When are cartridges gonna replace disc media?

32gb/64gb cards would eat too much of profit margin.

>>59464444
>disk media
whats it like living in the 90s?

>>59464444
disk media?
like CDs AND DVDs? haven't those been extinct for like 10 years?

>>59464604
>>59464590
Blu ray

>>59464444
when flash NAND gets super cheap again

>>59464830
>bluray
literally obsolete trash that only exists because of how shilled it is. We have internet speeds faster than bluray transfer and hard drives and SSDs literally 20-50x the size in your average pc. and they don't require $300-500 proprietary "players" to read content from them.

Would it cost that much more to put that in a plastic shell so its bigger...

Oh yeah, gotta be portable.

>>59464444
They kind of already did everywhere but in video games.

File: image.jpg (117KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1920x1080px

>>59464830
Bluray is deprecated

File: Screenshot_20170318-144028(1).jpg (164KB, 720x686px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 720x686px

>>59464936
>>59465051
Microsd cards are very expensive for distribution.

While you can fit a blu-ray movie in a $10 32GB msd card, you can still fit that same movie on a $0.40 blu-ray disc.

Also not everyone has 1gbps internet so their only practical choices are download a shitty 750MB yify rip or buy the blu-ray.

Things will probably improve as HEVC becomes more popular though.

>>59464830
>>59464936
>>59465051
literally this
bluray is slower and lower capacity than a micro-sd card and has a ridiculous amount of relative latency since it's spinning storage. the only reason it's alive is because bluray player manufacturers would go out of business if it wasn't.

>>59465194
>he compares buying bluray with downloading low rez movies

>>59465194
bluray speeds max out around 70mbps. that's not an impressive internet speed in any country other than the congo.

File: 1374846394183.gif (579KB, 204x200px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 204x200px

>>59464444
Never, because streaming and cloud storage exists - you might not like it, but it is inevitable.

>>59465194
still not as cheap, high capacity, fast or practical as a hard drive. Why do these things exist?

>>59465194
That's garbage

>>59465221
I didn't say that. I said most people, having shit internet, either deal with the shit quality of yify rips or bite the bullet and pay for a fucking blu-ray to get a high quality movie.

>>59464936
A bluray burner costs maybe $50 and bluray is still the most cost effective medium for storing large amounts of data at home for long terms without having to worry about losing terabytes of data from a single failure. Only other option that comes close is a NAS with a several hard drives in a RAID 6 configuration, but that's a lot more data than most people need to store.

>>59465266
Except blurays do cost less per GB than comparable quality hard drives (ie, comparing Verbatim disks to HTSC hard drives).

>>59465240
damn, i didn't expect them to be this ridiculously slow

>>59465330
Most people can stream 4k video no problem

>>59465240
Man stop acting like over 50% of people on earth have 1gbps internet, they don't. It would be nice though.

>>59465266
For distribution of high quality movies to those with shit internet and as means of more reliable back-up. Blu-ray discs are claimed to last more than 100 years if stored properly.

File: WrLYaXB-1.png (361KB, 1940x1050px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1940x1050px

>>59465468
No.

>>59465639
Glorious Nippons and Vikings.

>>59465639
Feels good seeing my country at the top.

>>59464444
Internet made all physical media transfer devices obsolete

>>59465639
Your map shows that pretty much everyone who would even consider buying blurays can stream 4k

>>59465194
>as HEVC becomes more popular though.
lol...

File: Seinfeld.S08E09.The.Abstinence.720p.HULU.WEBRip.AAC2.0.H.264-NTb.mkv.00:11:46.png (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>59465918
Streaming 4k at 25Mbp/s

File: x265-2.png (582KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 600x600px

>>59466051
Welllll, we already have hardware decoders on most phones with snapdragon 600 series or better SoCs and $320 high performance processors doing 30FPS encoding 1080p HEVC.

>>59464604
disk =/= disc retard but yes, by disc OP means CD/DVD/Blu Ray (which is not extinct in any way).

>>59466084
>he doesnt know about AV1

>>59465918
I got a shit ton of Blu Rays but I got a 500kbit/s connection

File: bon-jovi-greatest-hits-usb.jpg (43KB, 720x340px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 720x340px

Nobody buys media on pyhsical anything these days.

>>59465194
kys you retarded toddler.

>>59466115
Preliminary reports say it takes 2-3X longer to encode than HEVC at the same quality so until they fix that shit AV1 won't be relevant.

File: 1435629554171.jpg (64KB, 586x634px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 586x634px

>>59466163
quality post you got there anon-kun

>>59466170
>Preliminary reports say it takes 2-3X longer to encode
this means nothing. encoding is a 1 time process

File: 1483251864237.jpg (252KB, 466x732px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 466x732px

>>59464830
hm... hm...
blu ray... when it came out didn't it had some competitor format?
I think it had even greater capacity than blu ray, but somehow it vanished...
I think it was just before blu ray hit the market...
Or am I dreaming..?

>>59465244
>no internet access
>zero files

please self murder

>>59464444
Sneakernet physical discs > Your shit

>>59465240
That's faster than 90% of internet speeds in the US. I'm not shitting you. I live in a decent sized city suburb and you can't even buy internet faster than 50mbps, no one offers it

>>59466189
Ignoring this massive downside, we still don't have any HW decoders for AV1. By the time we have them HEVC will be used in like 90% of rips out there.

>>59466201
hddvd

>>59465639
>tfw Italy

>>59465266
You're retarded and obviously can't understand what's being discussed in this thread

>>59465240
Most of Africa has like 1Mbps at best.
They still have dial-up in some places lol

File: 13746599.png.gif (172KB, 246x215px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 246x215px

>>59464444
Did you know that Nintendo Switch cartridges have an oddly sweet, candy-like taste to them when you put your tongue on the cartridge?

>>59464444
Discs are less failure-prone than flash drives and memory cards though.

>>59466239
Thanks anon.
So what happened to it?
I forgot even name of it since it appeared...

>>59466349
Died in a fire. Blu-Ray won.

>>59466181
>>59466170
>>59466235
you're a complete loser. just fucking kys or fuck off and find some other board. but preferably just kys.

>>59466334
This is only tru for high quality blu-ray discs. I lost most of my dvd/cds to disc rot.

>>59466410
Fuck off you AV1 shill

File: Its' dangerous to go alone here take this.jpg (268KB, 596x1055px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 596x1055px

>>59466245
>tfw South Italy

>>59464444
Disk: $0.10-$0.40
Cartridge: $5-$10

I dunno, do you want games to be more expensive? Because fuck if you think they're going to cut the profit margin! Pass the costs onto you.

>>59466420
But AV1 is better and not so encumbered by patents

>>59466459
No one gives a fuck when millions are torrenting H264/HEVC rips. At best youtube and netflix will start using AV1 when qualcum and jewtel decide to actually give a shit about it.

>>59466459
It can't be better since it doesn't exist.
At least a viable implementation of it.

>>59466384
Obviously.
But did blu-ray won because it's superior or because of marketing?

>>59464444
It's still much more efficient to mass produce optical discs, especially ones that come with data like movies and games. The disc is injection molded with the data in the mold, the moment the disc is made it's got data on it, no need to be burned.

>>59466487
>when millions
t. webp shill

>>59465240
I'm not in Congo and the maximum available internet speed here is 100Mbps. Not tying up 70% of the best internet connection available to me just to watch a movie is impressive.

>>59466170
>it takes 2-3X longer to encode than HEVC
Does it have any space savings? Reencoding to HEVC is barely worth the CPU time and I have very limited storage.

>>59466583
Bluray is superior to HD-DVD. Past format wars have shown this is not why it won though.

>>59464444
Around 2010 I guess.

>>59466696
Says it "aims" for 25% less space used than HEVC, don't know if it actually does or not.

>>59464444
>wanting to get rid of read-only media
Nice try NSA

>>59466583
Marketing. Marketed as a premium for so long now it's the primary storage for movies. Fuck Blu-ray and their anti-consumer bullshit.

>>59466617
Please show me the millions of open sores rips done in VP8/VP9 then.

>>59467212
I'm referencing when you shill for webp when it's obscure and no browsers support it

>>59467470
Oh, well sorry if I sound like a shill but it's just I don't see a better successor to JPG, PNG, and GIF in a single image format. If you do then please let me know so I can learn about it.

Never. Downloading and streaming will

File: 00104what.jpg (65KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1280x720px

>>59465918
>Steaming and physical media have the same bitrate

File: 1489158843385.png (247KB, 597x242px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 597x242px

>>59465208
>the only reason it's alive is because bluray player manufacturers would go out of business if it wasn't
the actual reason is that it is much cheaper and easier to mass produce optical discs.

>>59465244

Games aren't something you can easily do "streaming" with. We've had various companies pop up that have tried to offer a cloud based gaming service. The games were hosted on their own service, and you would pay a fee for usage of their servers. None of these companies ever made it off the ground, because it turns out that this service is always going to be more expensive than people just buying their own consoles or gaming computers, and buying the games themselves, especially for those who play for hundreds of hours each month.

Also, most people's Internet connections aren't that great, and ISPs can't be fucked to improve performance or bandwidth.