he is designing, building, and proliferating strategic platforms that will be mainstream in the next three to five years - and ones that still need to be viable for the next ten years or more.  He wanted to drive the industry to new heights, not to be complacent with where we are today.  Just because we have lived in an ERA that distributes content this way does not mean we should stop continuing to develop platforms and services that provide a much more scalable and economically feasible approach, which Bill was even more vocal about as Blu-ray settled in as the preferred standard in January of this year (note, that I am referring to 2008 once again).

Therefore, I still believe that 2008 marks the end of the ERA where the industry sees the need to spend an inordinate amount of time, money, and resources developing some new generation of physical optical medium for content distribution (and all of the associated intellectual property agreements that this involves).  So yes, Blu-ray technology has been around for quite a while, but as soon as it was accepted by the marketplace as a whole as the preferred distribution medium earlier this year, the need to take that type of technology any further and develop yet another future standard was brought into question by such industry visionaries as Bill Gates.  To me, 2008 still remains the end of an ERA that views a physical optical medium as the preferred way to distribute content - and, with what I see, large factions of the industry and an even larger number of consumers agree with Bill.

=D-

Knowing it’s easy to criticize and while we’re all entitled to our opinion, to avoid looking foolish, do us all a favor and actually read the article before attacking it. IMHO, the author is simply stating his belief (like others) that the end of an era has BEGUN in 2008 where physical media is the primary mass distribution method for A/V content. A slightly more careful reading makes this clear. “ben” agrees “blu-ray is on the road to failure” - and makes his points very well which AGREE with the article.

To “Crude Dude”, how does anyone know anything? While some may have inside information and/or actually have worked in the industry, others need only review the trends in on-line digital video or other on-demand content offered by DirecTV, Netflix (soon to offer streaming HD on the Roku box), and Microsoft through XBOX and Media Center (Internet TV), to name a few. Spend some time and actually touch the technologies you’re quick to condemn. Recent advances are very impressive and usable, although not perfect in every way.

I’m not sure where the hostility is coming from, but even a casual CEPro reader should have noticed Flickinger’s 7 articles in the past 2 years. This guy is far from just a “reporter” – he’s a knowledgeable active player who’s “living it” and constantly pushing the technology envelope. He is well respected and has participated in many industry events over many years. Note that I have no affiliation with any magazine and no horse in this race. While open debate is welcome and you don’t have to agree, it’s sometimes better to remain silent than to open your mouth and prove your ignorance.

Personally, while I own true HD 1080p equipment, the fact is it’s very difficult for the human eye (at a normal distance) to perceive the difference between wide-screen 720p and 1080i (or 1080p for that matter). Today, most installed flat panels don’t have the native resolution of 1920x1080 to render true HD content in spite of “taking” a 1080 signal. Furthermore, what equally matters to quality is how the scene was originally shot. Most movies are shot on film and while theoretically providing very high resolution, many factors affect the ultimate picture quality rendered in your home.

The point is, to the vast majority of viewers, an average, modern, properly configured system will look very good and that on-line content need not be true HD to satisfy most viewers. The big players know this. Comcast has been responding to the Verizon FiOS threat by “magically” increasing the throughput to compete and handle the ever-increasing A/V streaming demands. AND “most users” are what drives consumer electronics technology.

To be sure, there have been efforts by ISP’s to limit abusive downloading, but this is business. Yes, we signed the agreement, but if we object loudly enough, they usually back off on the bandwidth “throttling”. And yes, we all hate poor compression algorithms which can be very noticeable. At the same time, can we agree excessive users should pay more?

Yes Troy, I “like” to own physical content, but I’ll get over it and that while optical media will essentially last forever, magnetic tape will not. The recording is degrading due to the earth’s field and anytime current passes through a nearby conductor. While the Amiga or Atari may well have been the first multi-media systems - cool, but so what? I’m not seeing much support for these platforms today – as good as they were.

As for the other men who “created the vision”, many kudos, but where did their ideas come from? Should Gates not pursue something to avoid the perception of theft? I agree credit and fair compensation should be given, but life is not always fair. Face it; Gates is a very unique and talented individual - not perfect and has made mistakes, but consider the big picture and the common good. History generally records and credits those responsible for great achievement. As we also well know, MS has legally purchased much of their technology. Last time I checked, this is not stealing and is usually welcomed by the acquired company.

On the question about average residential broadband internet throughput, I would direct you to a paper entitled, “Characterizing Residential Broadband Networks”. Let’s take the speculation out of this discussion and keep in mind there’s more to a good experience than just bit rates AND bottlenecks can occur at any point. On the number of US internet-connected users, the paper sates, “more than half of all Internet users connect via residential broadband networks.” – This means NOT dial up. Based on my understanding of their results, most cable subscribers can expect reliable throughput of about 5Mbps most of the time, while DSL is 2-3Mbps. Make no mistake, the bandwidth has to be there to support the growing demand for streaming content and Verizon is spending billions on the FiOS rollout for this very purpose I presume.

Downloadable HD movies from XBOX Live are Widescreen 720p and about 4GB. While selection is limited, it’s fair and improving. The quality is really very good AND you can optionally spend more on the HD content. The wait is about 5 minutes to begin viewing. When you combine the currently available online content from all sources, it’s becoming obvious where we’re heading. NO, optical media will probably not be eliminated entirely for all content anytime soon, BUT it’s most likely that nothing beyond Blu Ray will be developed for mass distribution which would mark the end of an era in 2008.

By any measure and while certainly not perfect, Microsoft is a tremendous success story that has driven the cost of computing down to be affordable by everyone. And where there’s an inability to afford computers, MS provides academic licensing and has given HW to the underprivileged. The “hate Microsoft” mantra is so old school – get over it, grow up, get a life, and be part of the solution. Or just remain in your sanctimonious ivory tower, resenting MS and the astounding good it has done for the world’s population. 

Aside from the fact MS currently employs 89,809 tax-paying employees worldwide, if I’m not mistaken, Microsoft employees gave over $2.5 billion to non-profits worldwide. In addition, there is no denying the Gates foundation is doing awesome charitable work through the generosity of Bill Gates and others like Warren Buffet who is donating billions to this cause. I assure you, those benefiting from these good works aren’t quibbling over who was the first to have the ideas and there are far worse people in this world who deserve your criticism.

Yes, MS is a business, they are aggressive, have some legal problems, have paid serious fines, and the EU continues to extort big bucks from them, BUT as far as “stealing” technology ideas, keep in mind there is nothing new under the sun and great minds do think alike. I love it when the “open source” crowd goes on about how great it is and cries b/c MS won’t reveal every line of source code, yet when MS builds on a well-known concept and invests in development and actually SUCCEEDS in bringing it to market, this is somehow “stealing”. Please don’t misunderstand, the computing community has absolutely been essential in the phenomenal growth – one in which we all share and most companies in the business have profited. Remember, it is ONLY through capitalism that this would have been achieved. Note that computer and other technologies are simply a means to an end.

Yes, you do have to pay for SW to legally use it – that’s known as the price of doing business. Anyone who has written software or composed/produced music understands the reason for copyright law and digital rights management. Anyone who realizes the widespread, organized piracy of copyrighted material understands the need for DRM. We are all paying for the blatant theft of something no different from shoplifting items from a store shelf.

Having said that, and as an electronics engineer and independent professional SW developer for over 25 years, Microsoft technology is NEVER perfect. I have never worked for MS, but I have spent many late nights wrestling in “DLL Hell”, reverse engineering, or having to empirically determine how something works b/c of disgraceful documentation or sample code that could never have worked, but with all things (and the alternatives) considered, I was able to deliver the solution in spite of imperfect tools/technology.

Yes, technology can take some time to become fully baked and mature enough for primetime, but what doesn’t? There is tremendous risk and cost in bringing products to market. I am constantly disgusted by this sense of entitlement toward perfect, open technology for little to no cost. While we should demand high quality and value, we need to stop being part of the problem and help support the solution.

Where is it written that anything is easy? No matter which technology you choose, there will always be problems. While there’s no excuse for poor quality and I have to wonder about the some of the products/features MS offers, there remains serious innovation at Microsoft who spends billions every year on R&D;and who employs some of the best talent in the world. Generally, if there’s great enough demand and useful feedback, most companies will deliver quality or face extinction for as we know, only the strong survive.

>>>the start of a new ERA that has the ability to get that same content in the future via a connected platform.

I disagree that this era has arrived because (1) the network is still too slow to provide ~50 megabit/s connections to all 150 million homes in North America.  (2) Even if said network existed, most consumers don’t like the idea of paying for videos, but not owning those videos, and therefore risking losing their investment.  (Example:  When Google Videos decided to pull the plug, and people lost hundreds of dollars worth of purchased movies.)

As for Bill Gates:

I still think you are giving undue credit.  Many of the ideas in today’s computer industry (music-quality sound, moving video, multitasking, graphical-mouse interface) did not come from Gates or even Microsoft employees.  Those ideas came from other innovative companies like Atari, Commodore, Amiga, Sun, Apple, et cetera.

The “era” you speak of is NOT the era of Gates.

It is an era that was built by many, many innovators… and Gates was like the student who copies off everybody else’s homework.  Gates’ retirement is not the end of an era, because the innovators are still out there, creating new ideas.

>>>Microsoft is a tremendous success story that has driven the cost of computing down to be affordable by everyone.

Yet another example of false history.

The first affordable computer was the Atari 400 and later Commodore 64.  They cost $200 and $100 respectively, and the Commodore 64 still holds the record as the most popular computer ever (30 million units sold).

Microsoft does not deserve credit for “making computing affordable”.  That credit belongs to other innovators.  Microsoft is merely rewriting history (and you are falling for it), to act as if other contributors like Ray Kassar or Jack Tramiel never existed & contributed nothing.

You do these people a disservice to forget their roles in computing history.

Troy,

To say that Bill Gates is getting undue credit because other people may have developed products along the same lines before him is short sighted.

I’m going to assume you remember the invention of the integrated circuit. Can you tell me who was more important to the discovery and widespread use of the IC? Was it Jack Kilby or Robert Noyce? Or like both men and the courts are concerned, can you agree that although one may have preceded the other in discovery, both played a hand in refining and creating something that could be mass produced to solve a real problem in the industry. And that without BOTH men we would not be where we are today.

This is no different than with Bill Gates. He has had truly innovative ideas and those that he has lifted from others. But he always sets out, not with an intent to blatantly steal something as you seem to feel, but to refine and make a better product. Plus he compensates those that have done the work before him, just like everyone else does. Do you honestly think that we would be where we are today if everything was left the companies you so love to bring up? Do you also think that they are perfect? Perhaps you need to remember the phrase, “pot calling the kettle black”. Atari, Sun, Apple, etc. have ALL done what you are mouthing off about to others as well. Some have done a whole lot worse actually. But I feel that you don’t care to look at those things as you seem to have only one opinion, and that is MS and Bill Gates are evil. Here is something recent that demonstrates my point. Apples recent success with multi-touch technology is not there own doing, but they will no doubt get the majority of the credit, and I don’t see them doing anything to give credit or money to those that came before them. In fact the technology has been around since the 60&70;’s and was recently brought back into the spot light by a man named Jeff Han of NYU. He demonstrated much of his work at conventions such as TED. Google should help you on this.

The corporate world has become a place of “integration” and not “innovation”, and what you are complaining about is nothing new. Not saying this is something I agree with, but it is how things are done to maintain competitive in the business world, something your other companies fail to do, and is why they have a hard time competing and is why if we left the industry to them we would have reached the point we are at today (certainly not this fast). As someone who works for a very large government entity I can tell you that 95% of the stuff pushed out the door was developed and bought from smaller companies, reworked to fit certain requirements and needs, and sold to the government as part of billion dollar contracts under OUR company name. This is the cheapest way to do things (why reinvent the work others have already done?). It is how things will continue to be done, and if companies wish to remain competitive than they also need to adopt this or end up being overshadowed by the others that actually get, not just the technical side of the industry, but the business side as well.

That is all I have to say on the matter. I won’t be checking back to see any response. Feel free to twist my words or pick what I say apart to try and prove to...well yourself...that you have a right to hate people like Bill Gates and MS.

>>>"you seem to have only one opinion, and that is MS and Bill Gates are evil.”

Strawman argument.  I didn’t say Gates was evil, or that other companies are saints.  Please don’t put words into my mouth which I did not say.

To put it succinctly, I said:

- Bill Gates is not the end of an era.
- The circa 1975-2008 era is not the work of just one man.
- That era is the work of many men, and therefore the era will continue forward without Gates.

Take multimedia for example.  This article makes it sound like Gates singlehandedly invented multimedia circa 1990.  In reality, Macintosh and Amiga and Atari owners were *already* doing multimedia.  They also had mouse-based computing.  And multitasking.

- Macs were being used to publish newspapers and magazines.

- Amigas were being used in movies and tv shows to create special effects and music.  (Examples: The movie Beauty and the Beast, and the tv shows Babylon 5 and seaQuest.)

- Gates had nothing to do with those advances.  Nothing.  Let that sink-in for a second.

If you wrote an article claiming Henry Ford invented the automobile, I’d be just as adamant to say “that’s wrong”.  Ditto Gates.  If you wrote an article claiming Ford’s retirement was the end of an era, that too would be wrong.  Automobiles continued advancing without Ford, and computers will continue advancing without Gates.

It’s NOT the end of era, because the era was not the work of just one man or one company.

OK, this is weird… I started writing about a parallel between Bill and Henry Ford without reading the post just above mine.  Yikes, that’s a twighlight zone moment for sure!  But my point is a little different.  Neither man was all that original but both men had the vision and drive to bring their respective industries to the masses… and that’s huge!

Originality is a good thing though… don’t get me wrong.  But don’t forget:  It was the Xerox P.A.R.C. group that actually brought us the computer mouse, ethernet and the modern GUI… Had they had the vision and drive to do something with those great ideas, who knows??  Maybe we’d all be on Xerox Macs by now and watching XXNBC!

IMHO, if you HAD to choose a person who was the single MOST influential individual person on the computing industry of the 20th (& 21st?) century, I believe, by ANY measure, Gates is the man – by FAR.

While there are MANY very talented people who made major, essential contributions, Gates would still have made the most impact.

Therefore, his leaving Microsoft marks the end of an era - and the beginning of a new one.

One may like it or not, but the fact remains.