# Digital Distribution vs. Physical Media



## Infexxion (Jun 29, 2009)

Let's get some discussion going here.

Where do you guys stand on digital media vs. physical media?

Me personally, I do enjoy both quite a bit. Physical media has been around far longer though, and digital media in comparison is still very new, but seems to be advancing at a far faster rate. We no longer need to go to a video store to rent a movie, we don't have to buy an album to get music.

I like having a physical copy of something I own on my shelf, I like being able to hold it and feel it. But, at the same time, say something happens to your disc, you're basically screwed. Either buy another one, or do without.

Digital distribution on the other hand (figuratively speaking), doesn't give you the option of displaying what you own for all to see, but definitely wins in pure ease of access and versatility. Netflix is on the web, on game consoles, and phones, you can buy video games through downloads to your console, Steam is a very large part of the PC community, etc. Plus, you can't 'lose' a game unless your account gets hacked, but on the flip side to that, you can't let a friend borrow a game or any of that.

Overall, I'd have to say, I've been a part of steam for a long time and I am very comfortable with purchasing games online, there's usually great deals running, and despite not having a physical copy in my hands, looking at the list of games I own is *almost* as good as looking at my shelf of consoles games. Not quite as satisfying, though. 

Where do you stand? Do you prefer digital media? Is it easier to just fire up Netflix then run to a video store? Or do you prefer having something you can hold, show people, and physically touch?


----------



## Duke of Prunes (Jul 20, 2009)

Digital downloads would only be acceptable if they were at proper quality (lossless for audio, DVD or BluRay quality for video depending on the source) and you had a gigantic RAID 5 array (or a smaller one with enterprise-grade disks on an enterprise-grade controller powered by an enterprise-grade PSU on an enterprise-grade power conditioner, none of which most people would be willing to pay for) or a big stockpile of flash drives, not to mention a ridiculous connection to fetch it all. I wouldn't feel safe keeping my whole collection on a single consumer-grade hard drive without a solid-state backup, which would cost way too much for a proper collection.

Streaming is NEVER a good option. I wouldn't be willing to have my movie/music collection stored on some random company's servers, requiring a working internet connection and an account to access.

If you want good quality audio/video on a reliable, cheap medium, pressed physical mediums are the only way to go. With BluRay and DVD copy protection both cracked long ago, it's trivial to make your own digital copies anyway if you want to stream them over your home network (which is pointless anyway, is it really that hard to get out of your chair and put a disc in, or if two people want to watch the same thing, just share the screen?), keeping the physical copies as backups.

Vinyl is still the best way to listen to music


----------



## Einangra (Jul 28, 2010)

Digital downloads should be cheaper due to not needing a physical box of DVD and no delivery costs, yet games available for download are pretty much always more expensive. It makes is easier for the big companies to screw us.


----------



## coldmorning (Jul 4, 2007)

It depends. For games, I think digital distribution is better. I've been screwed this way by hard drive crashes, but there are some games that issue a license and you can reuse the license. That avoids the computer crash issue. And the reality is that games are always being updated with fixes. If you need to install on a new computer, it's nice to have the latest version rather than relying on an older one and having to get all the updates. 

Music and movies are different because they aren't being updated all the time.


----------



## LostPancake (Apr 8, 2009)

I love digital everything - it means less clutter. Books are the worst - I can't wait to replace them (well, 95% of them) with digital versions someday.

I loved getting rid of all my cds and records after I'd digitized them. I did keep some of my favorites though.



Duke of Prunes said:


> I wouldn't feel safe keeping my whole collection on a single consumer-grade hard drive without a solid-state backup, which would cost way too much for a proper collection.


Just curious, why only solid-state backup? I keep backups on hard drives that I swap out and keep elsewhere.


----------



## zookeeper (Jun 3, 2009)

The fact that items sold through digital distro (especially PC games) cost the same as their physical counterparts is ridiculous. They've cut out most of the overhead costs, yet still charging the same? No thanks.

However, having said that, I haven't bought a boxed PC game in several years because online sales of 50%+ on even relatively new games just can't be matched by stores.



LostPancake said:


> Just curious, why only solid-state backup? I keep backups on hard drives that I swap out and keep elsewhere.


That's the way to do it. For almost the same price of the cheapest SSD, I could buy a standard drive with 64x the storage. And that's the _cheapest_ SSD. I'll buy a few giant drives and store to my heart's content.


----------



## Tranquility (Apr 8, 2011)

They both have their unique advantages and disadvantages. Most of the media I own was digitally distributed.


----------



## Duke of Prunes (Jul 20, 2009)

Every time you spin up a hard disk, there's a good chance that it will crash. Also, they're not very resistant to shock, even when powered off. Using a mechanical device that basically operates on the edge (you've got a microscopic gap between a normally functioning drive and a dead one, and low air pressure can make that gap even smaller) for long-term backup in any case, is silly. The only reason big businesses get away with it these days (I don't think the likes of Google, Amazon, Akamai, etc is using offline tape with the stupid amount of data they deal with) is because they have a ridiculous amount of redundancy spread across multiple data centres worldwide.


----------



## coldmorning (Jul 4, 2007)

Digital distribution doesn't necessarily have to be tied with hard drive fragility. If you buy a license to the media, you can always re-download it. Of course, that's often not the case. But this is changing. For example, Amazon recently starting selling music with the ability to re-download or even stream it.


----------



## Duke of Prunes (Jul 20, 2009)

Yes, but to re-download it, you need to rely on an internet connection and an account that's bound to some dodgy ToS that lets them terminate it (along with the rights to re-download your stuff) whenever they want; that to me is unacceptable. The only way for digital downloads to ever fully replace physical media is a massive chunk of bandwidth, cheaper flash chips and DRM-free BluRay quality videos. Unfortunately this will never happen, as the only reason we can even make BluRay rips is because the copy protection has been cracked, so I can't see retailers offering any of that content DRM-free.


----------



## njodis (Nov 8, 2006)

zookeeper said:


> The fact that items sold through digital distro (especially PC games) cost the same as their physical counterparts is ridiculous. They've cut out most of the overhead costs, yet still charging the same? No thanks.


Yes, that is definitely ridiculous- I totally agree there.

Digitial distribution is definitely the future, though. Steam is massive- much bigger than I ever thought it would be. In the future, online distribution will overtake physical distribution, at least for games. Physical distribution will never completely disappear, though; at least not in the near future. You would be surprised how many people have dialup and don't have any other option. There's simply no way they're going to download a 4+ GB game on a dialup connection.

I also want to express my hatred for DRM, especially implementations that require authentication from a server. It's only a matter of time before those servers no longer exist, and then what, you just can't play your game/watch your video anymore? I remember reading about at least one PC game that is unplayable for legitimate buyers because the company went out of business and closed their DRM server. One day Steam won't be around anymore, and what then, do you just lose all your games if you don't have them backed up?


----------



## huh (Mar 19, 2007)

I prefer digital distribution. I don't keep CDs or DVDs anymore. All my stuff is backed up on external hard drives. Amazon's new cloud drive is pretty nice and I'm starting to transition most of my music to it. This way I have access to it wherever I go, and they still give you the option to download your music as MP3s free of DRM. So now my music is backed up on my external drives and out on Amazon's cloud drive.

The only thing that frightens me a little with the new Amazon cloud drive service I'm using is the potential security risk it poses. I do have things other than music stored there, but I always encrypt it before uploading it. Their terms of use is a little less than appealing from a privacy standpoint. Oh well, they can look at my encrypted documents all they want. 

I still buy quite a few books that aren't ebooks, even though I own an ebook reader. Sometimes I just enjoy having the actual book. It's also easier for me to mark up and make notes on.

I don't really play video games, so I guess I can't comment much on that aspect.


----------



## tlgibson97 (Sep 24, 2009)

I don't mind not having physical media as long as it is on record that I purchased the item so that I can redownload if necessary. Steam is a good example of that. I can also log in and install games on other computers and play as long as I log in with my account. 

I have lost good games before either by losing the disk or by damage. Back in the day I could make a copy of it but most today have copyright protection on them.


----------



## leave me alone (Apr 1, 2011)

This is a no brainer for me - digital distribution all the way. It is more practical in every aspect - easier to manage, avalailbility, storing, accessability. I am not saying this is true for everyone, just for my personal use. I have almost 1TB of music on my HDD's, i dont see how would i manage this amount of albums with physicall copies. I only keep CDs of my all time favorite albums. HDD's are really cheap these days, you can easily have double backup of your whole collection on external drives.


----------



## wjc75225 (Jul 24, 2010)

I believe physical media will go obsolete within 2 years.


----------



## Duke of Prunes (Jul 20, 2009)

It better not.


----------



## leave me alone (Apr 1, 2011)

I dont believe so, the physical copies still have its value. They will be around for quite some time.


----------



## Fragment (Mar 23, 2011)

I have to have a physical copy. 1's and 0's just don't cut it for me, and I love having my geeky stuff on display.

Even if it's a game running through steam, I like to have the physical copy.


----------



## Perfect (Apr 10, 2011)

Fragment said:


> I have to have a physical copy. 1's and 0's just don't cut it for me, *and I love having my geeky stuff on display*.
> 
> Even if it's a game running through steam, I like to have the physical copy.


^
I prefer physical media for that reason alone. :b


----------



## Johnny_Genome (Nov 11, 2003)

Digital has zero resale value -- at least in the old days when you needed gas money you could trade in your CD's or DVD's for cash.

As everything moves digital, everyone's expectation that digital means cheaper (or free) will eventually effect quality and choices. The reality is, the cost of manufacturing / packaging / shipping is negligible in the video game and movie business when compared to the actual costs of making the software.


----------



## leave me alone (Apr 1, 2011)

Thats why you have a choice to not pay for something that is expensive and low quality (pirate it) and only support quality and honest artists/developers.


----------



## Selbbin (Aug 10, 2010)

Books don't run out of batteries.


----------



## David1976 (Nov 8, 2003)

I don't mind digital streaming for movies/tv shows as long as it is a rental situation. If I am going to own the movie I definitely would like a physical copy. For music I feel like having it only digital on my computer/ipod is good enough.. with the addition of backing it up. Also for music having it in an online storage for streaming would also be nice for playing on any internet enabled device.. again as long as I have a copy on my computer and backed up.


----------



## Barf (Oct 31, 2010)

Physical for me, I like to keep the box and manuals. Digital has been more convenient but I dislike it when they limit the number of times you can download it :mum and the fact that you can't resell it.


----------



## Infexxion (Jun 29, 2009)

Books are probably the only thing I'm hesitant about switching over digitally to. I've never read a full book on a computer before, mostly because I get distracted and end up surfing the web or something. Never used a Kindle though, maybe I should check into it.

Also, with Netflix and such, they do offer HD movies, and whatever compression there is to get it to stream through the internet to your TV/computer is usually unnoticeable, and most people would rather take the compression then hassle with actually purchasing the DVD online, paying shipping fees, waiting 4 days, then getting the physical copy. For $10 a month (or around there) Netflix is an amazing service.


----------

