hellegennes wrote:I am not talking about price reduction with time, here. I am talking about two different releases. The first one is the original H6 release and the second one is the H6 complete, which will be released in a few months. This is not a comparison between the two but an idea of how much they cost in physical format. In downloadable format, they cost much less (as low as 1/3 of the physical copy price).
They cost 1/3 of physical copy now. Was it the case when H6 was released? Or is it another argument to GreatEmerald's quote (who is "actually in agreement" with you):
prices in brick-and-mortar stores are usually the same as the prices of a download. Because the brick-and-mortar stores ask the publishers to set the prices such, or else nobody would ever buy from them. So to offset that, the publishers artificially increase the price of the digital download.
I still think you do have something to discuss.
Regarding DVD copies, a home-made copy is as good as a factory-made one. There's no real difference.
No, it's not. The difference is huge. Simple google search results in many comparisons, for example:
"DVDs are read by a laser, so they never wear out from being played since nothing touches the disc. Pressed discs (the kind that movies come on) will probably last longer than you will, anywhere from 50 to 300 years.
Expected longevity of dye-based DVD-R and DVD+R discs is anywhere from 20 to 250 years, about as long as CD-R discs. Some dye formulations (such as phthalocyanine and azo) are more stable and are expected to last longer, 100 years or more, compared to 20 or 30 years for less stable dyes. The phase-change erasable formats (DVD-RAM, DVD-RW, and DVD+RW) have an expected lifetime of 25 to 100 years.
Difference between 50 and 20 years, if we take lower estimates, is 2.5 times. Hardly "no real difference". As an engineer, you should at least try to understand technology, and difference instantly becomes obvious.
Nor are DVD writers unreliable. You may happen to have personal experience from two such drives, but I've been dealing with DVD writers for a number of years and never did I encounter a serious problem with any of these (I've worked as a computer engineer for more than 12 years).
I find it very hard to believe. As an engineer you may know that reading and writing subsystems are different and sometimes even independent, and writing is much finer process, and as such it is more prone to failure. I wrote about two drives I personally own, it doesn't mean that they represent my whole experience.
I think if you take 5 drives older than 4-5 years, at least 3 of them will not be able to burn DVD and verify it, and all 5 of them will be able to read a good DVD. Want to try?
Mail order is not always an option. In fact, most of the time it's not an option. But even if it is, there is the added shipment cost.
Finally we came to something. The right way would be to optimize production and shipment so that customers can receive the benefit of industrial production with no excessive cost. The only companies that could do it are big publishers. There are different approaches to that. They can go Amazon path, they can try to renegotiate a deal with retail stores. Now, after retail lost almost 100% of this type of revenue, they would be much more likely to listen to common sense.
But it's way easier for publisher to unload all the risks to customer, and add some cover-story about evil retail and progress.
To sum up, the initial DVD copying at a factory may be somewhat cheaper, but it comes with a host of added costs and the result is that making your own copy is much much cheaper and as reliable as the factory-made one.-
"Somewhat" means "several times" and with much more reliable result - see above. Fighting excessive cost is a much better way to go than just unloading their problems on customer.
And a s result - digital distribution is not "just cheaper". It's completely different thing, with other set of risks, costs and benefits. Which was my point from the very beginning.