When will DVDs be obsolete?

just a curiosity. when blu ray came out a few years back i figured DVD was on its way out but they still seem to be going strong.

velvet revolver

DVDs will continue to be strong until absolutely everything that has appeared on home video over the decades is available on BD, and that will never happen because the studios have told us they have no intention of ever doing anything like that. Even with new releases there is much material that is made available only on DVD, with no BD ever planned. Some material, like tv series, do very well on DVD, but not on BD. What will change that?

Do you have something against DVD and, if so, what ever on earth for?

You'll have to pry my DVD's out of my cold dead hands....

I got a great collection. It will never be obsolete.

ha same here...i own over 200 DVDs...

Everything will be obsolete once the government puts micro chips in our heads.
Then we will be able to view any movie we've ever seen in our minds eye ;)

"ha same here...i own over 200 DVDs..."

That's a good start....

I think eventually DVDs will go the way of the VHS tape and the 78 RPM record, yes. All formats must eventually make way for new ones. VHS tapes had a great run . . what, about 20 years? . . .and once we'd graduated from wax cylinders, records were around for decades longer. But eventually there will be a new technology that makes DVDs pass�.

As a Netflix member who gets DVDs through the mail, I'd say I see symptoms of that obsolescence already . . as more and more of their catalogue goes digital, their DVD stocks are getting short. When discs go missing or get damaged they aren't buying replacement copies, and whereas several years ago I might have received one defective disc in a year, I've had to send back 3 or 4 items already this year because they were too damaged to play. They are keeping old and damaged discs in the rotation long after they should be retired. Most of their customers are switching to the digital option for the convenience of instant viewing.

I work with young people in my job and I see more and more the idea of 'owning' a physical storage device for content--ie, a DVD or a CD or a book--is becoming obsolete. For people under 30, the concept of 'ownership' is more nebulous. They store their entertainment in 'the cloud' . .they don't need a disc to put it on. Old farts like me still like to have something 'in my hand' as 'proof' that I own it. No computer malfunction/virus/software upgrade will obliterate my collection of books, movies and music. I'll keep my old-skool stereo boom box until it dies or I do. I've got an Ipod, but it's the size of a postage stamp and I can lose it a whole lot easier.

Meanwhile, it appears that Blu-Ray was not quite the savior of the world it was promoted as. I see bins of those things at Walmart that they can't even give away for $5.

Hikari

Do the youngsters you deal with every day ever express any concern about losing the material they've paid for if and when their "cloud" company goes out of business or has a crash that can't be restored? What about those streamed movies they've bought they love so much when the studio issuing said movies decides to remove them from availability? How are they going to get to enjoy them then? What about when the inevitable newest new format appears and the present forms of streaming and "cloud" storing are no longer supported by the industry? What happens to their movies, tv shows, books, etc.?

I will admit I have moments from time to time when I look at my big collection compiled over fifty years and wonder what it would be like to not have it all in the house, but still have access to it. I can see the appeal of cloud storage and streaming, but I simply don't trust it. After all, it's a "present" technology that may be around for 20 years, but then what?

I guess one has to be a young person today to have such faith in something so fleeting as in a given technology. Or to have faith that the music, books, and movies one loves will always be available on the "stream" or Internet, or that the cloud service storing so much of one's library on which they've spent so much of their money will always be there.

With it all in hand, I can still read books I bought 60 years ago, listen to records purchased over 50 years ago, and still enjoy video, laserdiscs, DVDs, HD DVDs, and BDs bought over the last 30 years. Do young people really think there is no chance whatever that their cloud "libraries" will not be there for them 60 years from now? That everything they will want to see and hear will still be available as streamed programs that far in the future? When technologies and formats change there is always a lot of material that is not ported over.

What is the mindset of the youngsters on these matters?

DVD's will be obsolete when Deckard meets Rachael at the Tyrell Corporation.

That's actually only six years away, at least according to the movie.

@Cav

Everything you write, I agree with, absolutely. With the ubiquity now of e-readers, tablets, IPads, etc., it's hard to remember, but this technology really isn't that old. I am in my 12th year at my current library, and e-readers hit the scene since I have been here . . . probably about halfway through that time. So we are only talking half a dozen years or so since people have been using the term 'e-reader' or 'digital book'. A bit less than that since the words "Kindle" or "Nook" or "IPad" became household terms. In the beginning, at least here, response to the e-reader was slow, but when Amazon jumped on board with their Kindle, it just took off.

As a public librarian who grew up in the 1980s, well before the Internet, and as a lifelong bookworm, I have an internal struggle about adopting all this new technology, and what it means for the future of libraries . . and my profession. I'm not opposed to technology out of some Luddite principles . .hardly. I couldn't survive without my daily Internet fix. That aspect of the digital age has made my job so much easier than back in the day when I'd have had to dig through a towering box of typed bibliographic records or dug through dusty periodicals to try and help a patron. Digital technology is more efficient. And it does away with clutter! But I am concerned for today's youth (god, I really sound like an old fart, don't I?) because so many of them are so plugged in to all their devices that that's all they do. "Socializing" for them is almost 100% online or via their smart phones. Even when a group of them hang out together, they are in their own individual little bubbles of digital isolation. I see kids in here spending their entire Saturdays and evenings after school on our computers when they should be out playing. Some of our computer users with Facebook accounts are as young as seven. I'm not making that up. I think the gigantic surge of autism-related disorders is connected in some way to the gigantic surge of electronic stimulation in our world. Young children, even babies, are being subjected to a barrage of electronics and it's messing with the wiring in their brains. Now that schools are even using electronics to teach reading, I think the problems will only increase. The centuries-old method of learning to read and write via actual physical paper and ink that stays stationary on that paper was not 'sexy' perhaps, not 'cool'--but it was effective for developing brains. We really don't know the long-term effects of all these electronics on the brain, of children or adults, since the technology has mushroomed in growth and usage far ahead of the research.

As far as worrying about losing their 'cloud' libraries . . . I don't think most young people take such a long view. They are concerned about the 'now', and about adding the newest Rihanna single to their playlist. They don't worry about losing it 'sometime later'. As far as they're concerned, if they lose their Ipod or their phone or a new model comes out that they like better, they'll get it and buy all new digital stuff. After all, who cares about losing songs that were so, like, 2010? That was at least two Ipad generations ago.

You and I are collectors, long-term collectors, and that mindset is different from the much more ephemeral one of today. There are still collectors out there, to be sure. I don't think print media or discs for movies or music will completely die off in the foreseeable future. Probably not in our lifetimes. But eventually they will stop manufacturing the machines on which to play 'discs'. It's not very easy to find anything to play 'tapes' anymore, is it? Print books may never completely die out, but eventually they will be the minority format. Digital books provide a greater profit margin because you can charge $8-10 for a digital file to be sent to someone's e-reader . .and there are no printing, warehousing or distribution costs--after paying royalties to the author, most of that's pure profit. Whereas the same book in a print format might rung $16-18 but that product has to be produced, packaged, stored, shipped to bookstores, displayed, etc. It's not cost-effective. Of course, holding a real book in your hands is an experience without price . . but it doesn't do anything for the bottom line. I think eventually 'books' will become something of a specialty item. Only academics or the wealthy will have a large collection of printed books--so we will come full circle to the very earliest days of the printing press, when a printed and bound book was a precious thing, the province of the privileged classes, who were the only ones who could afford it and had storage space (ie, special rooms) in which to keep their libraries.

One day, in the not-very-distant future, I think books, along with physical discs for movies and music will be considered 'retro'.

That's us--we're retro and proud of it!

I wish they would start making needles that would last longer on my victrola!

Hikari

Unfortunately, so true.

I get the mindset of the young where their ephemeral music tastes are concerned, but for those of us who love opera and classical music, the past is every bit as important as the present and future. Indeed, the vast majority of the repertory comes from the past. Obviously, this has a major bearing on literature and the books containing it as well.

In addition to the points you've made about the effects of an electronic lifestyle, I've wondered what it will do to the soul of man when he no longer owns anything but his house, furniture, and clothes. Everything else is "out there" somewhere. I think who ever chose the word "cloud" for this new storage technology made a wise choice for there is nothing solid about a cloud. Moreover, a cloud changes shape constantly, eventually ceasing to exist. I worry about the future safety of man's accumulated knowledge and culture in this brave new world. To what extent will the old saying "out of sight, out of mind" prove frighteningly true when man no longer has anything around to remind him of what he knows, let alone "owns"?

@Cav
I suppose there is an elegant simplicity to the notion that no one 'owns' intellectual properties and they just float around in the ether. Christ would support not encumbering ourselves with so many 'possessions'.

But, He probably wouldn't say that exchanging books and movies and music CDs for a $600 Ipad and $2000 computer . . not to mention enslaving oneself to a monthly Internet subscription . . oh, yeah . .and a Wii console, the latest Apple I-phone and the latest-generation plasma screen TV to play it all on in your home-theatre system constitutes 'doing without' or 'simplifying your life' would He? Yeah, you now 'own' fewer individual items and have more space in your house . . but the items you do 'own' have just gotten that much more expensive and are all subject to yearly 'upgrade' fees . . .until they become completely obsolete and you have to start all over again with new devices.

Do you ever lie awake at night thinking of all this electronic waste going into landfills?

Places to act as 'repositories of the knowledge of civilization' will become more and more important as the general population grows dumber and dumber tied to their electronic pacifiers. At least we won't be around if and when the day comes when libraries cease to exist. It's a sad irony, really, that the more technology we have, the more prosaic our minds get. Sure, there have been medical and scientific advances that man in the 18th century would never been able to conceive of. But for all our 'advances'--are we producing any minds today like our Founding Fathers . . or the leading artists of the Renaissance? The visual arts are another area infiltrated by digital technology. I don't think we are producing great painters in oils or watercolor that will be able to stand with the likes of a Rembrandt or even an Andrew Wyeth. They don't develop fine artists anymore--they graduate kids with degrees in 'digital media arts'. These kids have spent four years learning how to design video games and tricking out computers to do the painting and the photography for them. What we gain in instantaneous delivery of images and communication and convenience and ease of production . . .no more laborious 'film developing' in darkrooms with dangerous chemicals . . .or laboring for months with brushes and paint to produce a picture . . .we lose in Art. We've got the forms, and dazzling creations some of them be . . .but there's no soul in it when the 'artist' is using a keyboard and a software program to create his 'art' instead of sweat and the skill of his hands. It's fast-food Art to go with our fast-food cuisine and our 24/7 helpings of Internet 'news' and celebrity gossip.

I am always drawn to stories of the artistic life from generations past . . the DaVincis, Michangelos . . spending years of back-breaking toil and heavenly inspiration to create their masterpieces . . . of the Dickenses, writing out their scripts by longhand . . .the 1920s Left Bank tortured artists and writers. Yeah, we have over-romanticized those times to a large extent . . but some real Romance with a capital R was there, inherent in the artistic process. Now computers generate our pretty pictures, but I sure don't call it 'Art'. I think greatness in any field of human endeavor is gone, sadly---replaced by efficiency, sanitation . . instant gratification. We may have raised the median lifestyle for most, but at the top echelons of the 'brillant'--those few in-a-generation geniuses . . . well, I don't know about you, but I can't put Steve Jobs into the same category as a Thomas Jefferson, a Ben Franklin . . or a van Gogh, or even a John Steinbeck, can you?

Sorry, but I spent way too much on my Dvd Criterion collection to have any intention of letting go of my dvd's.

Hikari and Cavardossi,

I don't think we should be so quick to pity a whole generation of young people; I mean, there must be a certain percentage of them who actually collect media and physical books, who don't wish to rely on The Cloud to hold their beloved stories and tunes and illustrations. We're talking here like owning stuff is gone for anyone under 30. I don't believe it. Yes, many young adults don't have any discs or paper books, since the technology now makes it convenient to keep things "out there somewhere" for lack of a better phrase. That's what many of them are used to, I gather. Yet I like to think that some of them sit outside on a sunny day and read a magazine or the new bestseller mystery, that a few of them are into vinyl music recordings (because maybe an aunt or cousin is), that many of them paint and draw and make music without digital means.

Maybe I'm taking posts here too seriously, but when you begin worrying about the future safety of mankind's knowledge and art ... well, I think life's too brief to do that. Mind you, I understand the point: if created things are not in a tangible form (just inside a tablet), then it's almost like they don't exist-- if the power's gone, the art is as well.

This certainly is some interesting conversation. Hence my chiming in today.

Hikari

I can't disagree with a word you said, principally because I agree with every word you said!

Everything in my Listmania I own on DVD, half of which are not or will not be made available on Blu-Ray, 80% of my favorite shows are not on Blu-Ray, having said this there is no way DVD is going away any time soon, as for digital downloads, I prefer a physical copy of anything whether it be books, pictures, DVD's, or CD's, there are tooo many!!! viruses out there that will cost you all your downloads, I had over 50 pictures saved on my old PC & it crashed, had everything transfered to my current PC, but lost every single picture.

@Baron

Thanks for your comment. Let me clarify that I don't pity a whole generation of young people because they don't have groaning bookshelves or have Ipods rather than turntable stereos. I pity them because compared with generations that came before them, they are technologically savvy and intellectually ignorant. It doesn't really matter 'how' an artistic property is delivered, but that the message is received. A current college kid could read "Great Expectations" or the essays of Ralph Waldo Emerson via his Kindle and still get the same benefit I received when I read them via the 'original handheld' medium in the 1980s. And we may well have ourselves a budding Dickens out there that will save a buttload of time by composing his 21st century opus on the computer. These are only the tools. But we've started to make the 'tools' the entire point, rather than the message they are supposed to help create or deliver. The youth that once haunted bookshops and record stores now haunt their local Apple Store--that is the new Temple of Knowledge. After they get their nifty new tablets or what have you . . . what are they using all their nifty apps for? Probably not for reading Great Expectations. Unless they are forced to for a course, after which they will go to the nifty 'Term Papers for Sale' site on the Internet and purchase a suitable one.

Where knowledge is not labored for, it becomes valueless. All our nifty devices have removed most of the labor element . .labor and retention . .that used to be inherent in the process of "Learning".

Don't get me wrong--I think these shiny, superfast devices are awfully cool. But as a society we are becoming so entranced with our toys that they become an endeavor unto themselves . . .all the potential they have for 'meaningful' content over and above sheer entertainment value has become incidental. As far as worrying about the future of civilization . .it's kind of in my bones--I'm a librarian. You're right that life's too brief to be consumed with this concern--I certainly will be dead before Art and Literature and historical recall become obsolete. But if, heaven forbid that happens--some generation not ours will still be here, and so I will pity them in advance.

There's a young adult novel by Rodman Philbrick called "The Last Book in the Universe". Published in the 1990s, during an early generation of Windows, and long before Steve Jobs had invented the Iphone, it imagines a dystopian future where, after a nuclear apocalypse, a new Dark Ages has dawned. There remains one book left . . one record of Western Civilization compiled by Elders who remembered the Before days. This record of man's past has been handed down through several generations to one person, the Keeper of the Book. Now the current Keeper is old and dying, and he must find a successor to safeguard the Book before he goes. He picks, wisely or unwisely, a 13-year-old kid.

For better or worse, the 'youth' will always be the guardians of the legacy of the past. It is in their hands. If that doesn't scare you just a tad, then you are made of braver stuff than me. Of course, I see them every day, and these are not the enterprising 20-somethings in universities . . no, this is the generation behind--the 14-and-under crowd. You might not be so confident about handing over the future of mankind's knowledge to them if you see them as I do.

They have done away with penmanship in public schools, did you know that? They don't teach cursive writing anymore. It is no longer deemed necessary . .the children learn keyboarding instead. Handwriting instruction wastes time and you cannot devise a standardized testing procedure for it, so it's gone. That means a few troubling things:

--Most persons under the age of 21 don't really know what a 'signature' is. They print their names.
--The handwriting of an 18-year-old is, in most cases, indistinguishable from the penmanship of a 9-year-old.
--Within a generation, they predict, that handwritten documents in English will have become like Egyptian hieroglyphics . . indecipherable to all but a select handful of academics.

Selfishly, I think with relief, "At least I'll be dead by then."

Every generation since Adam and Eve had kids has despaired of 'the kids of today' . . but in our case, we are witnessing an acceleration of technology such as never has been seen before in known history. We are so entranced by the benefits that we are kind of turning a blind eye to the detriments . . .brain tumors from cell phone exposure is only one of the quantifiable risks. What is not so quantifiable but no less deadly is how the mushrooming of electronic technology is changing the fabric of social interaction and the very way children are learning and absorbing information. Even if nothing medically bad is provable, it's still an indisputable fact that we are becoming more and more isolated from one another, socially because of our reliance/addiction to these devices . . and it's those under 30, who've always grown up with this stuff that have the most effects from it. The rituals of childhood that you and I remember have been replaced by new rituals . . I call this the age of the Electric Childhood. And that's not complimentary.

There will always be minority exceptions to prevailing majority trends . . . the young people today who still haunt bookstores and scour Craigslist for turntables and vinyl and stuff . . .*THOSE* will be the Keepers of our knowledge. I read an article about a 24-year-old girl living in a Chicago apartment that has something like 10,000 books. Mostly hardcover, mostly scrounged from used bookshops and estate sales. Her boyfriend built custom-made floor-to-ceiling walnut shelves to house her collection. I read it and said "Hail, soul-sister!" And only 24, too.

It's 20-somethings like these that give me hope for the future. But they are definitely birds of rare plumage for their generation.

Hikari

I also worry that attention spans are becoming far too short. Sure, it doesn't really matter how fast MTV edits their shows, or how quickly major Hollywood films move, it's the fact that real knowledge that is retained requires sustained effort and concentration. How many young minds that are used to Internet shorthand wordage can sufficiently engage with and comprehend, say, medical texts or learn advanced mathematics? I have a hard time imagining how they can spend the needed time and deep thought in disciplines like philosophy and theology.

I no longer have any contact with young people, let alone teens, so I may not be the best person to be expressing these concerns, but I don't see things getting better anytime soon.

Hikari,

I suppose we must simply be grateful that at least some younger people cling to stuff of the past. I'm surprised at your revelation that script handwriting is no longer being taught, but at this stage nothing is very shocking when it comes to education.

Philbrick's "The Last Book in the Universe" must have such a Twilight Zone flavor from the way you described it. Remember the TZ episode called "The Obsolete Man", with Burgess Meredith and Fritz Weaver-- an episode which must hit very close to home for you.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I like the way you express yourself ("groaning bookshelves", in particular).

Baron Sardonicus

I can confirm Hikari's mention of the rejection of the teaching of handwriting. I read it in TIME a while ago. I was as surprised as you. Remember when your written signature was a recognizable aspect of your identity? It looks like that has gone by the way. What replaces it?

The only things to prove identity is either one's face or one's fingerprint, right?

Geez...we're headed back to the days of people making their "mark" instead of signing their name.

Is a printed name on a contract even legal as a signature?

@Billy

I don't believe so. My friend who used to be a bank teller says not. But she had legions of young people in to open their first bank account and when asked for their signature on their bank card had no idea that a signature was any different than block printing their name like they'd always done.

Obviously given current realities, other methods of identification will have to be devised. A signature is hardly a secure means of ID'ing someone . . but it was always considered a rite of passage to go from the childish writing of the schoolroom to developing an adult signatory identity. I remember being introduced to 'grown-up' writing at the end of second grade-beginning of third grade. It was a big deal to learn how to write cursive. Printing was for babies.

A recurring theme in teen dystopian literature (all the rage right now) is the idea that in the near future, governments will simply tattoo their citizens as a means of identification--with a unique barcode that links the person to all their important documents, social security, birth certificate, criminal records, work history, DMV, etc. Other methods include retinal scans and implantation of microchips.

I would have called this science fiction once upon a time, but I think that day is practically upon us, so it no longer seems that outlandish. I'm prone to losing things, so a barcode tattoo would eliminate some of my problems. Would create others, though.

I don't think DVDs will be going away anytime soon. Their sales are as strong as ever, and quite importantly, Blu Ray players have retrocompatibility and can play DVDs, while DVD players couldn't play previous formats. I think that's one of the main reasons the previous formats were discontinued, the other one being that besides visual and audio quality there's not much room for improvement in the present formats.

I think one of the reasons DVD became popular was its convenience. Not only you don't have to rewind/fast forward for minutes to be able to rewatch something, you can actually pick a spot and go to it instantly. They're also easier to store (specially without the box), lighter to carry and can be played almost anywhere (dedicated players, videogame consoles, computers, etc.). Now Blu Ray is the same only the picture looks better. The jump from DVD to Blu Ray wasn't nearly as high as the one from VHS to DVD, and it didn't make the previous format instantly obsolete.

Now the only new format is digital, but it's not really an improvement. It trades one set of conveniences and issues for a different one. Digital formats can be carried anywhere or not carried at all if you have them in the cloud, yeah, but if your DVD player breaks, you don't lose all your DVDs, whereas if your digital drive crashes it's all lost. And if it's stored in the cloud you need internet access to get it, which isn't available everywhere.

So, again, DVDs are not going anywhere anytime soon.