Self Destructing DVDs

[ogryzek]

By now you’ve probably read that news story on Self Destructing DVDs from Disney...

1) Most DVDs usually scratch so easily that we should consider them self-destructing anyway. (Does anybody remember original audio CD claims of virtual indestructibility?).

2) Even with 'recycling' program in place I can see some enterprising politicians taxing us extra for that environmental nightmare. Eventually we will end up with $6 movie + $15 tax (just take a look at cigarettes) - and equilibrium in universe will be restored.

[mf]

Originally posted by ogryzek
(Does anybody remember original audio CD claims of virtual indestructibility?).
Actually, I had a PC Zone CD a few years ago, that I used to disregard people's claims of scratches being oh-so-important. It had an ISO9660 track and 7 Redbook audio tracks. I frisbeed it around the house for about half an hour, then put it on the floor and went "ice-skating" with the cd under my feet. I created all kinds of scratches, from diagonal to across to radial, etc. Needless to say the thing looked damaged enough to be considered unplayable by the people I needed to convince. I put it in my old 1983 Philips CD player, and it played fine. Now I won't say that the quality didn't degrade due to error correction, but to a non-audiophile like me it played okay. The ISO track was also readable.
Now note, that this was a FREE CD I got with a magazine, and those aren't exactly manufactured in the most costly ways. I'd say CDs are pretty robust. I wouldn't want to go ice skating with a compact audio tape, the protective structure would break and the tape would fold.

[avih]

Originally posted by mf
[B...I wouldn't want to go ice skating with a compact audio tape, the protective structure would break and the tape would fold. [/B]

plus, unless you're a trained professional, you could easily break your neck. kids, do not try this at home ;)

[Soulhunter]

Yeah, use only brand-name audio tapes for ice skating... :D


Bye

[m99]

How much petrol does your big SUV use just for returning the rented DVD? I don't buy all the arguments against Self Destructing DVDs.

[easybeat]

Question - If Disney can make, sell and market a self-destructing DVD for $4-5 dollars how come they sell normal DVD's for around $20?
A case of blatant profiteering I think.

[sarahjh69]

Princo have been making self destructing
dvd-r for years, and you don't need to scratch
them for the data to go away.

[Soulhunter]

Originally posted by sarahjh69
Princo have been making self destructing
dvd-r for years, and you don't need to scratch
them for the data to go away.
LOL... :D


Bye

[CzechMate]

Originally posted by easybeat
Question - If Disney can make, sell and market a self-destructing DVD for $4-5 dollars how come they sell normal DVD's for around $20?
A case of blatant profiteering I think.

Not that I'm advocating the use of these, because I'm not...but Disney considers this a rental, not a purchase.

[easybeat]

To me a rental is something that you return. If you don't return it to the shop can't re-use it, therefore the costs involved are exactly the same as a normal sale.
The discs cost the same to make and sell but one retails for 1/4 of the price!

[r6d2]

Originally posted by easybeat
To me a rental is something that you return. If you don't return it to the shop can't re-use it, therefore the costs involved are exactly the same as a normal sale.Whether you return it or not, the shop cannot reuse it. It's like if you returned it "through the trash can" instead. There are significant cost savings for the rental business to operate like this.

Netflix, for instance, would not have to pay for the return shipping costs.

Blockbuster, OTOH, would not have to clean/check or restock the media once you return it, and you'd save the trip back to the store, expense often overlooked. Blockbuster also saves the cost of moving a piece from store to store (stock rotation). They transfer the shipping cost to the manufacturer, asking for delivery of specific quantities per store, until they run out, and just ask for more.

The difference on the price tag IMHO has to do with the shorter life span of the product. With the disposable media, you get less value, since you cannot watch the thing any time you want it. Think of it as a pay per view movie channel, which is quite like movie rental.

It's been a long time since production costs don't drive price tags. This is valid for almost any industry. That's the difference between production cost and perceived value.

Even if production cost is the same, the value of disposable media is lower, hence the price tag is lower too.

Look also at the pay per view model. It's generally (at least where I live) more expensive than the rental. Why? It gives more value: you save two trips to the store.

With this kind of media the manufacturer can even completely bypass the rental business, giving you, the customer, the same rate directly, without any logistics hindrances.

[mf]

You forget two things r6d2, one: late return fines (big $$ from lazy porn watchers :D), two: rental usually gets you a movie for a week or at least a day. Pay-per-view, you get no control, see it once, and that's it. I wouldn't want to pay extra for that.

[r6d2]

You have a point. But I think average Joe watches the movie only once every time he rents it. And by per per view you still save the trips to the store. Anyway, both models have customers. You may prefer the other one, but I certainly value the possibility of saving time and money with pay per view.

With DVRs you even get to cache the movie for restroom and popcorn pauses too. :)

And late fees, even with Disney movies, is another reason to stay at home. :)

[easybeat]

Agreed on the rental front, I like the option of not returning a film, but I still don't agree with the profit margin that they must make on a full price DVD.