BLURAY when????

[jorisaerts1]

four years ago a read something about new upcoming bluray discs
since apple joined the project in 2005 i thought it wouldn't take long for this new technology to be integreted in their products(or as an option)
but still, we get nothing.

i find i contradictory to find apple getting behind on the high defenition race

or am i wrong???

anyone got some new information about when we could expect bluray to enter the realm of apple???

 

[pdjudd]

four years ago a read something about new upcoming bluray discs
since apple joined the project in 2005 i thought it wouldn't take long for this new technology to be integreted in their products(or as an option)
but still, we get nothing.

i find i contradictory to find apple getting behind on the high defenition race

or am i wrong???

anyone got some new information about when we could expect bluray to enter the realm of apple???

The last we heard of anything was when Steve Jobs last year called it a "bag of hurt" Probably in reference to its nightmarish licensing standards (which differ to Apple being on their board). I also think the lack of drives that fit their computers (last I heard there was only one maker of said drives) and the fact that its an expensive add-on and also that it still has not taken off in the massive explosion that DVD did is making Apple hold off until they can do it in a method that won't get everybody angry about a price increase or a windows like DRM schema.

Outside of what we heard last year - there has not been anything and I doubt we will get anything more until it actually happens - doubt it will be anytime soon.

 

[LethalWolfe]

IMO Jobs sees BR as a competitor to the iTMS so Apple will wait as long as possible before adopting BR support.


Lethal

 

[jorisaerts1]

pdjudd, your right about a lot of things,
but why does my friend with an acer has an built in blu-ray drive
and he didn't pay more for his computer as i paid for my macbook pro?????

 

[pdjudd]

pdjudd, your right about a lot of things,
but why does my friend with an acer has an built in blu-ray drive
and he didn't pay more for his computer as i paid for my macbook pro?????

1) Acer does not use drives the same side as Apple does and those form factors are more readily available to other hardware vendors. I have only seen one manufacture that makes a 9mm drive for blue ray. Apple uses those sizes and does not want to make thicker uglier computers.
2) Apple prices its hardware differently than Acer for various reasons I will not go into - suffice it to say most hardware vendors can sell cheap laptops - that doesn't mean that Apple can apply the same economics. For the record, Acer sells cheap in hopes to make up in quantitiy - like most other vendors, they don't make much money doing that. You cannot take two laptops out of the blue and compare them based on one feature.
3) Micorosft sold its soul to the DRM devil many times over to get Blue Ray to work - its DRM is horriffic on a computer - unfortunatly this is nomething that most consumers never see.

 

[armoguy94]

Apple uses those sizes and does not want to make thicker uglier computers.

Yeah, see here at Apple they like to downgrade the hardware and use the smallest things possible to pack it in a very tight case, resulting in a cheap computer (but costing expensive). I find it funny how much of a fanboy you seem to be.

 

[nuckinfutz]

1. Blu-ray competes for digital downloads

2. Blu-ray's licensing is ridiculous

3. Blu-ray's DRM is draconian

Apple joined the BDA board but this is appearing to be the classic

"keep your friends close and your enemies closer" scenario.

 

[pdjudd]

Yeah, see here at Apple they like to downgrade the hardware and use the smallest things possible to pack it in a very tight case, resulting in a cheap computer (but costing expensive). I find it funny how much of a fanboy you seem to be.

Nice - I try and explain the situation and you use personal attacks! I never said that Apple should not use blue ray. I am very critical of it, no doubt about that but that does not in any way make me a fanboy. I can't wait to see if Apple will ever implement Blu-Ray, but Apple hasn't made any comments about it recently to give me any optimism that it will happen. Not to mention that Blu Ray has a lot of draconian DRM and Licensing issues to clear up before I choose to adopt it - I can wait. Besides I don't see the appeal of watching High def content on a laptop screen anyway. It seems to me that the other guys are doing it because the DRM side is done by someone else and they are not in the content business like Apple is.

Is it unfortunate? Yes. Is it something to get your panties in a wad over? Absolutely not. If Apple does not go with what you want, go with someone else. Apple is not, has never been, nor will it ever be a company that offers everything to everybody.

 

[slpdLoad]

It will be here when it's not a "bag of hurt." You don't want a bag of hurt, do you?

 

[LethalWolfe]

It will be here when it's not a "bag of hurt." You don't want a bag of hurt, do you?

Jobs has said similar things about how bad flash based MP3 players are, how bad watching video on an iPod would be, how Apple isn't interested in making phones and how FW is getting removed from their consumer devices. It's Apple's MO to downplay technology they don't currently offer. If companies like Roxio and Adobe can endure the "bag of hurt" I'm sure Apple can too, they just don't want to. They don't want you to watch a BR movie on your Mac. They want to use the iTMS. They want you to use TV. Public pressure may make them come around eventually but they'll hold off as long as they can, IMO.


Lethal

 

[yg17]

1. Blu-ray competes for digital downloads

2. Blu-ray's licensing is ridiculous

3. Blu-ray's DRM is draconian

Apple joined the BDA board but this is appearing to be the classic

"keep your friends close and your enemies closer" scenario.

All 3 of those are true for DVDs. Hell, even CDs compete with the iTMS, maybe Apple should just remove all optical drives

Blu Ray kicks the crap out of digital downloads in terms of quality. There is no comparison, and I didn't spend good money on a TV to watch some compressed downloaded garbage. If I can't get it on Blu Ray, I don't bother.

 

[nuckinfutz]

All 3 of those are true for DVDs. Hell, even CDs compete with the iTMS, maybe Apple should just remove all optical drives

Blu Ray kicks the crap out of digital downloads in terms of quality. There is no comparison, and I didn't spend good money on a TV to watch some compressed downloaded garbage. If I can't get it on Blu Ray, I don't bother.

1. DVD's do compete with digital downloads that's true.

2. DVD licensing wasn't comparitively as bad because many items were optional.

3. In addition to AACS you have BD+ which requires a resource hit and there's ROM Mark as well.

Blu-ray is definitely a bigger footprint for a computer system and now with Managed Copy coming you need new hardware and a connection to AACS servers.

Apple may never support Blu-ray but if they don't they better spearhead another initiative to deliver HD content to people that's affordable.

 

[LethalWolfe]

All 3 of those are true for DVDs. Hell, even CDs compete with the iTMS, maybe Apple should just remove all optical drives

DVDs and CDs were obviously well established mediums prior to Apple getting into the content distribution business.

Blu Ray kicks the crap out of digital downloads in terms of quality. There is no comparison, and I didn't spend good money on a TV to watch some compressed downloaded garbage. If I can't get it on Blu Ray, I don't bother.

And the quality of downloadable music doesn't compare to records or CDs. The population at large is more concerned w/convenience, not quality. Audio/video-philes don't control mass market trends.


Lethal

 

[yg17]

DVDs and CDs were obviously well established mediums prior to Apple getting into the content distribution business.


And the quality of downloadable music doesn't compare to records or CDs. The population at large is more concerned w/convenience, not quality. Audio/video-philes don't control mass market trends.


Lethal

My ears can't tell the difference between an iTunes Plus file or the original CD, but my eyes can easily tell the difference between a downloadable movie and Blu Ray. That's just me though

 

[LethalWolfe]

My ears can't tell the difference between an iTunes Plus file or the original CD, but my eyes can easily tell the difference between a downloadable movie and Blu Ray. That's just me though

That's the thing though, it doesn't have to be perfect it just has to be good enough. How many 128kps MP3s have been purchased or pirated in the last 10 years? Billions? People complained about the iTMS quality being too low quality for years but that didn't stop it from selling a ton of tracks.


Lethal

 

[Tilpots]

That's the thing though, it doesn't have to be perfect it just has to be good enough. How many 128kps MP3s have been purchased or pirated in the last 10 years? Billions? People complained about the iTMS quality being too low quality for years but that didn't stop it from selling a ton of tracks.


Lethal

I respect the avatar, but I gotta disagree Lethal. People care about video quality a whole lot more than they care about audio quality. Anybody who just spent $1k+ on their HDTV wants to see "perfection." This is a lot different than listening to songs on your ipod thru crapy headphones or on your computer thru crappy speakers. Don't have any stats to back this up, but I think it's a safe bet to believe more people spend money on their TV equipment than they do their audio equipment. When you spend the dollars, you want the best available.

Right now 1080p is the best available. Apple doesn't offer anything on this level. Sure they want to the iTunes store to do well, but selling hardware will always be more important than selling somebody else's wares. To sell more hardware, they need to either include the latest technology (Blu-Ray) or start selling 1080p downloadable content (not likely) and an ATV that can play it.

 

[LethalWolfe]

I respect the avatar, but I gotta disagree Lethal. People care about video quality a whole lot more than they care about audio quality. Anybody who just spent $1k+ on their HDTV wants to see "perfection." This is a lot different than listening to songs on your ipod thru crapy headphones or on your computer thru crappy speakers. Don't have any stats to back this up, but I think it's a safe bet to believe more people spend money on their TV equipment than they do their audio equipment. When you spend the dollars, you want the best available.

That's not exactly a like-on-like comparison. I'm sure anyone who just spent $1k+ on their home audio system wants to hear 'perfection' as well while someone watching a stretched-out, 4x3 SD image on their HDTV from Wal-Mart isn't going to be super picky about image quality. Of course people who spend a lot on TVs or spend a lot on home audio assume everyone does, or at least wants to, as well but that's just not the case. A/V enthusiasts bought into LaserDisc, D-VHS (a short lived consumer HD format), DVD-A, and SACD but the mass market didn't 'cause they mass market didn't care all that much about having access to improved quality. What new things did the mass market latch onto? MP3s and YouTube. And YouTube doesn't serve up the most video on the internet because they have the best image quality.

W/regards to the importance of image quality vs sound quality in a general sense, people are more willing to tolerate a movie/tv show w/poor image quality and good sound quality than a show w/poor sound quality and good image quality. As they say in the production world, sound is half the picture. People typically think because TV is a visual medium that the image is paramount but that's not the case. Show someone video of a campfire and they'll see a campfire. Show someone video of a campfire w/o sound of the cracking, popping fire and they'll feel a campfire. Sound adds a visceral element that images alone lack (even the coolest looking motion graphics don't 'come alive' until they have some sound design done to them).


Lethal

 

[nuckinfutz]

People get caught up on the numbers too much.


When consumers can tell with %70 or better accuracy

720p video versus 1080p I will worry. Right now the whole 720p vs 1080p is an anathema IMO. Rather than trusting the only source that matters "your eyes" people have given leave to their senses and put their faith in marketing.

Comcast is claiming their HD is any number of a handful of superlatives. I see artifacting like crazy on many channels. I've seen over the air HD look MUCH better. Same 1080 resolution but delivery mechanism determine the likelyhood of artifacts.

Consumers first listen to marketers. Their hear "full HD" and they expect to see a marked improvement in the picture quality but they won't.

Lethal Wolfe is an old hand at video production so he knows and has likely seen the 720p production cameras from JVC that have fantastic color and resolution. Most people would not be able to say "that's definitely 720p"

For once I wish consumers would just go out and pick the screen they think is the best and forget the tech stuff which invariably is designed to mislead you.

 

[djellison]

It will be here when it's not a "bag of hurt." You don't want a bag of hurt, do you?

It's under my TV....and it didn't hurt (looks lovely on my Panasonic Plasma) It's in my PC workstation...and it didn't hurt. And I saw it in a £350..yes...£350 laptop...not a wince.

Apple just want to keep the extra £50 or so per machine for themselves, rather than offer competitive hardware.

 

[pdjudd]

It's under my TV....and it didn't hurt (looks lovely on my Panasonic Plasma) It's in my PC workstation...and it didn't hurt. And I saw it in a £350..yes...£350 laptop...not a wince.

Apple just want to keep the extra £50 or so per machine for themselves, rather than offer competitive hardware.

Thats because you as the consumer do not have to worry about the licensing and the DRM that Apple was referring to. The ability to purchase something in store does not change the fact that the platform is hurting on the hardware side of things. Unless you happen to work on the hardware develelpment side of any of the Blue Ray companies, the "bag of hurt" does not apply to you. Apple was talking about them in that context.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Thats because you as the consumer do not have to worry about the licensing and the DRM that Apple was referring to. The ability to purchase something in store does not change the fact that the platform is hurting on the hardware side of things. Unless you happen to work on the hardware develelpment side of any of the Blue Ray companies, the "bag of hurt" does not apply to you. Apple was talking about them in that context.

Lol gotta love the emotive pleas from Blu-ray fans that seemingly want to ignore the impact of supporting the platform.

If competitive is embracing DRM at Microsoftian levels then I'll gladly compute on non-competitive hardware. Besides turning your computer into the extension of a boob tube seems anti-thetical to using a computer as a tool.

Computers should excite the creative senses.

 

[djellison]

Apple was talking about them in that context.

I know. So what is it that Sony, HP, Acer, Dell, Lenovo LG and others CAN do, that Apple, to date, refuse to do. There is no HURT. It's just money.

It's not a world of hurt. It's a world of slightly reduced margins. And that makes Steve angry.

 

[ravenvii]

I know. So what is it that Sony, HP, Acer, Dell, Lenovo LG and others CAN do, that Apple, to date, refuse to do. There is no HURT. It's just money.

It's not a world of hurt. It's a world of slightly reduced margins. And that makes Steve angry.

Actually, you're only partly right - Apple's situation is a bit different from all the companies you named.

Apple makes both the software and hardware. The "world of hurt" that Steve spoke of is software-based. Microsoft, and the DVD player companies (PowerDVD, WinDVD, et al) took care of the "world of hurt", not Dell, Lenovo, HP and the other guys.

 

[godslabrat]

Lol gotta love the emotive pleas from Blu-ray fans that seemingly want to ignore the impact of supporting the platform.

If competitive is embracing DRM at Microsoftian levels then I'll gladly compute on non-competitive hardware. Besides turning your computer into the extension of a boob tube seems anti-thetical to using a computer as a tool.

Computers should excite the creative senses.

Well, when my creative senses are excited, the end result is often a video project, and lately I've been looking at HD equipment. Since I use my computer to edit video, it would be really nice if I could actually SAVE that finished product on something other than an external hard drive. I should be able to save my HD project on a BluRay disc, so that I could distribute it to potential clients or archive for personal use. By not offering a solution, Apple is compelling me to fall back on Windows to do my HD work.

Considering how many people adopt the Mac for video work, I'd say that's a very bad move for Apple to make.

 

[neiltc13]

If Apple's movie prices were actually reasonable then there wouldn't need to be fear of competition from other formats. But when I have to pay £10.99 for a movie I can get for £3 on DVD or £8 on Blu Ray it's a real problem for Apple.

I have never bought a movie on iTunes yet.