PDA

View Full Version : Blu-ray Licensing to Get Easier and Cheaper




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Feb 27, 2009, 02:40 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/27/blu-ray-licensing-to-get-easier-and-cheaper/)

AlleyInsider speculates (http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-macs-to-finally-get-blu-ray-2009-2) that licensing changes (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39619195,00.htm) to Blu-Ray could pave the way to Mac support for the High Definition drives.A new licence will be established by mid-2009 as a "one-stop shop" for device makers. The licence will include all necessary Blu-ray, DVD and CD patents for selling Blu-ray players. The licensing programme will be handled by a new licensing company to be led by Gerald Rosenthal, former head of intellectual property at IBM. It will be based in the US, but will have local branches in Asia, Europe and Latin America.The new streamlined process will reportedly cut the total cost of royalty payments by 40 percent. Apple's Steve Jobs specifically cited complicated licensing issues as one of the hurdles to adopting Blu-Ray in Apple's own computers.

Of interest, Apple's recent inclusion (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/18/apple-incorporates-hdcp-copy-protection-in-new-laptops/) of HDCP copy protection in their newest laptops could also help pave the way for support of the HD disc format.

Article Link: Blu-ray Licensing to Get Easier and Cheaper (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/27/blu-ray-licensing-to-get-easier-and-cheaper/)



Colin20
Feb 27, 2009, 02:44 PM
This is great news!

themoonisdown09
Feb 27, 2009, 02:46 PM
I'm starting to care about having a Blu Ray drive in my Mac now because I finally got an HDTV a month ago. Now that I'm buying my movies on Blu Ray instead of DVD, I have no way of ripping them to my iPod.

VanMac
Feb 27, 2009, 02:47 PM
Great News. Looking forward to Blu Ray being incorporated into future macs.

Sky Blue
Feb 27, 2009, 02:50 PM
A bag of slightly less hurt.

50548
Feb 27, 2009, 02:50 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

gkarris
Feb 27, 2009, 02:51 PM
Minis with Blu-ray drives... :eek:

(runs off screaming...)

kastenbrust
Feb 27, 2009, 02:52 PM
The only useful use for blu-ray is for data backup, and macs can do that already using an external blu-ray drive or one of these which you can build into your Macbook Pro:
http://store.fastmac.com/product_info.php?products_id=338

ok so we cant watch blu-ray movies, but id rather buy them in the iTunes store anyway. I think Apples trying to move away from disc media as it goes away from their whole iPod digital media philosophy.

To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

Eminemdrdre00
Feb 27, 2009, 02:54 PM
But Apple will still charge $300+ for the Blu-ray drive option =\

champ01
Feb 27, 2009, 02:55 PM
The only useful use for blu-ray is for data backup, and macs can do that already, ok so we cant watch movies, but id rather buy them in the iTunes store anyway. I think Apples trying to move away from disc media as it goes away from their whole iPod digital media philosophy.

not only movies how about programs

I have Logic Studio and Final Cut Studio and both are 8 dvd's

and you don't mention one word about gaming..

because games and movies are gonna be sold on one blu ray

PlaceofDis
Feb 27, 2009, 02:57 PM
next excuse: the drives aren't slim enough in the slot loading variety or something along those lines.

i don't really care either way personally. but its about time for the data retention purposes at least.

guzhogi
Feb 27, 2009, 02:59 PM
Sounds good. While I know Apple probably won't do this any time soon since it would cut into its iTunes sales, I hope they eventually put Blu-Ray drives in their computers. Blu-Ray movies (as well as DVDs) have special features (and are of a higher resolution) than the movies you can get from iTunes. That's one thing I don't like about the iTunes store (although, I can see how downloading a 1080p movie + special features would take a long time).

Ragardless of movies, Blu-Ray discs can be a good backup measure/data storage device since it holds so much more than DVDs.

Evan_11
Feb 27, 2009, 02:59 PM
For all those saying that Blu-ray is not needed please let it go. You're probably not interested in the extra storage capabilities nor are interested in a authoring HD media.

081440
Feb 27, 2009, 03:00 PM
not only movies how about programs

I have Logic Studio and Final Cut Studio and both are 8 dvd's

and you don't mention one word about gaming..

because games and movies are gonna be sold on one blu ray


I agree! FCP installs are intense, not only for the computer but all that CD swapping and little paper envelope stuffing.

I never watch movies or the like on my Mac. But wouldn't mind the option... Apple will wait though... we know this.

cube
Feb 27, 2009, 03:01 PM
It still has regions, unlike HD DVD.

4np
Feb 27, 2009, 03:04 PM
Finally, I hope this may result in a new MacBook Pro in July with a Blu-Ray player/writer on board... The 50Gb backup possibilities are very interesting. I always photograph on RAW format, and I'd like to keep everything I shoot so a lot of storage on a single disc would be perfect :)

Jetson
Feb 27, 2009, 03:05 PM
I wish that HD-DVD had won the contest. Blu-ray may be a better technology, but none of the studios are actually using all that extra storage space. Blu-ray movies are bare bones. Few movies have alternate endings, profanity-free audio tracks, or any of the other carrots that Blu-ray promoters used to dangle.

HD-DVD didn't have the greed driven, annoying region coding that Blu-ray does. Certain movies have been available for years on Blu-ray overseas (Britain, France, Germany) but not in the U.S.A. We can't use those disks here in the U.S. because they are coded region 2.

gkarris
Feb 27, 2009, 03:05 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

And downloaded purchased media isn't????

:confused:

skeep5
Feb 27, 2009, 03:07 PM
A bag of slightly less hurt.

That'd be Half a bag o' hurt.

jcb10
Feb 27, 2009, 03:07 PM
To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

While that point is very much true, I'd have to agree with the earlier poster who was frustrated that he just bought a HDTV and all of his purchases are now on Blu-Ray, but now he can't put them on his Mac.

We shouldn't have to buy movies twice -- we don't have to buy songs on both CD and through iTunes, do we?

Pnut13
Feb 27, 2009, 03:08 PM
Some people actually prefer owning a physical copy of a movie, and if w3e want the "slightly better" image capibility of BR disks, us as apple owners should have the right to burn BR disks on our macs....without having to run bootcamp and burn BR on Windows. Sometimes people like to save things on more than a (external) hard drive.
No matter how much apple wants us to download, there are some people like me that want more than one option!

Cromulent
Feb 27, 2009, 03:10 PM
because games and movies are gonna be sold on one blu ray

Hah I remember when CD-ROM drives first started to become common on computers and people were like, WOW games will fit on only one disk now!

Trust me, in 5 years or so we will see games on multiple blu-ray disks. Same with applications too.

BJWanlund
Feb 27, 2009, 03:10 PM
There's also an environmental impact if Apple puts Blu-Ray drives in their computers: Blu-ray movies use less plastic for its packaging and its actual media. Less plastic = lower carbon footprint.

BJ

kastenbrust
Feb 27, 2009, 03:14 PM
While that point is very much true, I'd have to agree with the earlier poster who was frustrated that he just bought a HDTV and all of his purchases are now on Blu-Ray, but now he can't put them on his Mac.

We shouldn't have to buy movies twice -- we don't have to buy songs on both CD and through iTunes, do we?

I totally didn't think about that, but yeah thats right, not something that occurred to me before.

I do think with constantly increasing internet speeds (by 2020 the average speed will be 32MB) then people will be able to download blu-ray movies from the itunes store in about 15 mins and we wont bother with solid media. We will download it on our Macbooks, and then wirelessly stream it to the Apple TV connected to our 40" High Def TV's.

because games and movies are gonna be sold on one blu ray

Not with 32MB broadband, people will just download them legally from the iTunes store or Steam. Downloading and streaming are the future :)

pkoch1
Feb 27, 2009, 03:16 PM
The only useful use for blu-ray is for data backup, and macs can do that already using an external blu-ray drive or one of these which you can build into your Macbook Pro:
http://store.fastmac.com/product_info.php?products_id=338

ok so we cant watch blu-ray movies, but id rather buy them in the iTunes store anyway. I think Apples trying to move away from disc media as it goes away from their whole iPod digital media philosophy.

To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

I've said this before, and so have others but it still needs to be said:

Compatibility.

I don't want to have to buy a Blu-Ray disk for my TV and a DVD for my iPhone/computer/appleTV

50548
Feb 27, 2009, 03:16 PM
And downloaded purchased media isn't????

:confused:

The point is: BR hasn't shown its marginal value. Nobody cares about it, unless you have a gigantic screen to count the pixels...and I won't pay extra for a movie that can't copied to other media support devices unless DVDs really disappear from the market, which won't happen anytime soon.

Blu-Ray is DEAD. Just like Microsoft.

macaco74
Feb 27, 2009, 03:17 PM
This will be great. And I am sure an $800 add-on.

alexbates
Feb 27, 2009, 03:17 PM
Im glad to hear that it will be cheaper too. Blu-ray drives in the past have seemed pretty expensive.

Quu
Feb 27, 2009, 03:24 PM
I don't really believe Steve Jobs response about Bluray being a 'Bag of Hurt' in reality they are hoping consumers will use iTunes for High Def content.

Remember when the MacBook Air was released and they put up the reasons for no longer needing an Optical drive. One of the reasons was iTunes is a replacement for DVD movies. And since then they have begun offering High Def movies (Although highly compressed and nowhere as good as what Bluray offers).

Apple will drag there feet on this one until it no longer makes sense or they axe Optical media entirely. Just my opinion mind you.

I personally hope for Bluray sooner rather then later. I just purchased one for my PC today.

curmi
Feb 27, 2009, 03:28 PM
I don't really believe Steve Jobs response about Bluray being a 'Bag of Hurt' in reality they are hoping consumers will use iTunes for High Def content.

Remember when the MacBook Air was released and they put up the reasons for no longer needing an Optical drive. One of the reasons was iTunes is a replacement for DVD movies. And since then they have begun offering High Def movies (Although highly compressed and nowhere as good as what Bluray offers).

Apple will drag there feet on this one until it no longer makes sense or they axe Optical media entirely. Just my opinion mind you.

I personally hope for Bluray sooner rather then later. I just purchased one for my PC today.

I agree entirely. When Steve said it was a "bag of hurt" he meant a bag of hurt for the iTunes store.

There was a time when Apple liked to be on the leading edge of technology. But now there is a conflict of interest between the iTunes store and the hardware division - and it is the consumer (those who want a blu-ray option) that suffers.

oldwatery
Feb 27, 2009, 03:30 PM
If this results in Apple adopting the format then I say three cheers!
Now can I have my new Mac Mini/TV Server with built-in BR drive.
Thank you :D

Lesser Evets
Feb 27, 2009, 03:30 PM
We can only hope.

It probably won't be a year until we see Blu-ray being facilitated by Mac.

Loge
Feb 27, 2009, 03:31 PM
There's also an environmental impact if Apple puts Blu-Ray drives in their computers: Blu-ray movies use less plastic for its packaging and its actual media. Less plastic = lower carbon footprint.

BJ

Less plastic than what? Downloads take up no plastic. As for DVDs there was no reason to sell them in oblong shaped boxes in the first place, they are circular :p

For apps like logic pro, most of the packaging is to house the manuals.

mattster16
Feb 27, 2009, 03:32 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

Marginal increase? I dunno.. I notice a pretty big difference between DVD and Blu-Ray - I just got a new 46" HDTV and Blu-Ray player. I'm not one of those people who think DVD is horrible now that I have a Blu-Ray player, but there is significantly more detail in the Blu-Ray picture even compared to an 'upscaled' DVD.

Then again...I know people who insisted the picture difference between VHS and DVD was hardly noticable...

kabunaru
Feb 27, 2009, 03:35 PM
Just like Tallest Skil would say. No Blu-ray on Macs until 2015.

Jetson
Feb 27, 2009, 03:37 PM
If Apple does start selling Blu-ray players, I hope that they are much, much faster than the current crop of players from Sony, etc. These things are slow as molasses when loading a movie or accessing features.

Daschund
Feb 27, 2009, 03:38 PM
people will just download them legally from the iTunes store or Steam. Downloading and streaming are the future :)

That is if you live in the US or Europe. But if you live elsewhere in the world, there are still people on dial up. And huge countries that still don't have their iTunes Store (like Brazil, the 10th largest economy in the world). So, while you are not thinking really globally, I guess Apple might be. :-)

Spymit007
Feb 27, 2009, 03:40 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

In regards to the image quality, I disagree with you. A simple side by side comparison of a TV show or movie in Standard Definition and High Definition dramatically showcases the significant quality difference in image and picture. Perhaps your definition of a "marginal increase" is different from mine but in my view, 480i vs. 1080p or even 720p is a huge increase in image quality.

Not to mention audio quality in Blu-ray is superior to DVD or other formats (ie iTunes) but that's another discussion entirely.

zombitronic
Feb 27, 2009, 03:40 PM
Minis with Blu-ray drives... :eek:

Now can I have my new Mac Mini/TV Server with built-in BR drive.

Not until Mid-2009. WWDC?

Jetson
Feb 27, 2009, 03:46 PM
Apple computers with Blu-ray drives will need to have their specs upgraded.

Data throughput will need to be increased. Also most important, the LED displays should be 10-bit with 10-bit processors so as to avoid color banding (billions of colors).

What's the point of having Blu-ray if the hardware isn't up to snuff?

Slim02
Feb 27, 2009, 03:50 PM
I totally didn't think about that, but yeah thats right, not something that occurred to me before.

I do think with constantly increasing internet speeds (by 2020 the average speed will be 32MB) then people will be able to download blu-ray movies from the itunes store in about 15 mins and we wont bother with solid media. We will download it on our Macbooks, and then wirelessly stream it to the Apple TV connected to our 40" High Def TV's.



Not with 32MB broadband, people will just download them legally from the iTunes store or Steam. Downloading and streaming are the future :)



I LMAO when I see people that keep saying that High Speed Internet will increasing in speed.. But you forget one thing, as the speed get faster more and more will start putting caps on your bandwidth usage.. Do not believe me check out Comcast they doing right now and other IPS are following right be hide them.. So the more you stream and download the more you use up your bandwidth.. So if you think just because you have speed up to 32MMB you will have a cap on your bandwidth usage.. All that speed is not going to help you out when you use up you bandwidth usage just to download 50GB a movie... So do not come crying in the future when you used up your bandwidth because of streaming and downloading 50GB HD movies...

Xian Zhu Xuande
Feb 27, 2009, 03:55 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.
And we can tell that this is the case because they've improved the licensing for Blu-Ray, right? Yeah, whatever. Your logic doesn't tie into this article at all. Blu-Ray is doing well and growing, and nothing is going to replace it as the next generation standard for HD video now--not until something much better comes along the way may years down the road.

I wouldn't call the increase in quality marginal if you've got a nice television. Especially if you're watching something from Pixar, or a nature film like Planet Earth.

iPave
Feb 27, 2009, 03:56 PM
I don't need blu-ray because I've got broadband internet connection:p

Quu
Feb 27, 2009, 03:59 PM
Apple computers with Blu-ray drives will need to have their specs upgraded.

Data throughput will need to be increased. Also most important, the LED displays should be 10-bit with 10-bit processors so as to avoid color banding (billions of colors).

What's the point of having Blu-ray if the hardware isn't up to snuff?

The 9400m, Core 2 Duo CPU's, DDR3 RAM and SATA300 I/O have more then enough data throughput for Bluray.

Regarding the 10-bit well we can all wish but you don't really need 10-bit for Bluray 8-bit is enough. You would have to have a very good eye to tell the difference unless your looking at a perfect gradient of colours at like a million shades.

My point is, step 1: Just add Bluray the LCD's aren't an issue that needs to be corrected for Bluray. That should be corrected just in general.

Cromulent
Feb 27, 2009, 04:03 PM
Doh, sorry please delete.

Stridder44
Feb 27, 2009, 04:04 PM
The point is: BR hasn't shown its marginal value. Nobody cares about it, unless you have a gigantic screen to count the pixels...and I won't pay extra for a movie that can't copied to other media support devices unless DVDs really disappear from the market, which won't happen anytime soon.

Blu-Ray is DEAD. Just like Microsoft.


How's that Apple kool-aid taste?

As if you didn't already put your ignorance up on display enough with your speech about Blu-ray, but then you had to go and polish it with that last little tid-bit about it being dead JUST LIKE MICROSOFT.

The stupidity of your post is so great I can only assume you're really trying to be a troll.

And don't give me that 'up-converted DVD is as good as HD (BD, HDDVD, whatever)' crap.

Slim02
Feb 27, 2009, 04:07 PM
I don't need blu-ray because I've got broadband internet connection:p

Until they but a bandwidth usage cap if they haven't already. If not they will..

pizzach
Feb 27, 2009, 04:11 PM
Then again...I know people who insisted the picture difference between VHS and DVD was hardly noticable...

That all depends. The people who train themselves to notice the differences probably aren't actually watching the movie....they just keep staring at the picture telling everybody else how clear it is.

djellison
Feb 27, 2009, 04:12 PM
Jobs was talking complete crap. Acer can shift a <£500 laptop with a BR drive.

HiFiGuy528
Feb 27, 2009, 04:13 PM
Blu-Ray is DEAD!

Besides, Apple doesn't like disc media, it competes with iTunes, so we'll NEVER see a Blu-Ray drive on a Mac.

megfilmworks
Feb 27, 2009, 04:13 PM
Physical media is dead, and BR discs are part of the past.
Environmental concerns in manufacturing and waste disposal,
cost of distribution and production
(not to mention inventory production guestimates and warehousing),
impulse buying, media servers in households and business,
multiple non-physical copies protected from theft instead of a piece of plastic.
The list goes on.
Whether it is snail mail, paperless billing, or A/V media, it is over.
The times they are a changing and BR is mired in the past.

darrellishere
Feb 27, 2009, 04:18 PM
Will we see blu-Ray support in Snow Leopard.

Great for all of us who already use, our blu-ray drive's over in Windows LOL!

Mind you, the 3rd party software, Cyber Link is Amazing for image quality!

It will be hard to match, hardware off loading to the GPU, etc! (Nividia)!!!


We haven't heard anything about apple implementing this type of support

into Snow Leopard, or the dvd player being re-written?

Personally I don't see it happening! Any Time SOON!

It doesn't fit with apples high margins policy!

Krevnik
Feb 27, 2009, 04:20 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

DVD actually had similar licensing problems initially, which got sorted out about the time that it was launched publicly. The difference is that Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were in a rush to market to beat each other to the punch, rather than taking their time with the format. DVD was actually around for nearly half a decade before it publicly launched and took off.

Fixing the same stupid mistake twice just means they can't seem to learn from their mistakes. It doesn't prove Blu-Ray is a born-dead standard (even if it is).

jbernie
Feb 27, 2009, 04:24 PM
We will have to wait and see if Apple is willing to adopt, but certainly we should be able to view this as a positive step in that direction, it is also about time the manufacturers realized the benefits of making the licensing a single payment to a single group and that should hopefully encourage further adoption in general.

Hugh
Feb 27, 2009, 04:31 PM
Some people actually prefer owning a physical copy of a movie, and if w3e want the "slightly better" image capibility of BR disks, us as apple owners should have the right to burn BR disks on our macs....without having to run bootcamp and burn BR on Windows. Sometimes people like to save things on more than a (external) hard drive.
No matter how much apple wants us to download, there are some people like me that want more than one option!

You can already burn Blue-Ray on the Mac. You just need the drive and Toast 9. :confused:


Hugh

RichardI
Feb 27, 2009, 04:31 PM
It's odd that lots of other manufacturers of computer equipment have found a way through the licensing "maze". And most of them without nearly the resources that Apple has. Odd.

Rich :cool:

mattster16
Feb 27, 2009, 04:32 PM
That all depends. The people who train themselves to notice the differences probably aren't actually watching the movie....they just keep staring at the picture telling everybody else how clear it is.

That's like saying people with bad vision don't really have bad vision. "They don't need glasses, they just need to take in their surroundings as a whole instead of training themselves to focus on the visual clarity of the world around them."

rockosmodurnlif
Feb 27, 2009, 04:33 PM
A new licence will be established by mid-2009 as a "one-stop shop" for device makers. The licence will include all necessary Blu-ray, DVD and CD patents for selling Blu-ray players.
It wasn't like that from the beginning? Who's running the ship over there?

I'm starting to care about having a Blu Ray drive in my Mac now because I finally got an HDTV a month ago. Now that I'm buying my movies on Blu Ray instead of DVD, I have no way of ripping them to my iPod.
Here (http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/MRF8UEBDW6/)
Of course you still need something to break the encryption.

spark343
Feb 27, 2009, 04:42 PM
Buggy whips.

Jetson
Feb 27, 2009, 04:43 PM
Regarding the 10-bit well we can all wish but you don't really need 10-bit for Bluray 8-bit is enough. You would have to have a very good eye to tell the difference unless your looking at a perfect gradient of colours at like a million shades.

My point is, step 1: Just add Bluray the LCD's aren't an issue that needs to be corrected for Bluray. That should be corrected just in general.

No you don't need an eagle's eye to see the difference between millions of colors and billions of colors. If you are aware of the issue of color banding, anyone can perceive it quite easily on 8-bit panels.

bug67
Feb 27, 2009, 04:43 PM
This is great news for me, cause I just can't see buying a Mac laptop without a blu-ray drive. It just ain't happening.

SactoGuy18
Feb 27, 2009, 04:53 PM
I believe that there is pressure from people editing high-definition video on Macs for the ability to master Blu-ray discs on a Mac with a built-in BD-RE drive.

Given that the current hardware on Macs are almost ready for Blu-ray support anyway, adding in a BD-RE Superdrive plus some minor add-ons to MacOS X 10.5.x will make an iMac or Mac Pro capable of mastering Blu-ray discs or play back Blu-ray movies. Besides, if you play back Blu-ray movies on an iMac or Mac Pro with an Internet connection, it's a cinch to get even BD-Live support. :)

J71
Feb 27, 2009, 04:55 PM
And we can tell that this is the case because they've improved the licensing for Blu-Ray, right? Yeah, whatever. Your logic doesn't tie into this article at all. Blu-Ray is doing well and growing, and nothing is going to replace it as the next generation standard for HD video now--not until something much better comes along the way may years down the road.

I wouldn't call the increase in quality marginal if you've got a nice television. Especially if you're watching something from Pixar, or a nature film like Planet Earth.


Oh definitely. I have only had a Blu-Ray player for a few months. I rented Pixar's "Cars" on Blu-ray (Blu-Ray is only $1 more per month on Netflix) and compared it with my current copy on DVD and I noticed a dramatic difference in clarity compared to DVD. IMHO, if you have a nice 1080p HDTV, Blu-ray is worth the upgrade.

digitalbiker
Feb 27, 2009, 04:55 PM
Buggy whips.

Apple TV's.

hummerZ
Feb 27, 2009, 04:57 PM
I'm sorry, but to those of you who are saying that Blu-ray was born dead, or that physical media is extinct, you are wrong.

Blu-ray Disc may not entirely supplant DVD as the primary optical media for home entertainment, but it is bound to find a sure footing, due simply to the fact that the data rate and storage capacity is an IMMENSE improvement over DVD. This not only provides a huge improvement in image resolution, but also image quality, depth, contrast, and color representation.

For those who have mentioned something along the lines of not needing Blu-ray because they can watch iTunes in HD, I think you need to check your television (or your eyes) because the data compression artefacting from almost all downloaded content is simply inferior to Blu-ray.

However, perhaps the biggest improvement in BD over DVD is the audio quality. The option for uncompressed/lossless audio is nothing short of amazing when compared to the antiquated technology of Dolby Digital (which is what is on your DVDs, and in your DTV broadcasts)

Also, why are region restrictions such a problem? DVDs have always been region coded.

Blu-ray is amazing. Get with the times!

darrellishere
Feb 27, 2009, 04:58 PM
In all fairness, Blu-ray should go on the Next 24" iMac,

Mac Pro,

15" Macbook Pro & 17"!

15" macbook Pro should recieve a resolution bump, to meet the specifications.

P.S

Apple upgrading all of their cheap as chips TN screens! Seems Unlikely! :mad::eek:

And to HummerZ! Man You Said it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Blu Ray is amazing. Get with the times people!

lkrupp
Feb 27, 2009, 05:01 PM
This is great news for me, cause I just can't see buying a Mac laptop without a blu-ray drive. It just ain't happening.

I don't mind as long as the Blu-ray drive is optional. I don't want to pay for obsolete technology that is on its way out. Apple should drop optical drives the way they did 3.5 floppies. A few screwballs will scream bloody murder but that's okay. I haven't used the optical drive on my iMac for many months now, let alone burn anything. It's just not needed anymore.

Jetson
Feb 27, 2009, 05:04 PM
Optical drives and Blu-ray are most certainly NOT dead.

Where do you people get these notions anyway? :)

Just because YOU aren't using it doesn't automatically mean that the ENTIRE WORLD is doing the same.

megfilmworks
Feb 27, 2009, 05:06 PM
Optical drives and Blu-ray are most certainly NOT dead.


I agree,
just terminal and on life support, like all physical media.

digitalbiker
Feb 27, 2009, 05:06 PM
What Apple really needs to do is;

1) Kill the Apple TV.
2) Improve mini CPU.
3) Improve mini Ram.
4) Improve mini GPU.
5) Add BD drive and burner to mini.
6) Add HDMI and display port to mini.
7) Build multitouch, wii like controller with remote for mini.
8) Advertise mini as your media entertainment 1 box solution. Games, itunes movies, audio books, BD player / recorder, Tivo, itunes music, etc.

This would make more sense, than keeping two lame products around to die on the vine. Steve still refers to AppleTV as a hobby, ridiculous!

wetrix
Feb 27, 2009, 05:08 PM
Physical media is not dead. CD sales still smash digital sales for music because they are higher quality, have no stupid restrictions, work with everything, are almost as cheap and can be resold when you're done with them. Also, my mom can understand how they work.

Just like people who say MS is dead, your ubernerd approach to technology doesn't represent the majority of the market. People will buy Microsoft and DVDs and Blu-Rays because they work as expected. I'm quite ubernerdy, but I'll still never pay for a movie or album that I can't offload to somebody else or use anywhere.

kastenbrust
Feb 27, 2009, 05:12 PM
That is if you live in the US or Europe. But if you live elsewhere in the world, there are still people on dial up. And huge countries that still don't have their iTunes Store (like Brazil, the 10th largest economy in the world). So, while you are not thinking really globally, I guess Apple might be. :-)

and people who live with dial up can afford blu-ray disks

riiiiiight yes whatever.

I LMAO when I see people that keep saying that High Speed Internet will increasing in speed.. But you forget one thing, as the speed get faster more and more will start putting caps on your bandwidth usage.. Do not believe me check out Comcast they doing right now and other IPS are following right be hide them.. So the more you stream and download the more you use up your bandwidth.. So if you think just because you have speed up to 32MMB you will have a cap on your bandwidth usage.. All that speed is not going to help you out when you use up you bandwidth usage just to download 50GB a movie... So do not come crying in the future when you used up your bandwidth because of streaming and downloading 50GB HD movies...

Thats against European business competition laws so it wont happen here, some companies are currently doing it (Such as Orange and BT) but they got hit with big fines so we're seeing it less and less know. Guess its only going to stick in the US where you have IT comms lobbyists laughing in the face of your 'democracy'. My broadband is 52MB and its got no bandwidth usage limit and it costs me in dollars about $30 per month, and so thats why i think digital media is the future. Its also got no bottlenecks on torrent ports which rules :)

numbersyx
Feb 27, 2009, 05:14 PM
Long overdue in my book (if it happens). Apple has let other companies steal a march on them with this one and need to rectify it....

Shiner
Feb 27, 2009, 05:17 PM
The point is: BR hasn't shown its marginal value. Nobody cares about it, unless you have a gigantic screen to count the pixels...and I won't pay extra for a movie that can't copied to other media support devices unless DVDs really disappear from the market, which won't happen anytime soon.

Blu-Ray is DEAD. Just like Microsoft.

You are not serious right? Please tell me you are just trying to get a rise out of the community. A ton of people care about this.

Porco
Feb 27, 2009, 05:37 PM
I really want a Mac with Blu-ray movie playback in, so this is a positive step towards that being more likely, I hope.

iPave
Feb 27, 2009, 05:43 PM
Until they but a bandwidth usage cap if they haven't already. If not they will..

No they won't in Finland.

Porco
Feb 27, 2009, 05:45 PM
Thats against European business competition laws so it wont happen here, some companies are currently doing it (Such as Orange and BT) but they got hit with big fines so we're seeing it less and less know. Guess its only going to stick in the US where you have IT comms lobbyists laughing in the face of your 'democracy'. My broadband is 52MB and its got no bandwidth usage limit and it costs me in dollars about $30 per month, and so thats why i think digital media is the future. Its also got no bottlenecks on torrent ports which rules :)

But once you are outside of London it's not so easy to get uncapped 50Mbps is it? Good luck to you, but not everyone has access to that kind of speed, especially uncapped, and that's why Blu-ray has a healthy future. I live in the UK too, not very far from a major city, but the best speed I can get is 1.5Mbps. Even uncapped, I am simply not interested in downloading HD movies at that speed, especially when they're not as good as the video on a typical Blu-ray Disc. Yes, digital media is the future, maybe sooner for you than I, but there's plenty of 'present' before that future.

The fact is that people without access to super-fast broadband (which is still quite a lot) are still going to continue to buy HD TVs. Some of them will care about movies, and that is why Blu-ray will do ok.

illegallydead
Feb 27, 2009, 05:45 PM
We shouldn't have to buy movies twice -- we don't have to buy songs on both CD and through iTunes, do we?

I totally agree that you shouldn't have to. It is YOUR movie now, to do with as YOU wish, for PRIVATE usage.
However, on your point of the CDs and iTunes... Well, if the RIAA had their way, yes, you would have to. I think at one point they said that copying a song file onto your iPod is technically breaking copyright law. In other words: DRM is really only there to keep the honest citizen from enjoying the product that they are supposed to be enjoying...

I do think with constantly increasing internet speeds (by 2020 the average speed will be 32MB) then people will be able to download blu-ray movies from the itunes store in about 15 mins and we wont bother with solid media. We will download it on our Macbooks, and then wirelessly stream it to the Apple TV connected to our 40" High Def TV's.

By 2020 we will have something like Super Hi-Vision (4320p) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4320p) and even if connection speed are that fast by then, they will STILL be too slow, in all likelihood.

I LMAO when I see people that keep saying that High Speed Internet will increasing in speed.. But you forget one thing, as the speed get faster more and more will start putting caps on your bandwidth usage.. Do not believe me check out Comcast they doing right now and other IPS are following right be hide them.. So the more you stream and download the more you use up your bandwidth.. So if you think just because you have speed up to 32MMB you will have a cap on your bandwidth usage.. All that speed is not going to help you out when you use up you bandwidth usage just to download 50GB a movie... So do not come crying in the future when you used up your bandwidth because of streaming and downloading 50GB HD movies...

It would be presumed that if the connection speeds got that fast across the board that the caps would be removed/raised, seeing as that increased speed will likely come with higher capacity. But yes, for many people, physical media is the only way to go, since it would take multiple hourse to DAYS to DL even a 1080p movie, not to mention something like 4320p, whereas it would still only take a trip to the video store to get your shiny new 4320p purple-ray holographic storage unit video :D

PCMacUser
Feb 27, 2009, 05:47 PM
Well Apple should hurry up and get on board. Blu-ray writers are now available for Windows PCs for a little over US$200.

The difference in video quality between Blu-ray and DVD is startling too. If you're not into films, then there are plenty of other benefits to Blu-ray - mostly due to its capacity.

frimple
Feb 27, 2009, 05:51 PM
Even uncapped, I am simply not interested in downloading HD movies at that speed, especially when they're not as good as the video on a typical Blu-ray Disc. Yes, digital media is the future, maybe sooner for you than I, but there's plenty of 'present' before that future.

The fact is that people without access to super-fast broadband (which is still quite a lot) are still going to continue to buy HD TVs. Some of them will care about movies, and that is why Blu-ray will do ok.

And that's really the point. It's market saturation or (if you like) prevalence of media in the market place. DVD will be overtaken by Blu-ray before digital distribution takes hold of the market. Right now Hi-Def movies is a niche market and an even smaller niche within is digital media only users. They'll both grow, but to hamstring growth within a market (Apple users) by not providing the ability to use the media would be detrimental to growth, IMO.

dernhelm
Feb 27, 2009, 05:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I don't get the whole "apple won't include blueray since it conflicts with iTunes" argument. Apple includes standard def DVD players, and they sell standard def movies. Doesn't that conflict? Apple will put BR players in their macs when they can reliably and affordably support all their functions. This licensing hurdle was one of the issues. Hdcp suuport is another. Slowly but surely it will come, and they will support it completely. They'll just make itunes downloads so much better that no on will care!

Ted13
Feb 27, 2009, 06:03 PM
The Alley Insider stuff is pure, uninformed speculation. Don't hold your breath for Blu-ray on the Mac. If it appears it will be purely coincidental.

Sehnsucht
Feb 27, 2009, 06:13 PM
Thats against European business competition laws so it wont happen here, some companies are currently doing it (Such as Orange and BT) but they got hit with big fines so we're seeing it less and less know. Guess its only going to stick in the US where you have IT comms lobbyists laughing in the face of your 'democracy'. My broadband is 52MB and its got no bandwidth usage limit and it costs me in dollars about $30 per month, and so thats why i think digital media is the future. Its also got no bottlenecks on torrent ports which rules :)

Let's not turn a discussion about Blu-Ray on Macs into an old, tiresome "my country/c*** is much better/bigger than yours" fest. Mmmkay? Thanks. :cool:

Bruce Oksol
Feb 27, 2009, 06:15 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

The increase in image quality is only one feature of Blu-Ray. The really, really important thing about Blu-Ray is the incredible amount of space on it, allowing producers, directors, et all, place a lot more content on one DVD.

Hardly a bonedead standard. Early adopters love Blu-Ray and a year from now, we won't see much other than Blu-Ray.

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 06:18 PM
...and a year from now, we won't see much other than Blu-Ray.

Except that about 60% of the general public either doesn't know what Blu-ray is, doesn't care what Blu-ray is, or doesn't understand the difference between these $25 dollar Blu-ray movies and these <$10 DVD movies other than they know which one they're going to buy.

Eidorian
Feb 27, 2009, 06:20 PM
Fry's has some of the readers + HD-DVD for under $99 from time to time. I remember buying my first DVD burner for about that much. :eek:

thejadedmonkey
Feb 27, 2009, 06:21 PM
Apple's Steve Jobs specifically cited complicated licensing issues as one of the hurdles to adopting Blu-Ray in Apple's own computers.

Bull. If Sony, Toshiba, Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, et al can handle Blu-ray's "bag of hurt", so can Apple's lawyers. They don't seem to have any problems when it comes to Psystar.

Apple just didn't want blu-ray competing with iTunes, plain and simple.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I don't get the whole "apple won't include blueray since it conflicts with iTunes" argument. Apple includes standard def DVD players, and they sell standard def movies. Doesn't that conflict? Apple will put BR players in their macs when they can reliably and affordably support all their functions. This licensing hurdle was one of the issues. Hdcp suuport is another. Slowly but surely it will come, and they will support it completely. They'll just make itunes downloads so much better that no on will care!

Uh.. the DVD predates iTunes by about 6 years.

jmadlena
Feb 27, 2009, 06:47 PM
Bull. If Sony, Toshiba, Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, et al can handle Blu-ray's "bag of hurt", so can Apple's lawyers. They don't seem to have any problems when it comes to Psystar.

Apple just didn't want blu-ray competing with iTunes, plain and simple...

You're right, they do have Blue-ray drives in their computers, but what's the margin on their machines? Apple has always insisted on higher margins, and I don't think that is going to change anytime soon. So, until all of the royalties and everything drop down to within their margins, I doubt we'll see it.

Plus, the iTunes/Blu-ray competition doesn't help the situation either.

skellener
Feb 27, 2009, 06:47 PM
There's also an environmental impact if Apple puts Blu-Ray drives in their computers: Blu-ray movies use less plastic for its packaging and its actual media. Less plastic = lower carbon footprint.

BJAnd I suppose since less people use BR than DVD that's even less plastic = lower carbon footprint? This is ridiculous!

Axemantitan
Feb 27, 2009, 06:51 PM
Bull. If Sony, Toshiba, Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, et al can handle Blu-ray's "bag of hurt", so can Apple's lawyers. They don't seem to have any problems when it comes to Psystar.

Apple just didn't want blu-ray competing with iTunes, plain and simple.

While I agree with you, I don't think that Sony would have had a problem getting BRD on their computers considering that it is Sony technology! :)

xoggyux
Feb 27, 2009, 06:53 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/27/blu-ray-licensing-to-get-easier-and-cheaper/)

AlleyInsider speculates (http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-macs-to-finally-get-blu-ray-2009-2) that licensing changes (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39619195,00.htm) to Blu-Ray could pave the way to Mac support for the High Definition drives.The new streamlined process will reportedly cut the total cost of royalty payments by 40 percent. Apple's Steve Jobs specifically cited complicated licensing issues as one of the hurdles to adopting Blu-Ray in Apple's own computers.

Of interest, Apple's recent inclusion (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/18/apple-incorporates-hdcp-copy-protection-in-new-laptops/) of HDCP copy protection in their newest laptops could also help pave the way for support of the HD disc format.

Article Link: Blu-ray Licensing to Get Easier and Cheaper (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/27/blu-ray-licensing-to-get-easier-and-cheaper/)

This is bad news, yet another 10 years of the worse media reproduction technology that will slower the take over of flash memory as the standard for this kind of things. Haven't [they] (sony, etc) that playing a high definition movie (usually the audio system accompanied a nice HDTV set worth a few hundred dollars to a few thousands) with an optic drive moving at ~10K rpm is not the best experience?
I just hope that with all this SSD "revolution" manufacturers will realize the mistake they have been doing, and stop listening to Sony which despite being one of my favorite brands for many years, I've been disappointed with their late business practices, and keep "pushing" their "proprietary products" such as memory stick, and do not refuse to let it go once they are proven they are making a mistake....
Anyway this is likely to happen since so many people are easily convinced to buy a $5k++ home entertainment system to watch a movie with a secondary "not original" soundtrack [the noise of the disk spinning, and the fans (in many sophisticated equipment that get hot)]

jbernie
Feb 27, 2009, 06:54 PM
The increase in image quality is only one feature of Blu-Ray. The really, really important thing about Blu-Ray is the incredible amount of space on it, allowing producers, directors, et all, place a lot more content on one DVD.

Hardly a bonedead standard. Early adopters love Blu-Ray and a year from now, we won't see much other than Blu-Ray.

A nice dream but far from reality, there are a lot more things higher on the priority list of a majority of the people right now than buying a $200+ BR player. Maybe in 4-5 years after the current economic mess is over, and we are starting to boom again then the frivilous spending will increase, maybe. Right now if my DVD player dies then a $50 replacement from walmart or something will do just fine.

Not forgetting that although seeing movies and tv shows in HD is very nice, there is an awful lot of movie content out there for which BR is just a way to charge more without providing (this is the key) meaningful benefit. Things like Planet Earth are truely stunning in HD, my goodness the WOW factor is great, but tell me what is the benefit of getting the latest High School Musical movie on Blue Ray?

Porco
Feb 27, 2009, 06:59 PM
Things like Planet Earth are truely stunning in HD, my goodness the WOW factor is great, but tell me what is the benefit of getting the latest High School Musical movie on Blue Ray?

Because film and some digital video formats are higher resolution than Blu-ray. If High School Musical 3 is your favourite film, why wouldn't you want it in high definition, bringing the home video version closer to the original theatrical release?

xoggyux
Feb 27, 2009, 07:03 PM
A nice dream but far from reality, there are a lot more things higher on the priority list of a majority of the people right now than buying a $200+ BR player. Maybe in 4-5 years after the current economic mess is over, and we are starting to boom again then the frivilous spending will increase, maybe. Right now if my DVD player dies then a $50 replacement from walmart or something will do just fine.

Not forgetting that although seeing movies and tv shows in HD is very nice, there is an awful lot of movie content out there for which BR is just a way to charge more without providing (this is the key) meaningful benefit. Things like Planet Earth are truely stunning in HD, my goodness the WOW factor is great, but tell me what is the benefit of getting the latest High School Musical movie on Blue Ray?

I don't think thats accurate to say, people (at least AMERICAN) love to buy stuff, I KNOW people that are facing foreclosure, lost their home (which they had paid 100K++ already) and even in the face of losing their crappy jobs still HAVE to buy the last G1 (for ~$399) or a 72inch LCD ~$3K or even a knew car.... People (at least american) will spend the money they have, or even the one they don't (assuming they can get credit) even if they shouldn't. That what's got us in this mess in the first time? why would you think it is likely the opposite now????

Digitalclips
Feb 27, 2009, 07:06 PM
Until they but a bandwidth usage cap if they haven't already. If not they will..

Why would you say that? The internet it just gets faster and faster and no caps. Do you think FiOS are going to tell me I can only watch one movie a week some time soon? If the past is any predictor of the future we will laugh about current speeds in a few years ... remember 56kb/s being fast?

VoR
Feb 27, 2009, 07:11 PM
Thats against European business competition laws so it wont happen here, some companies are currently doing it (Such as Orange and BT) but they got hit with big fines so we're seeing it less and less know. Guess its only going to stick in the US where you have IT comms lobbyists laughing in the face of your 'democracy'. My broadband is 52MB and its got no bandwidth usage limit and it costs me in dollars about $30 per month, and so thats why i think digital media is the future. Its also got no bottlenecks on torrent ports which rules :)

Complete and utter rubbish?
Name an isp that doesn't cap or throttle anything (apart from [the american...] sky) or have a hugely complicated and ambiguous 'fair use' policy.
You don't mean 52MB obviously, your 50mbit connection is virgin right? I doubt you're using cash back/retention deals after you previous comment about dial-up being cheaper (if you can find someone with it, I bet they're paying through the nose for their ignorance), are you exaggerating the price too?
Do you actually get 50Mb down (I do)? - or like 95% of internet users, just assume you get what you pay for. Have you read the virgin fair use policy? Have you watched your speed drop as it hits the cap? Have you seen an 'average' adsl connection (or a good one...)? Most people are stuck with awful internet, and despite bt's promise with fibre to cabinet, I think we have an awful infrastructure, an awful company in charge of our telecoms network, an awful watchdog and an awful lot of incompetent experts and politicians helping/watching...


On topic, it's not great to see excuses being made for bluray delays before it appears, it's stupidly late now. As a customer, who cares about business models etc. Blu ray is the current standard for hd media on discs and there isn't an alternative unless your willing to pirate (consumer feedback). It's a good solution for data backup, drm'd playback or not - it should be and should have been an option for a long time.
There's lots of interesting information floating about relevant to hd media, little on this thread - the blu ray, itunes, licensing debates are just frustrating and this arrogant teaser is all I'm posting. (I blame the other guy...wot?)

ps. Out of the video wars, it's a shame hd-dvd didn't become 'standard', I think the situation (and quality?...) of average media consumption would be better/higher than it is now.

pps. Highly amusing posts and responses brlawyer. You deserve to be singled out as an example and as an excuse to keep reading these forums.

Sehnsucht
Feb 27, 2009, 07:20 PM
And I suppose since less people use BR than DVD that's even less plastic = lower carbon footprint? This is ridiculous!

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. :confused:

Rivix
Feb 27, 2009, 07:42 PM
Do it Apple.

ptsube
Feb 27, 2009, 07:45 PM
The only useful use for blu-ray is for data backup, and macs can do that already using an external blu-ray drive or one of these which you can build into your Macbook Pro:
http://store.fastmac.com/product_info.php?products_id=338

ok so we cant watch blu-ray movies, but id rather buy them in the iTunes store anyway. I think Apples trying to move away from disc media as it goes away from their whole iPod digital media philosophy.

To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

You can only rent or buy SD movies through iTunes unless you have an Apple TV. Blu-ray won't have a long life, but physical media isn't going anywhere.

Porco
Feb 27, 2009, 07:48 PM
Why would you say that? The internet it just gets faster and faster and no caps. Do you think FiOS are going to tell me I can only watch one movie a week some time soon? If the past is any predictor of the future we will laugh about current speeds in a few years ... remember 56kb/s being fast?

56k was on copper telephone wires like lots of people's internet still is now though. They've got about as far as they can with that. If everyone had cable/fibre connections of course things would be very different, but getting everyone that is a little different than going from dial-up to broadband DSL on the same old telephone lines.

All the what ifs are silly though. I have 60 Blu-rays, and 0 HD movie downloads from iTunes. That's why I want a mac that plays Blu-ray movies, it's not really complicated... Apple not supporting Blu-ray doesn't make me buy a non-existent product from iTunes (even if I could, if it it existed!), it just annoys me.

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 07:55 PM
All the what ifs are silly though. I have 60 Blu-rays, and 0 HD movie downloads from iTunes.

That's probably because they don't offer HD video on any medium other than the Apple TV yet.

When the Apple TV gets 1080p support, we'll see 1080p movies for rent and purchase in iTunes.

stevielee
Feb 27, 2009, 07:57 PM
Apple may well be the leading innovator as far as design - and how it's software integrates with it's proprietary hardware - but they have been way late to adopt/adapt with some of very popular and dominate technologies in computers like:

Not including USB 2 until mid-2003 - because it directly competed with Apple's own firewire standard (which Apple got royalties from).
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20121

Stayed far too long with the PPC processing platform.

Still sells it's top of the line- 3K Mac Pro - with a 2 year old, $50.00 graphics card: the lame ATI 2600XT.

Has not included a eSata port on any of it's computers as of now.

No direct card reading capabilities on any of it's machines. Including a 9 in 1 card reader on the iMac's - is to me - a no brainer.

The only major computer manufacturer to not yet release Intel's Quad Core Mobility processor on either it's laptops or iMacs. I thought for sure they would have had a BTO option for one with the just released 17" MacBook Pro.

Apple's refusal to offer Blu-ray is very much like it's resistance to adopting USB 2. It's all about Apple's bottom line. If it doesn't make big $$$ for Apple Inc., or cuts into any actual or potential revenues streams - then you can forget about it - until it is no longer feasible (profitable) for Apple to continue ignoring a major, widely featured technology like Blu-Ray.

Apple is one of the few companies out there still telling it's loyal customers that it will not use certain technologies simply because it's Dear Leader doesn't "like them", or that they don't "need them" because the big A is providing an alternative that will feed you deeper into it's highly profitable, closed loop business chain: OSX, iTunes, iPhone, iPod, etc. You will conform and learn to live "within" the Apple box. Resistance IS futile.

You don't need no stinkin' Blu-Ray, or DVD drive, or eSata port, or whatever else we decide is, or is not best for you (and especially us). All you need is your daddy Stevo to take you by the hand and lead you into Apple's golden, alternative, visionary computerland. But you WILL pay him a hefty premium for his hand and for the great privilege of "Thinking Different" - just not "too" differently...mind you...

megfilmworks
Feb 27, 2009, 08:05 PM
Blu-ray won't have a long life, but physical media isn't going anywhere.
You're right, it will be in landfills leeching into our water supply for centuries to come.:eek:

Hugh
Feb 27, 2009, 08:32 PM
Apple may well be the leading innovator as far as design - and how it's software integrates with it's proprietary hardware - but they have been way late to adopt/adapt with some of very popular and dominate technologies in computers like:

Not including USB 2 until mid-2003 - because it directly competed with Apple's own firewire standard (which Apple got royalties from).
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20121
:::::::::snip::::::::::



Off topic:

Apple didn't charge royalties for Firewire.. At least that's how I remember it, it was in a MacWorld issue. :/


Hugh

Xibalba
Feb 27, 2009, 08:33 PM
Downloading and streaming are the future :)


actually that would be the present and the past and it just keeps getting better and better...i receive all of my media entertainment via cable or the internet and nothing is on an optical disc...

i was an extremely early adopter with DVD but that was a significant upgrade in both quality and ease of use...HD formats are not significant improvements at all - esp compared now to HD streaming of entertainment.

Slim02
Feb 27, 2009, 08:33 PM
Why would you say that? The internet it just gets faster and faster and no caps. Do you think FiOS are going to tell me I can only watch one movie a week some time soon? If the past is any predictor of the future we will laugh about current speeds in a few years ... remember 56kb/s being fast?


I guess you miss my bigger post... I hate to break it to you but COMCAST already have caps and there are others that are going the same way.. I bet when FIOS gets the same amount of people that Comcast service it will happen..

While I agree with you, I don't think that Sony would have had a problem getting BRD on their computers considering that it is Sony technology! :)

I hate to break it to you but it is not Sony's technology.. Blu-ray is not own by one company but by a list of companies..


The "Blu-ray Disc Founder group" was started in May 2002 by nine leading electronic companies: Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung. On February 19, 2002 the companies announced[2] that they were the "Founders" of the Blu-ray Disc and later changed their name to the "Blu-ray Disc Association" on May 18, 2004 to allow more companies to join their development. Some examples of companies that signed in include Apple, TDK, Dell, Hewlett Packard, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. and Universal Music Group. As of December 2007, there are more than 250 members and supporters of the Association.

In February 2002, a large group of companies announced the introduction of the Blu-ray Disc (BD) format, the next generation in optical storage. The new format offers an immense storage capacity (up to 50GB) that is perfect for High Definition video recording and distribution, as well as for storing large amounts of data. The format shares the same form factors as existing CD and DVD optical discs allowing for backwards compatibility.

In 2005, the Blu-ray Disc Founders announced the creation of the Blu-ray Disc Association. The Blu-ray Disc Association, or BDA, re-incorporates the Blu-Ray Disc Founders group, but is now a voluntary membership group open to any corporation or organization with an interest in creating, upholding and/or promoting the BD formats. Those organizations engaged in research, development and/or manufacturing of any BD products or interested in developing and improving the BD formats are also encouraged to pursue membership. Furthermore, the group welcomes any company wanting to learn more about the format as it evolves.

The aim of the BDA is to:
- Develop Blu-ray Disc specifications
- Ensure Blu-ray Disc products are implemented by licensees according to the intent of the specifications
- Promote wide adoption of Blu-ray Disc formats
- Provide useful information to those who are interested in supporting Blu-ray Disc formats

For more information on the benefits of becoming a member of the Blu-ray Disc Association, please refer to Benefits in the Membership section of the menu.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/en/association/GeneralInfo.html


Board of Directors
Apple, Inc.
Dell
HP
Hitachi
Intel Corporation
LG
Mitsubishi Electric
Panasonic
Pioneer
Philips
Samsung
Sharp
Sony
Sun Microsystems
TDK
Thomson
Twentieth Century Fox
Walt Disney
Warner Bros.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/en/about/SupportingCompanies.html


Funny thing is Apple is one of the Companies that own a piece of the pie..

thedarkhorse
Feb 27, 2009, 08:36 PM
I hope they finally offer real blu-ray support.
I don't see why some people are so against it, it's just giving you more options, and if this new licensing makes it cheaper and closer to the cost of dvd then why shouldn't they include it?
It should be about choices, not either/or.

plus ~50mbps 1080p video is better than ~4mbps 720p video any day.

jpine
Feb 27, 2009, 08:41 PM
Will someone please explain to me why Blu-ray is a "bag of hurt" to Apple but no one else, including the hackintosh startup? :confused:

ptsube
Feb 27, 2009, 08:43 PM
While I agree with you, I don't think that Sony would have had a problem getting BRD on their computers considering that it is Sony technology! :)
It's more so a Panasonic technology. Panasonic holds more patents than the other two companies involved in the technology: Sony and Philips.

ptsube
Feb 27, 2009, 08:47 PM
You're right, it will be in landfills leeching into our water supply for centuries to come.:eek:
When was the last time you threw-away a DVD? I'm so sick of the fear mongering Global Warming idiots. Please feel free to stop breathing if you get any more concerned about Global Warming. And you can ship me all of your DVD's and Blu-ray's that you are throwing-out on a daily basis.

Slim02
Feb 27, 2009, 08:50 PM
It's more so a Panasonic technology. Panasonic holds more patents than the other two companies involved in the technology: Sony and Philips.

WRONG and already posted who it was 3 posted above yours..

dernhelm
Feb 27, 2009, 08:57 PM
Bull. If Sony, Toshiba, Dell, HP/Compaq, Lenovo, et al can handle Blu-ray's "bag of hurt", so can Apple's lawyers. They don't seem to have any problems when it comes to Psystar.

Apple just didn't want blu-ray competing with iTunes, plain and simple.



Uh.. the DVD predates iTunes by about 6 years.

No kidding? Uh.. I knew that. What I'm saying is that no one is suggesting that Apple is going to start pulling DVD players out of their standard hardware. The Air is the notable exception, but even then, they made a point out of producing software that could connect the drive of another Mac to your Air.

Just like standard def DVD drives have too much affordance to be eliminated from Apple's lineup, so too will BR drives. They'll deliver them because people will need the capacity. And they won't deliver them half disabled. They'll work and work fully. This decision has nothing whatsoever to do with iTunes, and whether or not it supports hi def movies.

Lynxpro
Feb 27, 2009, 09:12 PM
A bag of slightly less hurt.


It was only ever a "Bag of Hurt" to Apple's profits per machine. There's plenty other PC manufacturers that have been bundling Blu-ray drives with their systems.

It kinda cheeses me off about Apple not actively supporting Blu-ray considering Apple is considered to be multi-media savvy. I think they really didn't want to pay money to Microsoft for the mandatory VC-1 codec (Windows Media 9) which is a necessity because cheap-ass studios like Warner exclusively do their flicks in VC-1.

What also cheeses me off is the lack of Lightscribe on Apple machines. Again, multi-media savvy yet this has never been implemented. I guess they didn't want to add to HP's coffers either.

I'd definitely like to see a Blu-ray Lightscribe option but it hasn't been announced. There are BD-ROM/DVD+/-RW drives on the market that will do Lightscribe for DVD+/-RW, but not native to BD-RW discs. Maybe as the prices drop on BD-RW, Lightscribe might be announced.

megfilmworks
Feb 27, 2009, 09:14 PM
When was the last time you threw-away a DVD? I'm so sick of the fear mongering Global Warming idiots. Please feel free to stop breathing if you get any more concerned about Global Warming. And you can ship me all of your DVD's and Blu-ray's that you are throwing-out on a daily basis.
Believe me I do plenty to screw up the environment every day at work. (I've been know to burn 85 gals an hour of jet fuel)
But old is old and it is time to get with the program.
Paper, snail mail, paper billing, and even AV media is doomed.
Just like the typewriter.
Although I still know an old guy who owns one!

MKnight
Feb 27, 2009, 09:25 PM
If they put DVDs in round packaging they would roll right off the shelf... LOL.

Of course, I would propose DVDs are packaged in a square biodegradable packaging the size of current CD packaging.

Less plastic than what? Downloads take up no plastic. As for DVDs there was no reason to sell them in oblong shaped boxes in the first place, they are circular :p

For apps like logic pro, most of the packaging is to house the manuals.

Andrmgic
Feb 27, 2009, 09:35 PM
Until apple or anybody can offer the quality of blu-ray in a download, I'll stick to my physical media.

yegon
Feb 27, 2009, 10:17 PM
Until apple or anybody can offer the quality of blu-ray in a download, I'll stick to my physical media.

I agree. Can't really see the point in paying for hd media that isn't stupendously high quality.

Plus, considering that in years of owning laptops I've never used the dvd drive for watching films, colour me unexcited. I'm perfectly happy watching hd mkv's on my mbp, while my PS3 performs well as a BD player.

Now, for backup purposes, BD would be nice but given that you can already do that externally, not really a big deal, especially since the only time I'd burn BD's is when I'm plugged in either at work or at home. The only thing stopping me currently is the price of blanks.

That said, as a selling point, it's inclusion seems like a no-brainer.

Spymit007
Feb 27, 2009, 10:43 PM
Except that about 60% of the general public either doesn't know what Blu-ray is, doesn't care what Blu-ray is, or doesn't understand the difference between these $25 dollar Blu-ray movies and these <$10 DVD movies other than they know which one they're going to buy.

Where did you get your numbers? Better quality is the difference in Blu-ray...how is that so hard to understand. I do believe you do not give the general public enough credit.

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 10:45 PM
Where did you get your numbers? Better quality is the difference in Blu-ray...how is that so hard to understand. I do believe you do not give the general public enough credit.

Except the general public has professed that they cannot distinguish 480p from 720p and 720p from 1080p, so...

People don't seem to care about the "quality".

Spymit007
Feb 27, 2009, 10:47 PM
A nice dream but far from reality, there are a lot more things higher on the priority list of a majority of the people right now than buying a $200+ BR player. Maybe in 4-5 years after the current economic mess is over, and we are starting to boom again then the frivilous spending will increase, maybe. Right now if my DVD player dies then a $50 replacement from walmart or something will do just fine.

Actually, I would disagree with you. It's been shown that in hard economic times, people tend to go to invest in home movie technology for their entertainment needs. While I don't remember where I heard or read this, it sounds logical that it is cheaper to stay in, rent a movie and watch it than go out on the town. Blu-ray players have broken the sub $150 price margin and will likely reach sub $100 by Christmas 2009. The same will go for Blu-ray movies. Already Amazon sells a ton of popular titles for under $20, some under $15 so the difference in price between DVD and Blu-ray is becoming a non-issue.

Except the general public has professed that they cannot distinguish 480p from 720p and 720p from 1080p, so...

People don't seem to care about the "quality".

I must disagree. Where have they professed this exactly? Watching a James Bond movie on Blu-ray is vastly superior to watching it on SpikeTV in standard resolution. I cite this example because I witnessed this personally. Bond on Spike looked like they were using a damaged reel while on Blu-ray the colors, the contrast, and picture quality in general were the best I have ever seen in a Bond film.

A simple trip down to your local electronics store will clearly and unequivocally show the difference in quality between standard 480i and HD 1080p or even 720p. Now whether or not people don't seem to care, that is a judgment call. I would think some would say the difference in quality is not worth the price or upgrade while some would justify the cost for the added benefit.

seedster2
Feb 27, 2009, 11:29 PM
I always laugh when this matter is brought up.

If SJobs initially adopted BR all the opposition would be touting its benefits and advantages regurgitating his every word as the gospel truth. Many of the naysayers haven't used it or really know what they are talking about.

Why oppose optional equipment? SSD is a bag of hurt for many but it's still optional. Let's call the delay what it really is, Itunes HD competition and not profitable enough for us at the moment.

mosx
Feb 27, 2009, 11:33 PM
The point is: BR hasn't shown its marginal value. Nobody cares about it, unless you have a gigantic screen to count the pixels...and I won't pay extra for a movie that can't copied to other media support devices unless DVDs really disappear from the market, which won't happen anytime soon.

Blu-Ray is DEAD. Just like Microsoft.

I stopped posting here because of posts like this.

Too many people simply do not know what they're talking about and it gets frustrating when they spout off their lack of knowledge as fact.

Unfortunately, I have to reply to something as ridiculous as this because this sort of ignorance needs to be stopped.

Nobody cares about blu-ray? Look at the sales and statistics. Despite the world economy, when compared to the same point in its life as DVD, blu-ray is actually growing FASTER than DVD did. Meaning, at 2.5 years into its life, its growing faster than DVD did at 2.5 years into its life.

When I go to big box stores like Walmart, Target, Fry's, Best Buy, they all have larger sections dedicated to blu-ray than they did to DVD when it was only 2.5 years old. I remember because I had a DVD player 10 years ago when it was approaching 2.5 years old.

Now I have my first blu-ray player. I only have a 37" 720p set. The difference between blu-ray (h.264 discs) and DVD is staggering. It is completely night and day. So much so that even the average people I know who don't care about such things comment on how much better it looks and especially sounds. The difference between the two formats in both video and audio performance is completely night and day. The improvement blu-ray brings over DVD is several times greater than the improvement DVD brought over VHS.

To other people who think streaming is the future, you're ignoring many critical points. First being that the average person (not the average forum poster) does NOT want to hook a computer or any type of computer-like device up to their TV. DVD and blu-ray sales/rentals prove this. Despite the fact that there has been devices available for years now that the average vocal forum poster would consider better and easier to use, people still choose physical media. People still want physical copies of their media as well.

I mean, honestly, it's a hell of a lot easier to rent the blu-ray from Hollywood Video and pop the disc in to the player than it is to go online, download the movie from iTunes, and deal with all of the cables and adapters required to hook a Mac up to an HDTV.

Yes I know Apple TV has HD rentals. But the selection is extremely limited compared to blu-ray. On top of that you're talking about H.264 at 720p, 4Mbps (LESS than the average MPEG-2 DVD bitrate at 480i/p) versus 40+Mbps 1080p on blu-ray. Apple's overly compressed "HD" video with artifacting galore just cannot compare. And don't even begin to compare the audio. I've yet to see a major blu-ray release that doesn't have uncompressed PCM or lossless encoded audio in the form of Dolby TrueHD/DTS Master HD.

Oh and Microsoft is dead? Last I checked, there was about 12x as many people using Vista as there are Mac users total.

mdntcallr
Feb 27, 2009, 11:33 PM
Sorry, but Apple needs to get into the Blu-Ray game NOW!

to blame this on "Licensing" is ridiculous. Apple is delaying because it doesn't want Blu-Ray to succeed, not because it doesn't have the ability to install the technology or license it.

Any and all claims to the contrary are just crazy. Dell, HP, Sony and so many others can make PC's and laptops with Blu-Ray ... but Apple can't because of licensing issues.

hah!
I applaud easier licensing, but Apple needs to come with it NOW!

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 11:35 PM
...to blame this on "Licensing" is ridiculous. Apple is delaying because it doesn't want Blu-Ray to succeed...

:confused:

Apple has been on the Blu-ray board since 2005 or earlier.

whatever
Feb 27, 2009, 11:47 PM
While that point is very much true, I'd have to agree with the earlier poster who was frustrated that he just bought a HDTV and all of his purchases are now on Blu-Ray, but now he can't put them on his Mac.

We shouldn't have to buy movies twice -- we don't have to buy songs on both CD and through iTunes, do we?

Duh, that person is breaking the law! It's illegal to rip Blu-Ray discs.

The only reason why you can rip a CD onto a computer is because at the time of the launch of the CD no one thought about piracy. With Blu-Ray they have thought this through. Which is just one more reason why it's dead!

Blu-Ray is as dead as HD-DVD! On-demand and other download services have already eclipsed it.

Colin20
Feb 27, 2009, 11:47 PM
It still has regions, unlike HD DVD.

HD DVD is dead. Let it go...

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 11:49 PM
HD DVD is dead. Let it go...

It dies when I can stop buying movies in the format. ;)

I only buy HD DVD.

dukebound85
Feb 27, 2009, 11:51 PM
I only buy HD DVD.

why??

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 11:53 PM
why??

Because I still can, because I have an internal player for my Haswell Mac Pro and a standalone player for my HDTV, because there is an extensive library of titles, and because... they're cheaper than Blu-ray!

The only Blu-ray movie I have is of Serenity... and I have the HD DVD of it, too. :rolleyes:

Lynxpro
Feb 27, 2009, 11:54 PM
By 2020 we will have something like Super Hi-Vision (4320p) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4320p) and even if connection speed are that fast by then, they will STILL be too slow, in all likelihood.


We won't get 4320p by 2020. The next standard Joe Consumer gets is 2160p, which will probably be called SuperHD or UltraHD. If Sony bumps up Blu-ray to 4 layer discs, it will have the capacity to do 2160p now but the platform would have to go to a new Profile standard for increased resolution output and it would be wise to crank up the Mbps rate.

For those on here whining about HD DVD, put a sock in it. That was Microsoft's baby and in no way did it come close to Blu-ray. Just as the Wii is a GameCube 1.5, HD DVD was an incremental upgrade to DVD. They (Toshiba and Microsoft) wanted to retain the red laser for its use while Sony and its allies insisted on moving to blue laser. Blu-ray has the better transfer rate than HD DVD and Blu-ray uses Java instead of Microsoft tech to provide the interactive menus, not to mention favoring high bit rate AVC encoding versus HD DVD's rather pathetic bit rate with inferior VC-1.

ebouwman
Feb 27, 2009, 11:54 PM
Blu-Ray is a borndead standard and this move just proves it. They are desperate to sell DRM-ridden discs to people that could not care less about a marginal increase in image quality.

Marginal increase?

Oh come on!

Just because you can't see the difference because your eyesight isn't what it used to be doesn't mean that the rest of us can't see a pretty big difference.

Breckenridge
Feb 27, 2009, 11:56 PM
To have a BlueRay disk with writing ability is what I'm looking for on my Mac. I was about to buy an HP just for that purpose, now I will wait

Tallest Skil
Feb 27, 2009, 11:56 PM
For those on here whining about HD DVD, put a sock in it. That was Microsoft's baby and in no way did it come close to Blu-ray. Just as the Wii is a GameCube 1.5, HD DVD was an incremental upgrade to DVD. They (Toshiba and Microsoft) wanted to retain the red laser for its use while Sony and its allies insisted on moving to blue laser. Blu-ray has the better transfer rate than HD DVD and Blu-ray uses Java instead of Microsoft tech to provide the interactive menus, not to mention favoring high bit rate AVC encoding versus HD DVD's rather pathetic bit rate with inferior VC-1.

Intel was also on the HD DVD board, and HD DVD doesn't use a red laser, so I'm wondering where you get your sources.

To have a BlueRay disk with writing ability is what I'm looking for on my Mac. I was about to buy an HP just for that purpose, now I will wait

You can do that NOW...

ebouwman
Feb 27, 2009, 11:57 PM
Because I still can, because I have an internal player for my Haswell Mac Pro and a standalone player for my HDTV, because there is an extensive library of titles, and because... they're cheaper than Blu-ray!

The only Blu-ray movie I have is of Serenity... and I have the HD DVD of it, too. :rolleyes:

It's not dead yet, i agree!

But it WILL BE very shortly

whatever
Feb 28, 2009, 12:00 AM
I stopped posting here because of posts like this.

Too many people simply do not know what they're talking about and it gets frustrating when they spout off their lack of knowledge as fact.

Unfortunately, I have to reply to something as ridiculous as this because this sort of ignorance needs to be stopped.

Nobody cares about blu-ray? Look at the sales and statistics. Despite the world economy, when compared to the same point in its life as DVD, blu-ray is actually growing FASTER than DVD did. Meaning, at 2.5 years into its life, its growing faster than DVD did at 2.5 years into its life.

When I go to big box stores like Walmart, Target, Fry's, Best Buy, they all have larger sections dedicated to blu-ray than they did to DVD when it was only 2.5 years old. I remember because I had a DVD player 10 years ago when it was approaching 2.5 years old.

Now I have my first blu-ray player. I only have a 37" 720p set. The difference between blu-ray (h.264 discs) and DVD is staggering. It is completely night and day. So much so that even the average people I know who don't care about such things comment on how much better it looks and especially sounds. The difference between the two formats in both video and audio performance is completely night and day. The improvement blu-ray brings over DVD is several times greater than the improvement DVD brought over VHS.

To other people who think streaming is the future, you're ignoring many critical points. First being that the average person (not the average forum poster) does NOT want to hook a computer or any type of computer-like device up to their TV. DVD and blu-ray sales/rentals prove this. Despite the fact that there has been devices available for years now that the average vocal forum poster would consider better and easier to use, people still choose physical media. People still want physical copies of their media as well.

I mean, honestly, it's a hell of a lot easier to rent the blu-ray from Hollywood Video and pop the disc in to the player than it is to go online, download the movie from iTunes, and deal with all of the cables and adapters required to hook a Mac up to an HDTV.

Yes I know Apple TV has HD rentals. But the selection is extremely limited compared to blu-ray. On top of that you're talking about H.264 at 720p, 4Mbps (LESS than the average MPEG-2 DVD bitrate at 480i/p) versus 40+Mbps 1080p on blu-ray. Apple's overly compressed "HD" video with artifacting galore just cannot compare. And don't even begin to compare the audio. I've yet to see a major blu-ray release that doesn't have uncompressed PCM or lossless encoded audio in the form of Dolby TrueHD/DTS Master HD.

Oh and Microsoft is dead? Last I checked, there was about 12x as many people using Vista as there are Mac users total.

Sorry, to break this to you but both DVD and Blu-Ray sales decline in 2008. The DVD decline is happening faster than that of the VHS tape and Blu-Ray is declining at a even faster rate.

You say that people won't want to setup a set top device? Hmm, isn't that what Blu-Ray is? People are streaming and downloading movies in HD from Xbox Live, AppleTv, Netflix and Cable's own OnDemand service. And here's the kicker even Sony sees that downloading/streaming is the future and have begun offering this for the PS3.

In this new "Green" world physical media just doesn't have a place.

And remember higher/better quality doesn't always win, a few good examples include Beta Tape (superior to VHS and also a Sony product), Laser Discs (superior to both video tape formats), PS3 (superior than the Wii, but a distant third in the game console markets behind the Wii and Xbox 360), CDs (better sound quality than MP3 and AAC, but lost an establish market). People like cheap and easy and are tired of replacing their entire movie collections every couple of years.

Lynxpro
Feb 28, 2009, 12:04 AM
i was an extremely early adopter with DVD but that was a significant upgrade in both quality and ease of use...HD formats are not significant improvements at all - esp compared now to HD streaming of entertainment.


You must be vision impaired because the difference between a Blu-ray disc [1080p] versus an NTSC DVD disc [480p] is 600 lines of resolution. That 600 line resolution figure is greater than the entire total resolution of your precious DVDs.

DVD in terms of resolution was barely a 200 line increase over VHS.

HD streaming does not compare to Blu-ray because first of all, it is mainly in 720p and secondly, the streaming options have a majorly inferior Mbps frame/transfer rate which becomes all the more noticeable on a larger television screen.

I won't stream HD content nor watch non-upscaled DVDs on my 42" 1080p Sony Bravia television.

MacDaddi
Feb 28, 2009, 12:10 AM
One thing to consider here is with all of the downloading/streaming thats going on with your Tivo, and On Demand and Netflix Movies and iTunes Movies ... I foresee a future not to distant where Internet providers are gonna cap bandwidth, cap how much you can transfer in a month and then charge you if you want to go over that. Isn't that what is kinda happening already.

So I say bring on the physical media besides who would spend 50k on a home theater system and want to watch a movie in surround sound?

I love my mac. It is promised to be ahead of the game and loaded with ground breaking technology. And it is. But I have to burn my 1080p movies with a windows machine. Do you know how much I hate that?:mad::mad:

It's like getting branded with a hot Microsoft logo in my eye!!!!!!

Lynxpro
Feb 28, 2009, 12:13 AM
Intel was also on the HD DVD board, and HD DVD doesn't use a red laser, so I'm wondering where you get your sources.


HD DVD was originally intended to use a red laser. It was one of the reasons why Sony withdrew the Blu-ray specs from the certification process from the DVD Forum and ultimately helped set up the Blu-ray Disc Association.

The only reason why Intel was a member of the HD DVD group was because HD DVD was intended to use a Pentium4 as its CPU. Sony and other manufacturers wanted to be able to use all sorts of CPUs and decoder chips from other sources...and that is why Intel backed HD DVD.

Please feel free to review the history of that unnecessary format war that Microsoft perpetuated behind the scenes by using Toshiba as its proxy [some would say "biotch"] in order to purposefully hurt the launch of the Playstation3.

whatever
Feb 28, 2009, 12:14 AM
I won't stream HD content nor watch non-upscaled DVDs on my 42" 1080p Sony Bravia television.
And that's another thing that is hurting Blu-Ray sales are the upscaling DVDs and TVs that can also do the upscaling.

Imagine you buy a nice new HD TV and it automatically upscales your DVD. My Pioneer Elite does this and it's really nice.

We compared a Blu-Ray movie to the same movie on DVD and it was very close. Yes the Blu-Ray was better, but not worth re-purchasing the movie (something that drove the DVD market).

So close that my friend actually returned his Blu-Ray player.

nowonder24
Feb 28, 2009, 12:16 AM
If SJobs initially adopted BR all the opposition would be touting its benefits and advantages regurgitating his every word as the gospel truth. Many of the naysayers haven't used it or really know what they are talking about.

This is a cheap argument. It may be right for some of the forum's zealots, but you are oversimplifying by putting all the streaming fans into that class.

Why oppose optional equipment? SSD is a bag of hurt for many but it's still optional. Let's call the delay what it really is, Itunes HD competition and not profitable enough for us at the moment.

I for one would not mind a Blueray option in the MacPro, iMac, MacMini or whatever. More choice, more freedom.

But more importantly, I hate that if I want a notebook with an ethernet connection and more memory than a MacBook Air, I have to carry around a stupid 20th century optical drive. And no, for me the solution is not replacing it by a Blueray drive to have a 21st century optical drive. I do not want to carry around an optical drive that I'm using maybe once a year (if at all).
So an external blue ray drive for installing software etc. would totally fit my needs, but please save the space and the weight in the notebook for something more useful.

MrSEC
Feb 28, 2009, 12:21 AM
There's also an environmental impact if Apple puts Blu-Ray drives in their computers: Blu-ray movies use less plastic for its packaging and its actual media. Less plastic = lower carbon footprint.

BJ

Well screw it then! I want a bigger carbon footprint.:D j/k

Slim02
Feb 28, 2009, 12:33 AM
One thing to consider here is with all of the downloading/streaming thats going on with your Tivo, and On Demand and Netflix Movies and iTunes Movies ... I foresee a future not to distant where Internet providers are gonna cap bandwidth, cap how much you can transfer in a month and then charge you if you want to go over that. Isn't that what is kinda happening already.

So I say bring on the physical media besides who would spend 50k on a home theater system and want to watch a movie in surround sound?

I love my mac. It is promised to be ahead of the game and loaded with ground breaking technology. And it is. But I have to burn my 1080p movies with a windows machine. Do you know how much I hate that?:mad::mad:

It's like getting branded with a hot Microsoft logo in my eye!!!!!!

I already had post this and yes Comcast is already put a cap at 250GB a mouth and if you keep going over that you will lose your internet.. Other ISP are looking to follow what Comcast is doing.. So it is happening as we speak (write).. Also if you do not have phone (VOIP) with your cable company or what ever your ISP is.. Then you will eating up your bandwidth because it lands under streaming...

P.S. I sorry but I will keep my Blu-ray and DVD movies.. I will not and have not bought download movies or stream them from my Mac, Xbox360 and PS3... I am going to keep on buying Blu-ray movies because it sounds and Looks way better then any upscaled DVD or a download movies will even be...

MikeTheC
Feb 28, 2009, 12:53 AM
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3532/mikethecbannersmall01.png

MikeTheC (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?u=33289), regular MacRumors poster, has just announced an even newer Blu-ray licensing strategy which is even less expensive for consumers and systems manufacturers, and promises to be compatible to a far greater degree with many operating system platforms as well as hardware architectures.

"Basically," said MikeTheC in a recent press conference, "my new license strategy involves a discount, one-time payment by adopters at one eighth of Sony's current licensing rate," requires no new technology be installed, and will involve the "non-implementation of the Blu-ray technology." As such, requisite drivers in support of this licensing scheme can be written for Windows Vista, XP, 2000, ME, NT 4 and 3.51, 98SE, Win3.1 and DOS 6.0 or newer. Also available will be native drivers for all the distributions of Linux, BSD, Xenix, Solaris, Mac OS X 10.2 and newer, and Mac OS 7.6.1 - Mac OS 9.2.2. Additionally, this is expected to "mitigate all issues of HDCP copy protection."In other related news, Sony Entertainment America Chairman Michael Lynton is scheduled to be dressed in colorful, traditional Mexican fiesta clothes and hitched to a tree in one of San Jose's parks where he will be beaten like a piñata by several of Apple's senior executives. Speculations of Apple CEO Steven P. Jobs attending this upcoming "cultural licensing exchange" event, as it has been dubbed by insiders, have yet to be confirmed.

mosx
Feb 28, 2009, 01:14 AM
Sorry, to break this to you but both DVD and Blu-Ray sales decline in 2008. The DVD decline is happening faster than that of the VHS tape and Blu-Ray is declining at a even faster rate.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=jvI&ei=5NioSe6mN4m4sAPBnITiDw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=2008+blu-ray+sales+compared+2007&spell=1 wrong.

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6628383.html “A lot of people think of DVD as an overnight success, but actually if you look back, we have some data from CEA market research that shows three years into the launch of DVD 5.4 million players had shipped into the U.S. market. So if you are comparing DVD to Blu-ray we are actually looking at a considerably larger number of players that have shipped in only 2.5 years into the life of Blu-ray, so we are doing quite well.”

"Color TV registered a little more than 3 percent household penetration after three years, CD was a little less than 2 percent after three years, and DVD saw about 4 percent penetration after three years. In contrast, Blu-ray players are seeing a nearly 8 percent household penetration rate after two and half years, Parsons said."

Blu-ray is doing quite well, despite the economy, and is growing faster than DVD did.

You say that people won't want to setup a set top device? Hmm, isn't that what Blu-Ray is? People are streaming and downloading movies in HD from Xbox Live, AppleTv, Netflix and Cable's own OnDemand service. And here's the kicker even Sony sees that downloading/streaming is the future and have begun offering this for the PS3.

I said people don't want to use complex devices that are limited in scope, such as the Apple TV and the Roku box. The sales of the two devices prove that. Even though the Apple TV sales were up last year, they still pale in comparison to blu-ray and even iPod sales.

Have you seen the Netflix streaming selection? I'm a Netflix member and I can tell you from experience that its terrible. Anyone who buys a Roku box for it is stupid. Not only that but the quality is terrible. The HD streaming on Xbox Live and Roku is worse than Apple TV. VC-1 video encoded at either 3.5Mbps or so or 4Mbps. 720p. And no 5.1 sound. Don't even get me started on how awful the SD quality is. Might as well be VHS upscaled to 640x480.

Cable's On Demand services are of MUCH higher quality than any internet based company. It's typically 1080i at 20Mbps MPEG-2. Still WELL behind Blu-ray but well above Netflix and Apple TV, as well as Microsoft's "HD" video store on Live!.

And remember higher/better quality doesn't always win, a few good examples include Beta Tape (superior to VHS and also a Sony product)

Actually, the higher quality product here DID win. Blu-ray beat HD DVD and its growing faster than DVD did.

Also, people need to learn that Beta, at the time of launch against VHS, was NOT superior. Sure it had a slightly higher resolution, but those first few generations of Beta tapes could NOT hold a full length feature movie at a higher quality than VHS. On top of that, Sony would not license the technology to any one else, while JVC licensed it to anyone and everyone.

So people need to stop this "Beta beat VHS!" nonsense because its simply not true. At that time Beta was NOT superior to VHS AND Sony's licensing killed it before it even had a chance, after it did finally become "better". And even when it finally was technically better, the market had decided on VHS.

Laser Discs (superior to both video tape formats)

Laser Disc? Are you serious? While it technically had a higher resolution than VHS, it was plagued with problems. CLV discs didn't look as good as CAV discs. But CAV discs basically meant that you had to get up 3 to 4 times during your average movie to flip or swap a disc out. Let's not forget the laser rot issue, which basically gave the discs shorter lifespans than your average VHS tapes. Its not fun when you have to get up every 30 minutes to flip or switch a foot wide disc that won't even last a few years because of poor quality glue.

PS3 (superior than the Wii, but a distant third in the game console markets behind the Wii and Xbox 360)

Thats because the PS3 is overpriced, underpowered, and Sony's arrogance turned everyone off to the device. People only bought the Wii because its cheap. Look at the Xbox360. Now that its $199 its selling like hotcakes, even in this economy.

CDs (better sound quality than MP3 and AAC, but lost an establish market).

Theres several things wrong with this argument as well.

First of all, CDs haven't lost their market. Sure, sales are down dramatically, but CDs still move more music than online stores.

Second, most people are listening to music in their car, with iPod pack-in earbuds, some $100 boombox CD changer from Walmart, or other low quality headphones like Bose or some Sony in-ear set. So they can't tell the difference between a CD and low quality AAC or MP3 file.

Third and most importantly, I can go buy a song from Napster, iTunes, Amazon, Zune, Real, or any of the other online music stores out there, even in the DRM days, and burn it to a CD that will play anywhere on anything. I can even legally rip that CD back into another lossy format to play on a device other than what the DRM originally restricted you to. Back a few years ago, I knew people who didn't even own iPods yet but they were buying music from iTunes. Why? Because they could burn it to CD.

You simply cannot do that with video. If I buy a video from Amazon, I'm stuck with a handful of WMV devices to play it on. If I buy a video from iTunes I can play it on my computer, my iPod, my iPhone, and an Apple TV. I can't burn it to disc or even play it in the software of my choice.

Music succeeded online because of the fact that, even with DRM, you could still do what you wanted with it. Even if you bought a song from iTunes you could legally play it on anything, whether it be an iPod, a CD, or legally ripped back (though with a bit of quality loss that most people won't notice anyway) to another format. With online video you simply can not do that. That is why blu-ray and DVD will continue to live on for many many years to come. Both offer higher quality than you get online right now. DVD is still leagues above the standard definition content on iTunes, Amazon, Xbox, Netflix, and OnDemand/PPV services, in terms of video and especially audio. And blu-ray just mops the floor with everything else. 4.5Mbps H.264 720p video with a lower bitrate than the DVD 5.1 soundtrack just does not compare to 40Mbps 1080p H.264 video with uncompressed PCM or lossless compressed audio.

On top of all of that, blu-ray and DVD have the advantage of being able to be played anywhere and anything in the case of DVD, and nearly everything for blu-ray. Nearly any PC built within the last 3 years that doesn't have an Intel GPU has the horsepower to run blu-ray movies. A simple $129 external blu-ray reader that requires no more installation than plugging in a USB cable will do. You get that and you can play it on any nearly any Windows PC that has a Core 2 Duo or 3GHz P4/Athlon64 2GHz (those things are 6 years old now so don't tell me people don't have equal systems), and any nvidia or ATI GPU from the last 3 years.

To make it short, physical media will still live on well into the next decade and probably even beyond that. Why? Quality. Blu-ray discs have been developed that can handle 200GB. That means you can put full length movies on a single disc that would run at bitrate of about 160Mbps. Universal compatibilty. DVDs, CDs, and blu-rays can be played anywhere on nearly anything. I know people who own iPods who still burn CDs for their cars because its cheaper and easier than buying an $80 FM transmitter that requires changing the station preset every few miles. Plus ease of use. When I got my first blu-ray player a few weeks ago, I plugged in 2 cables, power and HDMI, I turned it on. It asked me my TV resolution and if I wanted "the highest quality audio". After that and ever since then I've been able to pop in a blu-ray disc and enjoy the movie with the best picture my TV has to offer and uncompressed/lossless audio. No fussing with internet connections, no advanced configuration of any kind like other streaming devices require.

You must be vision impaired because the difference between a Blu-ray disc [1080p] versus an NTSC DVD disc [480p] is 600 lines of resolution. That 600 line resolution figure is greater than the entire total resolution of your precious DVDs.

Theres a lot more to it than that ;) The total pixel count for DVDs is 345,600 pixels onscreen at a time. Blu-ray is 2,073,600.

Blu-ray offers 6 times the pixel count of DVD.

We compared a Blu-Ray movie to the same movie on DVD and it was very close. Yes the Blu-Ray was better, but not worth re-purchasing the movie (something that drove the DVD market).

So close that my friend actually returned his Blu-Ray player.

I have The Dark Knight and Transformers on blu-ray and DVD (yes two copies of each).

The difference between the two is completely night and day. In fact, its staggering how much better The Dark Knight looks. Thats using my Sony BDP-S350 blu-ray player to upscale, as well as my PC (all properly configured according to the instructions over at AVS) to play DVDs. Blu-ray is better than DVD in more ways than DVD was better than VHS.

MikeTheC
Feb 28, 2009, 01:35 AM
@ mosx:

That was quite a thing you talked about there. However, I'm not sure how Blu-ray addresses my own needs, since I don't watch TV and rarely watch movies. Also, how do you hook up a Blu-ray player to an RCA Proscan and get 1080p out of it? I'm really not clear on that point.

ptsube
Feb 28, 2009, 01:50 AM
WRONG and already posted who it was 3 posted above yours..

Obviously Blu-ray is a consortium, but Panasonic holds the most patents and therefore receives the most royalties.

Michael CM1
Feb 28, 2009, 01:57 AM
Some people in this world are even more stunningly full of it than I imagined.

First of all, business. I posted a link to this like 24 hours ago. What does it take to get credit? But I digress. Too many points to hit.

• Optical media are about as dead as the NFL (or EPL or La Liga for you Europeans). I pray that the people claiming optical media are dead are literally children. I buy some software online and maybe a few TV shows. But where does the vast majority come from? Uh, optical media. iLife '09, iWork '09, Mac OS X -- guess what? None of them are available for download! Basically, if you think optical discs are dead, you're just f#@%ing stupid.

• Blu-ray is not dead. In fact, it was one of the few sectors that saw growth this holiday season in the US. The USA Today story I read said it was growing faster than DVD was at this point in their life cycles. If you don't think Blu-ray Disc players and movies are worth it yet, HOLY CRAP DON'T BUY ONE. How long was it until EVERYBODY you knew had a DVD player? One of the best things about the emergence of Blu-ray is the player makes your old DVDs look better -- and still plays them. None of those stupid DVD/VHS combos, no need to ditch a single DVD in your collection. The players have been dropping like crazy and the TV shows/movies have been dropping a bit as well. Go look at Smallville Season 6 at Amazon. It's about $35 on BD. You still have to shop around so places like Circuit City don't rip you off with $35 movies and $80 TV series.

• I pity the fools who think 1920x1080 resolution is a "modest" improvement over 720x480. Do the math -- it's more than twice the pixels. If you want to make this claim, drop your computer monitor's resoultion down... yeah, I didn't think so.

• Any movies or TV shows you buy from iTunes are DRM-ridden. Get used to DRM on movies. If CDs had actual DRM, then we would have never seen iTunes Plus.

• The point isn't Blu-ray looking better on a 15-inch screen. The point is being able to play a BD movie on yet another device. As some poster said, I don't want to have to buy a BD to play on my HDTV and a DVD to play on my computer. (If you have a BD and want to rip like you would a DVD, one word: Netflix)

• The licensing problems were because multiple companies owned the copyrights. Yes, this probably should've been addressed with the birth of DVD, but it wasn't.

• HD DVD is dead. I don't care what advantages it had nor the advantages of Betamax. Sony was smart and put BD in the PlayStation3. Blu-ray won. After Betamax and MiniDisc, they deserved a win.

OK, enough of my fact-correcting and preaching. I'm just glad that another wall was knocked down so at the very least Apple will have to come up with a new excuse for not adding support. If Sony and Dell can make laptops with BD-ROM drives for about $800, Apple can add a BTO option to ANY computer and build in support in Snow Leopard.

Slim02
Feb 28, 2009, 01:59 AM
Obviously Blu-ray is a consortium, but Panasonic holds the most patents and therefore receives the most royalties.

Wrong.. There was 9 and all 9 get the same royalties until they added new members.. The patents here have no weight seeing the rights where a group thing not a one company thing..

The "Blu-ray Disc Founder group" was started in May 2002 by nine leading electronic companies: Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung. On February 19, 2002 the companies announced that they were the "Founders" (not one company like you say) of the Blu-ray Disc and later changed their name to the "Blu-ray Disc Association" on May 18, 2004 to allow more companies to join their development. Some examples of companies that signed in include Apple, TDK, Dell, Hewlett Packard, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. and Universal Music Group. As of December 2007, there are more than 250 members and supporters of the Association.

It is all in black and white.. It was a group not one company..

illegallydead
Feb 28, 2009, 02:57 AM
The only Blu-ray movie I have is of Serenity... and I have the HD DVD of it, too. :rolleyes:

haha good taste my man. One of my favorite movies by far :D

MrCrowbar
Feb 28, 2009, 03:27 AM
haha good taste my man. One of my favorite movies by far :D

Good flick indeed. The Firefly TV show sold like crazy once the DVD was out, think it even broke a record in DVD sales. I learned about it by IMDB-ing the Terminator show and Summer Glau's in both. I'm also pissed that Fox has given that show (Terminator) the death sentence by moving it to friday night... Season one on BluRay is sweet though.

Cloverfield is also pretty intense on BluRay although the interlaced mode (was shot with handheld cameras that can't do progressive) is ugly when there's lots of motion.

I'm all for new Ultradrives (i.e. better than Superdrive) in Macs so you can play BDs as well. Burning BDs could be a pro feature. I suppose blank BD discs are expensive as hell and take ages to burn, hard drives are just the better deal.

GaryMcT
Feb 28, 2009, 03:39 AM
I will not buy another mac until they have blu ray drives in them and they can play blu ray/AVCHD in real-time.

NightFox
Feb 28, 2009, 04:29 AM
All these people saying that Blu-ray is dead and that internet-streaming is the future - I hate to alarm you, but there's a big bad world outside of these forums in which people who like to watch quality video don't have computers in their living rooms. Many don't have broadband, and some of them, believe it or nor, don't even own computers :eek:

kornyboy
Feb 28, 2009, 04:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I'm ready to see bluray drives in macs. This has been a long time waiting for this. I hate that the this has been such a difficult hurdle for so long.

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 04:44 AM
It still has regions, unlike HD DVD.

It's still alive, unlike HD-DVD.

(and the majority of BDs are region free)

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 05:06 AM
Some people in this world are even more stunningly full of it than I imagined.

First of all, business. I posted a link to this like 24 hours ago. What does it take to get credit? But I digress. Too many points to hit.

• Optical media are about as dead as the NFL (or EPL or La Liga for you Europeans). I pray that the people claiming optical media are dead are literally children. I buy some software online and maybe a few TV shows. But where does the vast majority come from? Uh, optical media. iLife '09, iWork '09, Mac OS X -- guess what? None of them are available for download! Basically, if you think optical discs are dead, you're just f#@%ing stupid.

• Blu-ray is not dead. In fact, it was one of the few sectors that saw growth this holiday season in the US. The USA Today story I read said it was growing faster than DVD was at this point in their life cycles. If you don't think Blu-ray Disc players and movies are worth it yet, HOLY CRAP DON'T BUY ONE. How long was it until EVERYBODY you knew had a DVD player? One of the best things about the emergence of Blu-ray is the player makes your old DVDs look better -- and still plays them. None of those stupid DVD/VHS combos, no need to ditch a single DVD in your collection. The players have been dropping like crazy and the TV shows/movies have been dropping a bit as well. Go look at Smallville Season 6 at Amazon. It's about $35 on BD. You still have to shop around so places like Circuit City don't rip you off with $35 movies and $80 TV series.

• I pity the fools who think 1920x1080 resolution is a "modest" improvement over 720x480. Do the math -- it's more than twice the pixels. If you want to make this claim, drop your computer monitor's resoultion down... yeah, I didn't think so.

• Any movies or TV shows you buy from iTunes are DRM-ridden. Get used to DRM on movies. If CDs had actual DRM, then we would have never seen iTunes Plus.

• The point isn't Blu-ray looking better on a 15-inch screen. The point is being able to play a BD movie on yet another device. As some poster said, I don't want to have to buy a BD to play on my HDTV and a DVD to play on my computer. (If you have a BD and want to rip like you would a DVD, one word: Netflix)

• The licensing problems were because multiple companies owned the copyrights. Yes, this probably should've been addressed with the birth of DVD, but it wasn't.

• HD DVD is dead. I don't care what advantages it had nor the advantages of Betamax. Sony was smart and put BD in the PlayStation3. Blu-ray won. After Betamax and MiniDisc, they deserved a win.

OK, enough of my fact-correcting and preaching. I'm just glad that another wall was knocked down so at the very least Apple will have to come up with a new excuse for not adding support. If Sony and Dell can make laptops with BD-ROM drives for about $800, Apple can add a BTO option to ANY computer and build in support in Snow Leopard.

Nice post, i agree with absolutely everything you say (apart from you can download iWork 09) :)

cube
Feb 28, 2009, 05:07 AM
It's still alive, unlike HD-DVD.

(and the majority of BDs are region free)

I am not buying any BD player until it's region free and cheap.

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 05:24 AM
I am not buying any BD player until it's region free and cheap.

You might never be buying a BD player then!!!

I live in the UK and around 70% of my BD library (about 200 movies) is imported from the US because so many are region free.

Here's a list for you http://bluray.liesinc.net/

Fox are the only studio coding all their discs, but they even have started becoming more relaxed.

What did you want to be cheap? Players? Their pretty cheap now and this whole licensing article is about how the BDA are trying to make discs cheaper. Its a win-win situation i think...

MagicWok
Feb 28, 2009, 05:36 AM
I still can't see this ever happening.

Apple's excuse over licensing issues was weak at best. It's a simple fact that Apple are all about iTunes and selling HD movies through this format. Introducing a BR drive would only hurt their sales.

Personally though, I couldn't care about a BR drive in my laptop. I'd rather play on a dedicated player hooked up to my screen, which is how it should be for HD anyway

Otaviano
Feb 28, 2009, 05:52 AM
I really don't agree with the camp that claim adding a play BR drive is such a strong conflict to Apple's business model.

In my opinion the people purchasing video content on iTunes will continue to do so because of the convenience in it. Also delivering computers that are less equipped than the competition might be good for iTunes. However iTunes is not Apple's big earner. Selling computers is where they make the real profits and therefore they need to keep up with the competition.

Also people seem to neglect the fact that adding a BR drive is not only about playing movies. It allows Apple to deliver programs like FCP in one disc, which provide significant savings to them. Also their professional users will soon demand it. Photographers shooting 15GB of pictures in 6 months would sure appreciate being able to make larger back-ups and using fewer discs.

It might not fit into your workflow, but it seems pretty ignorant and pretentious to downplay the need for BD drives in Macs. There are lot of users with workflows that are very different that yours, who need the benefits of BR drives on their Macs.

ccuk
Feb 28, 2009, 05:54 AM
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=jvI&ei=5NioSe6mN4m4sAPBnITiDw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=2008+blu-ray+sales+compared+2007&spell=1 wrong.

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6628383.html “A lot of people think of DVD as an overnight success, but actually if you look back, we have some data from CEA market research that shows three years into the launch of DVD 5.4 million players had shipped into the U.S. market. So if you are comparing DVD to Blu-ray we are actually looking at a considerably larger number of players that have shipped in only 2.5 years into the life of Blu-ray, so we are doing quite well.”

"Color TV registered a little more than 3 percent household penetration after three years, CD was a little less than 2 percent after three years, and DVD saw about 4 percent penetration after three years. In contrast, Blu-ray players are seeing a nearly 8 percent household penetration rate after two and half years, Parsons said."

Blu-ray is doing quite well, despite the economy, and is growing faster than DVD did.



I said people don't want to use complex devices that are limited in scope, such as the Apple TV and the Roku box. The sales of the two devices prove that. Even though the Apple TV sales were up last year, they still pale in comparison to blu-ray and even iPod sales.

Have you seen the Netflix streaming selection? I'm a Netflix member and I can tell you from experience that its terrible. Anyone who buys a Roku box for it is stupid. Not only that but the quality is terrible. The HD streaming on Xbox Live and Roku is worse than Apple TV. VC-1 video encoded at either 3.5Mbps or so or 4Mbps. 720p. And no 5.1 sound. Don't even get me started on how awful the SD quality is. Might as well be VHS upscaled to 640x480.

Cable's On Demand services are of MUCH higher quality than any internet based company. It's typically 1080i at 20Mbps MPEG-2. Still WELL behind Blu-ray but well above Netflix and Apple TV, as well as Microsoft's "HD" video store on Live!.



Actually, the higher quality product here DID win. Blu-ray beat HD DVD and its growing faster than DVD did.

Also, people need to learn that Beta, at the time of launch against VHS, was NOT superior. Sure it had a slightly higher resolution, but those first few generations of Beta tapes could NOT hold a full length feature movie at a higher quality than VHS. On top of that, Sony would not license the technology to any one else, while JVC licensed it to anyone and everyone.

So people need to stop this "Beta beat VHS!" nonsense because its simply not true. At that time Beta was NOT superior to VHS AND Sony's licensing killed it before it even had a chance, after it did finally become "better". And even when it finally was technically better, the market had decided on VHS.



Laser Disc? Are you serious? While it technically had a higher resolution than VHS, it was plagued with problems. CLV discs didn't look as good as CAV discs. But CAV discs basically meant that you had to get up 3 to 4 times during your average movie to flip or swap a disc out. Let's not forget the laser rot issue, which basically gave the discs shorter lifespans than your average VHS tapes. Its not fun when you have to get up every 30 minutes to flip or switch a foot wide disc that won't even last a few years because of poor quality glue.



Thats because the PS3 is overpriced, underpowered, and Sony's arrogance turned everyone off to the device. People only bought the Wii because its cheap. Look at the Xbox360. Now that its $199 its selling like hotcakes, even in this economy.



Theres several things wrong with this argument as well.

First of all, CDs haven't lost their market. Sure, sales are down dramatically, but CDs still move more music than online stores.

Second, most people are listening to music in their car, with iPod pack-in earbuds, some $100 boombox CD changer from Walmart, or other low quality headphones like Bose or some Sony in-ear set. So they can't tell the difference between a CD and low quality AAC or MP3 file.

Third and most importantly, I can go buy a song from Napster, iTunes, Amazon, Zune, Real, or any of the other online music stores out there, even in the DRM days, and burn it to a CD that will play anywhere on anything. I can even legally rip that CD back into another lossy format to play on a device other than what the DRM originally restricted you to. Back a few years ago, I knew people who didn't even own iPods yet but they were buying music from iTunes. Why? Because they could burn it to CD.

You simply cannot do that with video. If I buy a video from Amazon, I'm stuck with a handful of WMV devices to play it on. If I buy a video from iTunes I can play it on my computer, my iPod, my iPhone, and an Apple TV. I can't burn it to disc or even play it in the software of my choice.

Music succeeded online because of the fact that, even with DRM, you could still do what you wanted with it. Even if you bought a song from iTunes you could legally play it on anything, whether it be an iPod, a CD, or legally ripped back (though with a bit of quality loss that most people won't notice anyway) to another format. With online video you simply can not do that. That is why blu-ray and DVD will continue to live on for many many years to come. Both offer higher quality than you get online right now. DVD is still leagues above the standard definition content on iTunes, Amazon, Xbox, Netflix, and OnDemand/PPV services, in terms of video and especially audio. And blu-ray just mops the floor with everything else. 4.5Mbps H.264 720p video with a lower bitrate than the DVD 5.1 soundtrack just does not compare to 40Mbps 1080p H.264 video with uncompressed PCM or lossless compressed audio.

On top of all of that, blu-ray and DVD have the advantage of being able to be played anywhere and anything in the case of DVD, and nearly everything for blu-ray. Nearly any PC built within the last 3 years that doesn't have an Intel GPU has the horsepower to run blu-ray movies. A simple $129 external blu-ray reader that requires no more installation than plugging in a USB cable will do. You get that and you can play it on any nearly any Windows PC that has a Core 2 Duo or 3GHz P4/Athlon64 2GHz (those things are 6 years old now so don't tell me people don't have equal systems), and any nvidia or ATI GPU from the last 3 years.

To make it short, physical media will still live on well into the next decade and probably even beyond that. Why? Quality. Blu-ray discs have been developed that can handle 200GB. That means you can put full length movies on a single disc that would run at bitrate of about 160Mbps. Universal compatibilty. DVDs, CDs, and blu-rays can be played anywhere on nearly anything. I know people who own iPods who still burn CDs for their cars because its cheaper and easier than buying an $80 FM transmitter that requires changing the station preset every few miles. Plus ease of use. When I got my first blu-ray player a few weeks ago, I plugged in 2 cables, power and HDMI, I turned it on. It asked me my TV resolution and if I wanted "the highest quality audio". After that and ever since then I've been able to pop in a blu-ray disc and enjoy the movie with the best picture my TV has to offer and uncompressed/lossless audio. No fussing with internet connections, no advanced configuration of any kind like other streaming devices require.



Theres a lot more to it than that ;) The total pixel count for DVDs is 345,600 pixels onscreen at a time. Blu-ray is 2,073,600.

Blu-ray offers 6 times the pixel count of DVD.



I have The Dark Knight and Transformers on blu-ray and DVD (yes two copies of each).

The difference between the two is completely night and day. In fact, its staggering how much better The Dark Knight looks. Thats using my Sony BDP-S350 blu-ray player to upscale, as well as my PC (all properly configured according to the instructions over at AVS) to play DVDs. Blu-ray is better than DVD in more ways than DVD was better than VHS.


Just as I was losing all hope of finding sensible posts amongst the misinformation that makes up this forum topic, you come along like a bright ray of light.

The only thing I would add is mosx hasn't even posted how the current digital download offerings from the likes of iTunes store pale into insignificance bit-rate wise compared with Blu-Ray and how current internet speeds to the home prohibit support of mass downloads of films encoded at 40Mbps or higher i.e attempting to match the quality offered by the physical disks... nor will they in the near future.

mosx has posted the most accurate, detailed and well explained post, regarding the not so immediate death of Blu-Ray, I have ever seen on this or pretty much any forum. This post should be stickied and should be dugg as far as I am concerned!

mosx
Feb 28, 2009, 06:05 AM
Just as I was losing all hope of finding sensible posts amongst the misinformation that makes up this forum topic, you come along like a bright ray of light.

The only thing I would add is mosx hasn't even posted how the current digital download offerings from the likes of iTunes store pale into insignificance bit-rate wise compared with Blu-Ray and how current internet speeds to the home prohibit support of mass downloads of films encoded at 40Mbps or higher i.e attempting to match the quality offered by the physical disks... nor will they in the near future.

mosx has posted the most accurate, detailed and well explained post, regarding the not so immediate death of Blu-Ray, I have ever seen on this or pretty much any forum. This post should be stickied and should be dugg as far as I am concerned!

Thanks :D

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 06:27 AM
Complete and utter rubbish?
Name an isp that doesn't cap or throttle anything (apart from [the american...] sky) or have a hugely complicated and ambiguous 'fair use' policy.
You don't mean 52MB obviously, your 50mbit connection is virgin right? I doubt you're using cash back/retention deals after you previous comment about dial-up being cheaper (if you can find someone with it, I bet they're paying through the nose for their ignorance), are you exaggerating the price too?
Do you actually get 50Mb down (I do)? - or like 95% of internet users, just assume you get what you pay for. Have you read the virgin fair use policy? Have you watched your speed drop as it hits the cap? Have you seen an 'average' adsl connection (or a good one...)? Most people are stuck with awful internet, and despite bt's promise with fibre to cabinet, I think we have an awful infrastructure, an awful company in charge of our telecoms network, an awful watchdog and an awful lot of incompetent experts and politicians helping/watching...


On topic, it's not great to see excuses being made for bluray delays before it appears, it's stupidly late now. As a customer, who cares about business models etc. Blu ray is the current standard for hd media on discs and there isn't an alternative unless your willing to pirate (consumer feedback). It's a good solution for data backup, drm'd playback or not - it should be and should have been an option for a long time.
There's lots of interesting information floating about relevant to hd media, little on this thread - the blu ray, itunes, licensing debates are just frustrating and this arrogant teaser is all I'm posting. (I blame the other guy...wot?)

ps. Out of the video wars, it's a shame hd-dvd didn't become 'standard', I think the situation (and quality?...) of average media consumption would be better/higher than it is now.

pps. Highly amusing posts and responses brlawyer. You deserve to be singled out as an example and as an excuse to keep reading these forums.

Its not Virgin, and last month i downloaded 450GB of data (legally) so if theres a fair usage policy then they obviously dont care about it. I agree most people are stuck with awful copper wire 2MB max internet connections, and in busy areas that can be reduced to sometimes less than 1MB, but as soon as fibre optic cabling is introduced which is happening at the moment (and the reason for my internet speeds) then we'll all get much faster uncapped internet, there wont be need for a fair usage policy because there will be more than enough speed to go around, look at the case of South Korea for example, where they've had fibre optic speeds for nearly a decade now, we're well behind over here.

HD DVD should be the standard, especially since blu-ray is making no attempt whatsoever to lower its prices, other than in the article we've seen here, and any monopolily like that deserves to fail. As long as they keep their prices high, people will pirate their movies, not everyone other than people in a few first world countries can afford so much to watch a high quality movie.

wizard
Feb 28, 2009, 06:35 AM
...........

To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

Really you might want to reconsider that statement, there are to many variables to make such a blanket statement. For one thing viewing distance is a big factor. Considering that Apple has even higher density displays for desktop usage, as do other manufactures, you point gets blown out of the water by the fact that people buy such displays because they can see the difference and can leverage the higher density displays in their work.

It is one thing to talk about usable resolution, on a screen of a given size, when you are planted on a couch 10-15 feet away. It is another thing to apply those same limits to a screen used in conjunction with a computer or in a much smaller room.

In anyevent one just needs to walk into a showroom and look at HDTVs side by side to see the advantages that 1080P brings to the picture.

cb31
Feb 28, 2009, 06:43 AM
HD DVD should be the standard, especially since blu-ray is making no attempt whatsoever to lower its pricesWhy would they lower their prices now they have their monopoly after bribing the film studios? I hope bluray fails.

Lesser Evets
Feb 28, 2009, 06:47 AM
Why would they lower their prices now they have their monopoly after bribing the film studios? I hope bluray fails.

BluRay WILL fail....in about 6 years when it is over shadowed by non-mechanical data media. BluRay is the last gasp of optical digital media for mass consumption.

cb31
Feb 28, 2009, 06:47 AM
In anyevent one just needs to walk into a showroom and look at HDTVs side by side to see the advantages that 1080P brings to the picture.One of the projector manufacturers, sorry cannot remember the name, ran an event for av enthusiasts. They were shown films using 720P and 1080P and only 30% of the audience could tell which was which. And this is people who are considered experts and were looking for differences.

Joe sixpack couldn't tell the difference and more importantly wouldn't care less. 1080P may be slightly better than 720P in absolute terms but in practice is just marketing one-upmanship.

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 06:49 AM
HD DVD should be the standard, especially since blu-ray is making no attempt whatsoever to lower its prices, other than in the article we've seen here, and any monopolily like that deserves to fail. As long as they keep their prices high, people will pirate their movies, not everyone other than people in a few first world countries can afford so much to watch a high quality movie.

Dude, what are you on about! HD-DVD is dead and buried (for over a year now). The only reason it was cheap was because Toshiba were desperately trying to keep the format alive with Microsoft helping only to keep the format war alive.

BD players have dropped massively since this time last year, you can now get players for £150 and prices are still going down.

The whole point of this single license IS TO MAKE THINGS CHEAPER!!!!

Tallest Skil
Feb 28, 2009, 06:54 AM
I will not buy another mac until they have blu ray drives in them and they can play blu ray/AVCHD in real-time.

You won't be buying a Mac for about six years, then.

The whole point of this single license IS TO MAKE THINGS CHEAPER!!!!

Yeah, because ever since they haven't had to lower prices to compete with anything, no one is buying their overpriced crap.

They HAVE to come up with one license to lower prices at all.

Windows 3.1. How much did it cost? $99.

Windows Vista Ultimate. How much does it cost? $339.

You can charge whatever you want when people HAVE to buy your crap for lack of an alternative.

Seen the price of Office? The fuller suites are around $500 because people HAVE to have it for business.

PCMacUser
Feb 28, 2009, 06:56 AM
Blu-ray is better than DVD in more ways than DVD was better than VHS.

I agree with pretty much everything you wrote in your post except this bit. To me personally, the VHS>DVD move was like going from candles to lightbulbs. DVD>Blu-ray is good, but more like going from lightbulbs to fluorescent bulbs - a definite improvement, but not a total change in the way we do things and our expectations.

cb31
Feb 28, 2009, 07:01 AM
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote in your post except this bit. To me personally, the VHS>DVD move was like going from candles to lightbulbs. DVD>Blu-ray is good, but more like going from lightbulbs to fluorescent bulbs - a definite improvement, but not a total change in the way we do things and our expectations.Absolutely, VHS was rubbish. The difference to DVD was noticeable to the whole population which is why it took off once it reached a mainstream price.

Blu-ray is better but not massively so which shows in the uptake rate. For the vast majority DVD is good enough so why spend a lot more?

spcdust
Feb 28, 2009, 07:20 AM
So, the licensing playing field has changed so I personally expect to see Apple rolling out a Blu Ray Drive option probably in the next but one revisions of their desktop.

Maybe a major iMac revision in the 1st-2nd quarter 2010 incorporating a Core i7 and Blu Ray option.

mdntcallr
Feb 28, 2009, 07:54 AM
I will not buy another mac until they have blu ray drives in them and they can play blu ray/AVCHD in real-time.

I am with you, i can wait, need a new imac 24" but i wont buy until blu-ray is fully integrated.

nor will i upgrade my MBP till i get able to read discs for playback.

apple used to be a tech leader, now it is only some of the time unless it messes with their itunes movie store.

fun fun fun

cube
Feb 28, 2009, 07:54 AM
You might never be buying a BD player then!!!

I live in the UK and around 70% of my BD library (about 200 movies) is imported from the US because so many are region free.

Here's a list for you http://bluray.liesinc.net/

Fox are the only studio coding all their discs, but they even have started becoming more relaxed.

What did you want to be cheap? Players? Their pretty cheap now and this whole licensing article is about how the BDA are trying to make discs cheaper. Its a win-win situation i think...

So be it if I never buy BD. I want ALL discs to be playable.

There are no cheap $99 BD players with BD-Live and so on.

markm49uk
Feb 28, 2009, 08:11 AM
Thats against European business competition laws so it wont happen here, some companies are currently doing it (Such as Orange and BT) but they got hit with big fines so we're seeing it less and less know. Guess its only going to stick in the US where you have IT comms lobbyists laughing in the face of your 'democracy'. My broadband is 52MB and its got no bandwidth usage limit and it costs me in dollars about $30 per month, and so thats why i think digital media is the future. Its also got no bottlenecks on torrent ports which rules :)

What are you talking about ??

Of course they can restrict their service if they want to - can you point me to the European business competition laws that state otherwise - in fact what's this got to do with competition ?

If you are on 52MB broadband then I assume its Virgin - in which case you should read the fair usage element of the Acceptable Use Policy - I quote:

7.3. In addition to the above, Users' provision of IPS may not adversely affect any other users of our network (including telephony and internet services). Further, Users may not include within and/or distribute via an IPS any content without the express consent of the owner of all relevant rights in such content (including but not limited to intellectual property rights). We reserve the right to monitor network traffic and to take appropriate action as required, including the right to restrict any IPS. An example of such adverse usage could be the consumption of a high proportion of the available upload bandwidth over a significant period of time. We will not offer any technical support for the provision of IPS.

Looks like they can take away your service if they feel it's being abused - what's not clear is what the level of usage needs to be ?

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 08:22 AM
Having been lurking here since purchasing the iPhone, I come to realize many seem to think Apple stiffles their customers by lmiting the hardware and software they can se.

I have a Dell XPS with a Bluray player and HDMI. Simply awesome.

I was an HD-DVD fan and was hoping they would have succeeded but they didn't so moved to Blu-ray.

Picture quality is very noticable. The animated movies really show the difference. black Knight whew, unreal on blu-ray compared to DVD.

Sorry Steve Jobs doesn't think you need blu-ray in your computers but while you wait for Apple to allow you to have player built in I will surely have been and will be enjoying my blu-ray laptop

Tallest Skil
Feb 28, 2009, 08:24 AM
Having been lurking here since purchasing the iPhone, I come to realize many seem to think Apple stiffles their customers by lmiting the hardware and software they can se.

I have a Dell XPS with a Bluray player and HDMI. Simply awesome.

I was an HD-DVD fan and was hoping they would have succeeded but they didn't so moved to Blu-ray.

Picture quality is very noticable. The animated movies really show the difference. black Knight whew, unreal on blu-ray compared to DVD.

Sorry Steve Jobs doesn't think you need blu-ray in your computers but while you wait for Apple to allow you to have player built in I will surely have been and will be enjoying my blu-ray laptop

And I'll enjoy my 1080p digital copies of my HD DVDs in iTunes. :)

champ01
Feb 28, 2009, 08:40 AM
And I'll enjoy my 1080p digital copies of my HD DVDs in iTunes. :)

apple is limiting us from the best stuff that other companies have thats the point bruinsrme was trying to make

and that sucks because I always believed apple was Pro
now I believe its more about Itunes and Ipods :mad:

Tallest Skil
Feb 28, 2009, 08:41 AM
apple is limiting us from the best stuff that other companies have thats the point bruinsrme was trying to make

And I'm saying that it's not limiting me, because I just plug my HD DVD drive into my Mac and pull the content from the disk.

ccuk
Feb 28, 2009, 08:57 AM
apple is limiting us from the best stuff that other companies have thats the point bruinsrme was trying to make

and that sucks because I always believed apple was Pro
now I believe its more about Itunes and Ipods :mad:

That is all Apple is about now... it is becoming quite evident they are transitioning their Pro line over to a more consumer oriented one. Where is my Final Cut Studio 3 update... or Logic Studio... or the Shake replacement called Phenomenon... or the Mac Pro update... where are the Cinema Displays vanishing off to before there is a replacement?

Answer: Apple spend a lot more time with the iPhone, iPod and iTunes line up at the moment... which is seemingly delaying everything else. And because of this vested interest in iTunes etc they are neglecting the computer users by attempting to hold back on Blu-Ray.

MrCrowbar
Feb 28, 2009, 09:17 AM
Nice post, i agree with absolutely everything you say (apart from you can download iWork 09) :)

Actually, you can Download iWork 09. Just download the trial version and try it out. If you like it, you can simply buy the license and activate your trial version. And "boom", you got the full version.

I seriously like that whole try-before-you-buy thing. Wouldn't work for games though, as non-casual gamers can easily finish a single player game within 2 weeks. I just hope Starcraft 2 runs ok on a unibody Macbook. That 9400M seems to be fairly decent for low-end gaming.

As for the Mac's ability to play BluRay files: it's really a software issue. Quicktime, even VLC usually can't handle big files. But XBMC (freeware media center, it's Front Row on steroids) plays everything I throw at it without a single stutter and perfectly in sync, even the high bandwith BluRay samples out there. I use my Mac Mini (stock Core 2, 1.83 GHz, 1 GB RAM) as home server (hooked up a fairly big external drive) and media center. It's nice on a big TV with bluetooth mouse and keyboard. Couch computing rocks. :)

GQB
Feb 28, 2009, 09:39 AM
To be honest there isn't much point watching blu-ray on a screen smaller than 30 inches anyway.

3...2...1... begin flames. :)
But you're absolutely correct. HD < 30" = vanity purchase.

GQB
Feb 28, 2009, 09:41 AM
There's also an environmental impact if Apple puts Blu-Ray drives in their computers: Blu-ray movies use less plastic for its packaging and its actual media. Less plastic = lower carbon footprint.

BJ

And downloads use even less.

lftrghtparadigm
Feb 28, 2009, 09:42 AM
To put this in perspective, we have a thread of people cheering about the idea of including a drive on Macs to enable the playback of $50, single movie discs.

What is this, 1998?

How about we forget this Blu Ray calamity and encourage Apple to add all conceivably interesting high-definition content to the iTunes store????

Its simply amazing to me that people who consider themselves Apple fans or Apple users, manage to completely block out reality.

:apple: Apple has spent years building and highlighting and improving the iTunes Store. iTunes is THE media distribution method, as far as Apple is concerned. The more unity between Mac software and iTunes Store content, the better. This is Apple's goal.

Yet Apple users are here, frothing at the mouth, over the prospect of Apple doing a complete 180 and make a big move AWAY from their digital media commitment, to include a floundering and largely unpopular "HD" drive, that will merely playback a $50 blu-ray disc.

So instead of getting you to buy, lets say, (4) $9.99 HD titles from the iTunes Store (hypothetical future price), and watching them on your Mac, Apple is going to do substantial R&D to include a new disc drive that is complete LOSS for them. They spend money to develop and include a new feature (that would then become a standard), that has no method of bringing in additional revenue, and in fact will hurt their #1 media revenue stream.

Yeah, sorry Apple fanboys but you can drop this one in the same waste bucket as the iPhone Nano.

Apple has the ability to look and think for longer than 3 seconds, so therefore, this won't be happening. Sorry.

GQB
Feb 28, 2009, 09:43 AM
Less plastic than what? Downloads take up no plastic. As for DVDs there was no reason to sell them in oblong shaped boxes in the first place, they are circular :p

For apps like logic pro, most of the packaging is to house the manuals.

The packaging's purpose is to facilitate display and easy viewing in a rental store rack.

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 09:44 AM
And I'll enjoy my 1080p digital copies of my HD DVDs in iTunes. :)

I have more HD-DVDs than Blu-rays

GQB
Feb 28, 2009, 09:48 AM
In regards to the image quality, I disagree with you. A simple side by side comparison of a TV show or movie in Standard Definition and High Definition dramatically showcases the significant quality difference in image and picture. Perhaps your definition of a "marginal increase" is different from mine but in my view, 480i vs. 1080p or even 720p is a huge increase in image quality.


But that's the whole issue... no one does 'side-by-side' comparisons in their home, and if you watch them sequentially is very hard for most people to see enough difference to go through a technology shift. The key here is 'most people', i.e. numbers that drive a major technology shift.
VHS to DVD was a noticeable difference for your average electronics consumer... the bigger driver of late has been 16:9, not resolution. I'll wager that widescreen has been the biggest driver, not HD.

Tallest Skil
Feb 28, 2009, 09:52 AM
3...2...1... begin flames. :)
But you're absolutely correct. HD < 30" = vanity purchase.

Besides the valid size argument, there's the concept of PIXELS as well.

Example: my roommate has a Sony laptop that has a Blu-ray player.

The laptop has a max resolution of 1600x900.

There is the standard "Full HD 1080p" sticker on the laptop, but the highest resolution available on the laptop's screen is, as I said 1600x900.

Oh, and it has integrated graphics. Not even a 9400M-comparable chip.

Spymit007
Feb 28, 2009, 09:53 AM
To put this in perspective, we have a thread of people cheering about the idea of including a drive on Macs to enable the playback of $50, single movie discs.

Single movie Blu-ray discs retail at $35 at the highest but you can find plenty of these titles for $20 or less on Amazon or on sale at Best Buy.

Apple has spent years building and highlighting and improving the iTunes Store. iTunes is THE media distribution method, as far as Apple is concerned. The more unity between Mac software and iTunes Store content, the better. This is Apple's goal.

Well Apple's selection is piss poor not to mention the quality is subpar as well so they need to step it up if they really want iTunes to be "THE media distribution method." I guess they didn't realize that negotiating with the movie studios was going to be a lot tougher than negotiating with the recording industry.

GQB
Feb 28, 2009, 09:57 AM
That all depends. The people who train themselves to notice the differences probably aren't actually watching the movie....they just keep staring at the picture telling everybody else how clear it is.

:) Post of the week.
When I rent or download movies to my AppleTV, I really make myself stop and think whether or not I need to get it in HD. Most content does not look noticeably better, and even when it does make some difference, I almost never notice after 5 minutes if I get engrossed in the movie.
There are some things where ultimate resolution does make a difference, but that's a much smaller percentage than videophiles will admit.

DakotaGuy
Feb 28, 2009, 09:57 AM
Absolutely, VHS was rubbish. The difference to DVD was noticeable to the whole population which is why it took off once it reached a mainstream price.

Blu-ray is better but not massively so which shows in the uptake rate. For the vast majority DVD is good enough so why spend a lot more?

The quality difference depends on what equipment you are using to watch the video. I have a 42" 1080p Toshiba REGZA with a Panasonic BD30 Blu-ray player and a Yamaha receiver with Bose AM16 6.1 speakers. The receiver is capable of decoding Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio. Both picture and sound are greatly enhanced on Blu-ray over standard DVD.

Now if you are watching the video on a 32" or smaller TV and just use the regular TV speakers, then I would agree there probably is not a lot of difference other then richer colors. If you get into the larger TV's, 47" and up then the difference becomes even more noticeable.

I'd like to get a new iMac when they finally update them and I would also really like a BD drive in it. Not so much for movies on my computer, but the fact that I could burn 25GB SL and 50GB DL discs. I keep an external 750GB Maxtor external HDD hooked up for Time Machine back-ups, but I also like to back up my music and photos every now and then and store in a different location then my house. I know that sounds silly, but house fires do happen and there is no way you can replace pictures. Also replacing a 6,000 song iTunes collection would not be cheap nor easy. Right now I have to use DVD's to do an occasional back-up to keep off-site (at my job location). I'd love to be able to use BD discs and use one for music and one for photos.

As far as the people who try to say that physical media is dead. I don't believe that for many reasons. It might not be the main storage and distribution method in the future, but there is always going to be a use and BD is pretty future proofed. They can always engineer discs with more layers and more storage capacity. Apple is just being stubborn because they have claimed that all physical disc media is dead and they don't want to make it appear otherwise. I think they would get rid of the DVD-CD ROM drive on their computers if they could, but they know what would happen if they did that. We are not talking about 3.5" floppies here, we are talking about a great new disc technology. There is no reason that a so called "top of the line" computer like a Mac shouldn't have these drives in them.

Chupa Chupa
Feb 28, 2009, 10:00 AM
This can't come fast enough AFAIC. It's kind of lame Apple hasn't supported it yet, especially in FCP. HD camcorders are ubiquitous. It's crazy Apple has all these video apps to edit HD but no way of burning onto optical HD media. Uploading to YouTube is great, but no more a 100% solution than owning a wardrobe of just jeans and t-shirts (unless you have no life, of course). People want choices.

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 10:04 AM
And I'm saying that it's not limiting me, because I just plug my HD DVD drive into my Mac and pull the content from the disk.

Why should you have to plug anything in?

Although having more HD-DVDs than blu-rays, Any new purchases have been blu-ray.
Why should apple users have to ADD more clutter to their desk/system?

Take a mac book pro, add say $300 to the cost then tell me what other company will be able to come close to what the MBP would have to offer. Being strictly PC I will be the first to say NOBODY!!!!!.

actripxl
Feb 28, 2009, 10:13 AM
Notice how the people that claim blu ray will fail fall into two categories.

1. The HD DVD fanboy that is upset his gamble didn't pay off. Seriously how could anyone not see they would be the one to fall is beyond me. The specs may have been nice, but there was always more muscle behind Blu Ray. The nail in the coffin was its inclusion in the PS3 that HD DVD had nothing to counter.

2. The Digital Download fanboy that fails to realize that most of the WORLD does not have the means to download movies at the required speed. Go to any unindustrialized country and you'll see people selling legal and illegal physical copies everywhere and this will not change for a very long time. DVD was expensive when it first came out and eventually it dropped, history shows that the same will happen with blu ray.

Chupa Chupa
Feb 28, 2009, 10:18 AM
Apple is just being stubborn because they have claimed that all physical disc media is dead and they don't want to make it appear otherwise.

Too true. But remember SJ once said DVD-RAM was the future; that flash wasn't a good storage medium for digital music players, and on and on. When ever Apple/SJ is wrong about something they have an uncanny way of reversing with no loss of credibility. Heck, often even gaining more.

DakotaGuy
Feb 28, 2009, 10:23 AM
Notice how the people that claim blu ray will fail fall into two categories.

1. The HD DVD fanboy that is upset his gamble didn't pay off. Seriously how could anyone not see they would be the one to fall is beyond me. The specs may have been nice, but there was always more muscle behind Blu Ray. The nail in the coffin was its inclusion in the PS3 that HD DVD had nothing to counter.

2. The Digital Download fanboy that fails to realize that most of the WORLD does not have the means to download movies at the required speed. Go to any unindustrialized country and you'll see people selling legal and illegal physical copies everywhere and this will not change for a very long time. DVD was expensive when it first came out and eventually it dropped, history shows that the same will happen with blu ray.

Hey now I was an HD DVD fanboy and for many reasons I thought it would be the best, most economical transition from DVD, however when it lost I moved on and sold my HD DVD player and collection and got into BD. I still like the idea of HD DVD and it's simplicity, but it's gone and it is time to move on.

I think it is pretty sad when Psystar can offer an affordable Mac clone with an available Blu-ray drive, but Apple can't. That is a case of the imitator beating the innovator at their own game.

Tallest Skil
Feb 28, 2009, 10:26 AM
I think it is pretty sad when Psystar can offer an affordable Mac clone with an available Blu-ray drive, but Apple can't. That is a case of the imitator beating the innovator at their own game.

Call me when they can get movie playing support in OS X.

Chupa Chupa
Feb 28, 2009, 10:28 AM
Notice how the people that claim blu ray will fail fall into two categories.

1. The HD DVD fanboy that is upset his gamble didn't pay off. Seriously how could anyone not see they would be the one to fall is beyond me. The specs may have been nice, but there was always more muscle behind Blu Ray. The nail in the coffin was its inclusion in the PS3 that HD DVD had nothing to counter.

2. The Digital Download fanboy that fails to realize that most of the WORLD does not have the means to download movies at the required speed. Go to any unindustrialized country and you'll see people selling legal and illegal physical copies everywhere and this will not change for a very long time. DVD was expensive when it first came out and eventually it dropped, history shows that the same will happen with blu ray.

Yes, but there is a 3rd category. Personally I'm format neutral. I have a PS3 and an HD-DVD player. I still buy HD-DVD media. It's cheap. I buy BD discs when they are cheap too. I also don't mind (legal) d/ls or watching streamed video.

To everyone else:

HD-DVD IS Dead. People need to get over that.

BD IS expensive. My first DVD player was $1000 though and my first DVD (Indecent Exposure) was $25. (That's $25 in 1998 dollars). The price of BD media and players will come down. Heck you can buy Indecent Exposure on DVD now for $7. As more people buying 42"+ sets they WILL see the difference between an upscaled DVD and BD. DVD in a few years will be like VHS today.

Streaming and D/L is great but not everyone has access to fast broadband. 30% of the US population won't for years to come. Streaming and D/L is an option, not a solution.

actripxl
Feb 28, 2009, 10:29 AM
Hey now I was an HD DVD fanboy and for many reasons I thought it would be the best, most economical transition from DVD, however when it lost I moved on and sold my HD DVD player and collection and got into BD. I still like the idea of HD DVD and it's simplicity, but it's gone and it is time to move on.

I think it is pretty sad when Psystar can offer an affordable Mac clone with an available Blu-ray drive, but Apple can't. That is a case of the imitator beating the innovator at their own game.

Yes, but this comment wasn't directed towards you since you let the loss go and moved over to blu ray. My comment is for those that are bitter that like it or not blu will have a healthy life cycle. Heck I'm just waiting for the rumored $100 price drop on the PS3 to get one which by default will put me in the blu camp, and believe me I'm not the only one waiting for this to occur since I wouldn't trying out the games it offer even if I love my 360.

ageha
Feb 28, 2009, 10:32 AM
No you don't need an eagle's eye to see the difference between millions of colors and billions of colors. If you are aware of the issue of color banding, anyone can perceive it quite easily on 8-bit panels.

What are you talking about? Blue-ray is only 8bit.

lftrghtparadigm
Feb 28, 2009, 10:37 AM
Single movie Blu-ray discs retail at $35 at the highest but you can find plenty of these titles for $20 or less on Amazon or on sale at Best Buy.



Well Apple's selection is piss poor not to mention the quality is subpar as well so they need to step it up if they really want iTunes to be "THE media distribution method." I guess they didn't realize that negotiating with the movie studios was going to be a lot tougher than negotiating with the recording industry.

Sorry, they were $50 per disc when I lost interest. Now they are $30 per disc, only 3 times the price of an iTunes movie. Pardon me.

You're absolutely on target regarding Apple's poor selection, but quite obviously, that is for the time being. Once the negotiations succeed the way they have for music, it WILL be an alternative to the blu ray disc experience, at a fraction of the cost.

Not to mention convenience, convenience, convenience.

dukebound85
Feb 28, 2009, 10:39 AM
i see most new blu ray movies in the 15-22 dollar range in stores....

megfilmworks
Feb 28, 2009, 10:41 AM
All these people saying that Blu-ray is dead and that internet-streaming is the future - I hate to alarm you, but there's a big bad world outside of these forums in which people who like to watch quality video don't have computers in their living rooms. Many don't have broadband, and some of them, believe it or nor, don't even own computers :eek:
I doubt this consumer is the target buyer for BR.
They probably don't know it exists or even care, surely not enough to drop $500 on a lousy box to play $30-$50 single movie discs.
And a computer is not needed for Apple TV or Netflix's service.
TV manufacturers are building in this capability so....
Seems the non computer crowd is best suited to non-physical media.

lftrghtparadigm
Feb 28, 2009, 10:46 AM
i see most new blu ray movies in the 15-22 dollar range in stores....

what stores are these? new standard definition dvds are still $15-$25.

New blu ray discs are not 15-22

ptsube
Feb 28, 2009, 10:56 AM
Wrong.. There was 9 and all 9 get the same royalties until they added new members.. The patents here have no weight seeing the rights where a group thing not a one company thing..

The "Blu-ray Disc Founder group" was started in May 2002 by nine leading electronic companies: Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung. On February 19, 2002 the companies announced that they were the "Founders" (not one company like you say) of the Blu-ray Disc and later changed their name to the "Blu-ray Disc Association" on May 18, 2004 to allow more companies to join their development. Some examples of companies that signed in include Apple, TDK, Dell, Hewlett Packard, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. and Universal Music Group. As of December 2007, there are more than 250 members and supporters of the Association.

It is all in black and white.. It was a group not one company..

Wow, how hard is this to understand? It is a consortium of companies. Each company holds certain patents for the technology. Do you think if Panasonic, for example, has 8 patents, and Sony has 4, and Philips has 3 and so on(obviously these numbers aren't correct), that all the companies will receive the same royalties? No, they won't. And not every company in the consortium is contributing a patent. Which means little to no royalties. If you owned a company that was contributing a third of all patents to a new technology, would you be okay with splitting the royalties with other companies that contributed less or nothing at all? Companies may collaborate, but it doesn't mean that they will all make the same amount of money in the deal.

http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20080305PD224.html Royalties, royalties, royalties. That's what it's all about. There wouldn't be Blu-ray without royalties.

Flowbee
Feb 28, 2009, 10:57 AM
All these people saying that Blu-ray is dead and that internet-streaming is the future - I hate to alarm you, but there's a big bad world outside of these forums in which people who like to watch quality video don't have computers in their living rooms. Many don't have broadband, and some of them, believe it or nor, don't even own computers :eek:

Check back with us in 5 years. :p

jayman99
Feb 28, 2009, 11:00 AM
blu-ray is the superior format. and i believe it will be the last optical-based media. the future is going digital download. optical just like the hard drive are going out of date. if blu-ray wants to continue being the last and only optical format, they need more exposure and availability of their format. the ps3 at the moment is holding blu-ray together. the ps4 will be fully digital download-based. blu-ray will be used as a ps3 backward compatible feature and a media center playback device. they better make it cheaper to license bluray playback. if they get the format on computers, it will succeed. if it doesnt make its way to computers, it will not live. the mac professionals are eager for this feature... the future we will see.

DakotaGuy
Feb 28, 2009, 11:03 AM
Call me when they can get movie playing support in OS X.

I was just making the comment that Psystar actually offers the drive and Apple does not.

I don't see how some people can come on here and try to claim that a Mac is better because it doesn't offer a BD drive. That whole logic of thinking doesn't make any sense to me. If you are a person that hates optical media, then don't use it, but for others that like that option it should be available.

I like Macs and if I didn't I wouldn't own one, but Apple needs to get with the times and offer this to their customers.

blu-ray is the superior format. and i believe it will be the last optical-based media. the future is going digital download. optical just like the hard drive are going out of date. if blu-ray wants to continue being the last and only optical format, they need more exposure and availability of their format. the ps3 at the moment is holding blu-ray together. the ps4 will be fully digital download-based. blu-ray will be used as a ps3 backward compatible feature and a media center playback device. they better make it cheaper to license bluray playback. if they get the format on computers, it will succeed. if it doesnt make its way to computers, it will not live. the mac professionals are eager for this feature... the future we will see.

I believe there might be something brewing beyond Blu-ray. It's called HVD. It will all depend on how far resolution is taken and how much space is needed. These discs could possibly hold up to 3.9TB of information in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 11:16 AM
what stores are these? new standard definition dvds are still $15-$25.

New blu ray discs are not 15-22

I have purchased a number of blu-rays at Best Buy for under $22.

There are a number of places on the net that offer excellent deals.

Amazon has good deals very frequently.

$500 blu-ray player? There are many half that price.

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 11:19 AM
blu-ray is the superior format. and i believe it will be the last optical-based media. the future is going digital download. optical just like the hard drive are going out of date. if blu-ray wants to continue being the last and only optical format, they need more exposure and availability of their format. the ps3 at the moment is holding blu-ray together. the ps4 will be fully digital download-based. blu-ray will be used as a ps3 backward compatible feature and a media center playback device. they better make it cheaper to license bluray playback. if they get the format on computers, it will succeed. if it doesnt make its way to computers, it will not live. the mac professionals are eager for this feature... the future we will see.

Where did you get that info about PS4?

Take the media away from the box stores who is going to sell the consoles and accessories?

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 11:24 AM
Where did you get that info about PS4?

Take the media away from the box stores who is going to sell the consoles and accessories?

Totally agree, and if people think digital downloads are the taking over in the near future man their wrong.

Killzone 2 has just come out with some of the most stunning console graphics and guess what they couldn't go lower than 25GBS, only on a BD, couldn't do it on a DVD.

Games designers aren't going to be like ok we now have all this power and storage so what shall we do? Compress our games so that we make it a "manageable" download. No chance. That's just going backwards.

EmperorDarius
Feb 28, 2009, 11:29 AM
Totally agree, and if people think digital downloads are the taking over in the near future man their wrong.

Killzone 2 has just come out with some of the most stunning console graphics and guess what they couldn't go lower than 25GBS, only on a BD, couldn't do it on a DVD.

Games designers aren't going to be like ok we now have all this power and storage so what shall we do? Compress our games so that we make it a "manageable" download. No chance. That's just going backwards.

In the future the internet connections will be much more faster. With a 1GB/s download speed, Killzone 2 could have been downloaded for just 25 seconds, with a 500MB/s download speed, 50 seconds, with a 250 MB/s for 100 seconds , with 100MB/s 250 seconds, with 50 MB/s 500 seconds (a bit more than 8 mins) etc. So it doesn't really seem that impossible to me.

champ01
Feb 28, 2009, 11:34 AM
blu-ray is the superior format.
the future is going digital download.
the ps4 will be fully digital download-based.


what are you talking about?

blyray aint superior but its damn good
2nd you don't know anything about the future
and tell me is the ps4 comming this christmas?

ikir
Feb 28, 2009, 11:39 AM
Jobs was talking complete crap. Acer can shift a <£500 laptop with a BR drive.

Which probably sucks hard time other than blueray. Turn on the brain before write.

Jobs said the licensing was difficult and it is, now is it cheaper and simpler as we read.

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 11:46 AM
believe there might be something brewing beyond Blu-ray. It's called HVD. It will all depend on how far resolution is taken and how much space is needed. These discs could possibly hold up to 3.9TB of information in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc

Blu-Ray just got Pwned.

3.9TB? I wouldn't need an external hard drive ever again.
Saying that though, Panasonic are developing a 2TB SD card for release in 2010, so I still don't see the need for disk media anymore.

I'll just be able to store HD movies on the SD card in my Macbook Pro's SD Multi Card Reader in the Express Card Slot, and then when i want to watch them on my TV slot that into my TV's Multi Card Reader, or when i want to share them with my friend, just slot them in their laptops card reader, but with a BR disk you have to worry about scratching it, burning times, its delicacy, cases, naming it because they all look the same, the expensive cost of them, their one and only single use unless its +-RW etc etc....

Bubba Satori
Feb 28, 2009, 11:53 AM
Choice is good. I'm selling quite a few laptops with Blu-ray and HDMI. Wish it was availble for my Apple customers.

bruinsrme
Feb 28, 2009, 11:55 AM
In the future the internet connections will be much more faster. With a 1GB/s download speed, Killzone 2 could have been downloaded for just 25 seconds, with a 500MB/s download speed, 50 seconds, with a 250 MB/s for 100 seconds , with 100MB/s 250 seconds, with 50 MB/s 500 seconds (a bit more than 8 mins) etc. So it doesn't really seem that impossible to me.

yeah in the future we will capture the power of the sun and wind.

Who wil be providing the services pushing that much bandwidth? Most providers can barely provide 10Mbits per second. Here you are talking 500MBps. Please tell me you are talking Mbps and not MBps because 500MBps is 40,000 times more information per soecond than 10Mbps.

EmperorDarius
Feb 28, 2009, 12:11 PM
yeah in the future we will capture the power of the sun and wind.

Who wil be providing the services pushing that much bandwidth? Most providers can barely provide 10Mbits per second. Here you are talking 500MBps. Please tell me you are talking Mbps and not MBps because 500MBps is 40,000 times more information per soecond than 10Mbps.

Afaik the fastest internet connection is 40 Gb/s which is about 5 GB/s download speed. In the future providers may provide something like 100-200 MB/s for a low price.

aygie
Feb 28, 2009, 12:51 PM
In the future the internet connections will be much more faster. With a 1GB/s download speed, Killzone 2 could have been downloaded for just 25 seconds, with a 500MB/s download speed, 50 seconds, with a 250 MB/s for 100 seconds , with 100MB/s 250 seconds, with 50 MB/s 500 seconds (a bit more than 8 mins) etc. So it doesn't really seem that impossible to me.

Never said it was impossible, but what your talking about is 10-15 years off at least i think.

Blu-Ray just got Pwned.

What by? A $15,000 player? :D

stevielee
Feb 28, 2009, 12:51 PM
In the future the internet connections will be much more faster. With a 1GB/s download speed, Killzone 2 could have been downloaded for just 25 seconds, with a 500MB/s download speed, 50 seconds, with a 250 MB/s for 100 seconds , with 100MB/s 250 seconds, with 50 MB/s 500 seconds (a bit more than 8 mins) etc. So it doesn't really seem that impossible to me.


And just when is that "future" supposedly going to show up - in 2020?

The US is ranked somewhere around 15th in terms of our high speed internet rates. Number one is Japan - which is approaching 100MB/S, followed closely by South Korea. The median download speed in the US is a pathetic 2.5 -3.0 MB/s.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/broadband-Internet,news-2326.html

We are being purposely "throttled" by our monopoly ISP's. That will continue, and accelerate, until they - along with the mega Media industries - can institute a "closed" two or three tiered Internet access system. One for Corporate, for-profit media giants like Apple, who will eventually acquire "exclusive" rights to deliver their content at the very highest of speeds (50MB/s ++), and everyone and everything else will be shunted off into tortoise speed pipelines of a couple MB/s, or even less. This tiered system, now being quietly implemented, assures that big Media can do business without any download speed restrictions, and at the same time they can slowly strangle all of the PTP and torrent sites that now threaten their absolute dominance in the delivery of any digital media content not controlled by them.

http://ubuntu-tutorials.com/2007/08/21/comcast-is-starting-the-tiered-internet-whether-we-like-it-or-not/

By not adopting Blu-Ray, Apple is effectively restricting any HD Media content on the Mac to it's very own, exclusive distribution portal: iTunes.

To all of the brain dead, manufactured consented droids on this thread, spouting the Apple Inc. party line that iTunes is "all you need" for HD Video access on the Mac, welcome to your future - circa 1984.

I wonder what ever became of that pretty blond in a track suit, swinging the hammer?

actripxl
Feb 28, 2009, 01:10 PM
Funny thing is that just this week they tallied up digital download vs physical media when it came to the PS3, 360, and the Wii for a grand total of 1% of software purchased. Before you start spouting about Steam, the AVERAGE consumer fits a lot more closely with consoles than the hardcore crowd that tend to gravitate towards the PC.

No one is saying digital downloads won't come to be a viable option, it just won't be with in the next 5 years like some you delusional individuals seem to think. The reality is we're looking at least 10 years before Digital truly takes hold and by then blu ray has more than run its successful course.

Slim02
Feb 28, 2009, 01:11 PM
Wow, how hard is this to understand? It is a consortium of companies. Each company holds certain patents for the technology. Do you think if Panasonic, for example, has 8 patents, and Sony has 4, and Philips has 3 and so on(obviously these numbers aren't correct), that all the companies will receive the same royalties? No, they won't. And not every company in the consortium is contributing a patent. Which means little to no royalties. If you owned a company that was contributing a third of all patents to a new technology, would you be okay with splitting the royalties with other companies that contributed less or nothing at all? Companies may collaborate, but it doesn't mean that they will all make the same amount of money in the deal.

http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20080305PD224.html Royalties, royalties, royalties. That's what it's all about. There wouldn't be Blu-ray without royalties.

WOW that says nothing but what I have posted.. I think it is you that does not understand... Yes all 21 have the same amount of money because it is a GROUP not one company...

Slim02
Feb 28, 2009, 01:22 PM
In the future the internet connections will be much more faster. With a 1GB/s download speed, Killzone 2 could have been downloaded for just 25 seconds, with a 500MB/s download speed, 50 seconds, with a 250 MB/s for 100 seconds , with 100MB/s 250 seconds, with 50 MB/s 500 seconds (a bit more than 8 mins) etc. So it doesn't really seem that impossible to me.

Yes faster but with a bandwidth cap on usage.. Yes their already have caps on bandwidth is call COMCAST and other ISP are following suit to do the same.. Just because speed gets faster does not mean there well not be caps on how much you can download and stream...

illegallydead
Feb 28, 2009, 01:27 PM
Yes faster but with a bandwidth cap on usage.. Yes their already have caps on bandwidth is call COMCAST and other ISP are following suit to do the same.. Just because speed gets faster does not mean there well not be caps on how much you can download and stream...

As I have said in previous posts, it is a reasonable assumption that if they are able to increase speeds by that much, they will also be able to increase total capacity of their lines, meaning that you will able to download more, faster. In other words, yes, their will still probably be caps, but I would say it is safe to assume that they will be much higher than they are today (~250GB)

And if digital DL's really do take over, I imagine Crapcast will come out with a package of some sort where you pay more a month to increase or even remove your monthly cap...

BroghamerJT
Feb 28, 2009, 01:42 PM
The availability of Blu-ray disk support on the Macintosh platform is long overdue. We expect state-of-the-art products from Apple, but the current DVD technology represents video standards developed in the late 1940s (480i). DVDs offer double the refresh rate (480p), but no increase in resolution. The quality of both video and audio provided by Blu-ray (1080p video and lossless/uncompressed audio) is orders of magnitude superior to DVD. Most of the current Apple displays support true high definition (1920 x 1080p), as does their video authoring software (iMovie HD and Final Cut Pro).
While Time Machine is a good product, it only backs up susceptible hard drives to susceptible hard drives. The 50GB Blu-ray optical media provides over 10 times more storage than the 4.7 GB available from DVD and is considerably more robust. Toast 10 supports data backup using Blu-ray R and RE disks on Mac Pro computers.
I have a third party (MCE) Blu-ray disk drive in my Intel-based Mac Pro. The only way to play Blu-ray theatrical disks on this computer is to boot into a Microsoft Operating System (XP or Vista). On a 30-inch screen, the image quality will take your breath away. How embarrassing to Apple is this?

Porco
Feb 28, 2009, 01:44 PM
I have to wonder at the people saying regions are bad but supporting iTunes over Blu-ray... I think iTunes is more region-controlled than even DVD was, by virtue of the way the stores are national, not even zoned roughly by continents!

One of HD-DVD's major strengths was its lack of region coding, but I believe it was in the specs for HD-DVD and could have been added later had it won the format war (? correct me if that's wrong anyone, it's academic now anyway).

For example, I bought Stephen Chow's Chinese Odyssey on Blu-ray recently. It doesn't have a UK Region B release, it might never do so. But because it's region free it doesn't matter. If I leave it up to Apple to decide which films are for me and which aren't, based purely on whether the studios and Apple think it's worthwhile for them, I may miss out on many films I want to buy. Everyone who likes foreign films should care about this, regardless of all other arguments. It's not great when there is music on iTunes that isn't available outside of one store, but at least CDs have no regions or DRM.

So anyway,

DVD regions: 0-8 (practically speaking 1-6 for most people)
Blu-Ray regions: A, B, C (and the majority of discs are region free and can be imported from/to anywhere in the world).
iTunes stores: currently 61, divided by nationality.

Imagine if Blu-ray had 61 regions!! People would be going nuts. Yet in iTunes that is ok because it's 'the future', and never mind the quality is worse and the internet isn't up to the task for most people (and unlikely to be for a Blu-ray shaped while).

BTW, I'm not saying Blu-ray's region coding is a good thing, and I really do want a region free BD player as soon as they become more affordable. But using that as an argument for iTunes and against Blu-ray makes no sense to me.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple and Microsoft and maybe others quietly decided between themselves to back different formats to try and kill both off. Apple's membership of the Blu-Ray board / association/ club whatever hasn't really been worth anything much to us mac users yet has it? And Microsoft wimped out when they didn't make an X-Box with a HD-DVD drive built in. The PS3 may still be pricey, but Sony stuck their neck out because they seem to genuinely want Blu-ray to succeed.

It's also funny how Blu-ray is "a bag of hurt" for the mac, but not for Pixar apparently, who have arguably released some of the best-looking Blu-rays discs out there. So another good question might be: Why is Steve Jobs favouring Windows users over Mac users when it comes to media quality?

BroghamerJT
Feb 28, 2009, 01:45 PM
The availability of Blu-ray disk support on the Macintosh platform is long overdue. We expect state-of-the-art products from Apple, but the current DVD technology represents video standards developed in the late 1940s (480i). DVDs offer double the refresh rate (480p), but no increase in resolution. The quality of both video and audio provided by Blu-ray (1080p video and lossless/uncompressed audio) is orders of magnitude superior to DVD. Most of the current Apple displays support true high definition (1920 x 1080p), as does their video authoring software (iMovie HD and Final Cut Pro).
While Time Machine is a good product, it only backs up susceptible hard drives to susceptible hard drives. The 50GB Blu-ray optical media provides over 10 times more storage than the 4.7 GB available from DVD and is considerably more robust. Toast 10 supports data backup using Blu-ray R and RE disks on Mac Pro computers.
I have a third party (MCE) Blu-ray disk drive in my Intel-based Mac Pro. The only way to play Blu-ray theatrical disks on this computer is to boot into a Microsoft Operating System (XP or Vista). On a 30-inch screen, the image quality will take your breath away. How embarrassing to Apple is this?

twoodcc
Feb 28, 2009, 01:48 PM
i can't wait to see blu-ray drives on all new macs!

stevielee
Feb 28, 2009, 01:49 PM
And if digital DL's really do take over, I imagine Crapcast will come out with a package of some sort where you pay more a month to increase or even remove your monthly cap...

No need to "imagine" when "Crapcast" will do this.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39855/103/

ptsube
Feb 28, 2009, 01:59 PM
WOW that says nothing but what I have posted.. I think it is you that does not understand... Yes all 21 have the same amount of money because it is a GROUP not one company...

As a group they get the same amount of money from licensing fees. Then they split it up among the member companies according to their respective stakes in the consortium.

You think they all just equally split the Blu-ray royalties? That's ignorant and absurd.

Spymit007
Feb 28, 2009, 02:01 PM
what stores are these? new standard definition dvds are still $15-$25.

New blu ray discs are not 15-22

Iron-Man on Blu-ray is $18.99 on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Iron-Ultimate-Two-Disc-Live-Blu-ray/dp/B001GAPC1K/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1235851114&sr=8-1

Transformers on Blu-ray is $18.99 on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Transformers-Two-Disc-Special-Live-Blu-ray/dp/B000NTPDT6/ref=pd_bbs_3?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1235851114&sr=8-3

If you buy over $25 worth of stuff on Amazon, you get free shipping too. So new Blu-ray discs ARE $15-$22 though there are plenty of single movie discs that cost more but not by much and more than likely their prices will go down in the near future.

Beric
Feb 28, 2009, 02:06 PM
I'm looking forward to increased Blu-ray useage. Then I might actually get a drive. But just think, you could put an entire TV series on one or two disks, at current DVD quality.

JesterJJZ
Feb 28, 2009, 02:21 PM
For all the ones spewing that physical media is dead you gotta step back and realize something. If downloads begin replacing optical discs, CDs will be the first to go, then DVD/Bluray YEARS after that. Last I checked everyone is still selling CDs and will continue to do so for at least the next 10 years.

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 02:47 PM
Yes faster but with a bandwidth cap on usage.. Yes their already have caps on bandwidth is call COMCAST and other ISP are following suit to do the same.. Just because speed gets faster does not mean there well not be caps on how much you can download and stream...

People need to stop going on about 'Comcast' who the *** are comcast? we're talking about the whole earth here, not some stupid company in the US. South Korea have had 30MB+ optic broadband for decades, and without bandwidth caps, and without issues, so why would the game be different when optic broadband comes to the rest of us?

For all the ones spewing that physical media is dead you gotta step back and realize something. If downloads begin replacing optical discs, CDs will be the first to go, then DVD/Bluray YEARS after that. Last I checked everyone is still selling CDs and will continue to do so for at least the next 10 years.

Digital music downloads have been outselling physical media such as CD's by 3 to 1 for some time now....
Add that to all the music illegally downloaded, its about 10 to 1 according to official figures, im sure its even more than that in reality.

JesterJJZ
Feb 28, 2009, 02:57 PM
Digital music downloads have been outselling physical media such as CD's by 3 to 1 for some time now....
Add that to all the music illegally downloaded, its about 10 to 1 according to official figures, im sure its even more than that in reality.

Yet CDs are still around and will be for a long time...what's your point? Cds need to go away before anything else does, so there's not much of point in discussing the end of physical media for video yet. I like having something I can place on a shelf and take to a friend's house to watch when I want. So do many others.

sedril
Feb 28, 2009, 03:11 PM
Let's not forget Pioneer has found a way to have 400GB on one disk...

Check this article out, I read about this a while back...

LINK (http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/07/pioneers-blu-ray-disc-hits-400gb/)


That in itself could open up more options, especially since it says it'll be backward compatible with blue ray disks...

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 03:26 PM
Yet CDs are still around and will be for a long time...what's your point? Cds need to go away before anything else does, so there's not much of point in discussing the end of physical media for video yet. I like having something I can place on a shelf and take to a friend's house to watch when I want. So do many others.

'Cds need to go away before anything else does, so there's not much of point in discussing the end of physical media for video yet'

LP's and other Vinyl's are still around yet CD's were dominant, so your theory has failed. Give up and admit you were wrong.

Porco
Feb 28, 2009, 03:48 PM
'Cds need to go away before anything else does, so there's not much of point in discussing the end of physical media for video yet'

LP's and other Vinyl's are still around yet CD's were dominant, so your theory has failed. Give up and admit you were wrong.

Surely Vinyl and CDs still being around proves that physical formats still have a future. Unless you're saying that only the dominant format or system deserves any attention whatsoever, in which case it's a little like saying 'go and use Windows and forget OS X and Linux', for example.

Also, Blu-rays hold digital files rather than analogue material, we're essentially talking about distribution of the same stuff at varying quality levels. Until the ability to distribute HD video at high quality over the internet is dominant enough that it's trivial and feasible for everyone to access it at a quality level that satisfies everyone, (especially including the content creators in order to make money) physical formats have a future.

MikeTheC
Feb 28, 2009, 03:54 PM
Until the ability to distribute HD video at high quality over the internet is dominant enough that it's trivial and feasible for everyone to access it at a quality level that satisfies everyone, (especially including the content creators in order to make money) physical formats have a future.
Pretty much. I know this thread is about Blu-ray, but I still use DVDs. I'd much rather have a disc somewhere at hand than not. Frankly, when it comes to all the other digital content formats (say, for iPod, iPod Touch, etc.) I'd rather roll my own. I just can't bring myself to trust any other organizations to put stuff out that isn't locked down, restricted, or otherwise not sufficiently forward-looking enough to dare risk it.

If that's wrong, then I don't really want to be right. Nothing against Apple. Just sayin'...

MagnusVonMagnum
Feb 28, 2009, 03:55 PM
Apple cannot even seem to get 5.1 Dolby Digital support in Quicktime (you have to add Perian to get ANY support what-so-ever for 5.1 output) so I wouldn't hold my breath about them adding Blu-Ray any time soon and IF/WHEN they do, who wants to bet it'll be a half-arse attempt with no support for the audio standards it includes, etc. just like with Dolby 5.1 on current Macs? It's funny how Apple TV (running a form of OS X) has 5.1 pass-through support, but regular Macs get no support. I'm afraid everything Apple does is to try and force you to buy some other product they're pushing (and Apple TV itself pushes the iTunes store like mad, having search functionality for their store, but not your own media!)

Rumors have it that Quicktime X will finally support Dolby Digital properly on regular Macs, but I'll believe it when I see it. What about DTS passthrough, then? Do you really think we'll get Dolby True HD or the newer DTS stuff when they don't even do Dolby Digital 5.1 over a DECADE after it made its appearance? Apple used to be on the cutting edge of things, but now it seems like they're always anywhere from a few steps to YEARS behind on so many different things and want to push their pet gadgets (like iPods) instead of keeping OS X and their Mac hardware up-to-date.

Apple likes to bash companies like Microsoft over the head for not supporting things like browsing standards, but then Apple turns around and doesn't support proper media standards! It just smacks of hypocrisy. So many of Apple's products could do/be so much more if Apple weren't constantly crippling them in some manner to try and force you to buy more iTunes Store crap (which in terms of music I wouldn't even TOUCH until recently when most of the DRM disappeared and 256kbit became available). Maybe the greedy media industries aren't totally paranoid about Apple having too much power because look how they use it. Where is the consumer in all this? He's still stuck in them middle getting screwed on both ends as it were.

mosx
Feb 28, 2009, 03:59 PM
Blu-ray is better but not massively so which shows in the uptake rate. For the vast majority DVD is good enough so why spend a lot more?

Well, as one of the links I posted stated, Blu-Ray is growing faster than DVD did at the same point in its life, about twice the rate. Blu-Ray literally has double the marketshare 2.5 years into its life that DVD had 2.5 years into its life.

Like the one person said, people seem to think DVD was an overnight success. But in reality, it didn't finally break 50% marketshare and "overtake" VHS until 2003. A full SIX years after the format launched.

People seem to forget that DVD launched in 1997 and didn't really become popular until around 2001-2002.

Yet Apple users are here, frothing at the mouth, over the prospect of Apple doing a complete 180 and make a big move AWAY from their digital media commitment, to include a floundering and largely unpopular "HD" drive, that will merely playback a $50 blu-ray disc.


I don't know what you're talking about, but Amazon's average blu-ray prices around $20. At Best Buy and Fry's its about $25.

And again, how is Blu-Ray unpopular? Click the links in an earlier post of mine and you'll see its growing faster than DVD did at the same point in its life.

So instead of getting you to buy, lets say, (4) $9.99 HD titles from the iTunes Store (hypothetical future price), and watching them on your Mac, Apple is going to do substantial R&D to include a new disc drive that is complete LOSS for them. They spend money to develop and include a new feature (that would then become a standard), that has no method of bringing in additional revenue, and in fact will hurt their #1 media revenue stream.

Thats too bad for them if Blu-Ray hurts iTunes sales.

I mean if you want to look at it that way, including optical drives in their Macs allows people to play DVDs, which hurts Apple's revenue when it comes to SD rentals and purchases. If thats so bad for Apple, why haven't they just gone back to CD writers or started pushing the sales of external HDDs while including their restore media on Flash drives?

Owning Blu-Ray now, theres no way I could go from 1080p video encoded at 40Mbps+ H.264 and VC-1 video with lossless audio down to 720p 4.5Mbps H.264 with Dolby Digital audio that doesn't even have a bitrate comparable to DVD.

Sorry, they were $50 per disc when I lost interest. Now they are $30 per disc, only 3 times the price of an iTunes movie. Pardon me.

Most blu-ray discs I see are $20-$25.

Let's not forget that while blu-ray might be an average of $10 more than a movie from iTunes, it offers 6 times the resolution and 30 times the video bitrate, while offering uncompressed/lossless multi-channel audio compared to iTunes mostly stereo 128Kbps AAC encoded audio.

You're absolutely on target regarding Apple's poor selection, but quite obviously, that is for the time being. Once the negotiations succeed the way they have for music, it WILL be an alternative to the blu ray disc experience, at a fraction of the cost.

Really? So Apple is going to go from 480p video up to 1080p? Don't bring up the 720p stuff on Apple TV, seeing as how thats only available to a fraction of the amount of people that currently own Blu-Ray.

Not only does Apple have to increase the resolution by 6x, they have to bump the video bitrate from the current 1.5Mbps H.264 up to 40Mbps+ H.264, like Blu-Ray. On top of that, they'll have to go from their extremely low bitrate AC-3 or AAC audio up to multi-channel lossless or uncompressed audio.

Oh and let's not forget the restrictions! Will I still only be able to play it on a computer, iPod, iPhone, or Apple TV? Can't burn it to a disc and play it on anything? No thanks.

Not to mention convenience, convenience, convenience.

What convenience? For a downloadable movie to equal that of a Blu-Ray disc its going to have to be the same 25-50GB in size that Blu-Ray movies currently are. I'm certainly not going to shell out $150 a month to Charter or Verizon for their 60 and 50Mbps internet services. On my current 10Mbps service or even the upgraded 20Mbps service that both offer here, it's still going to take 2-3x longer than the movie is to download it at that quality.

I'm certainly not going to settle for less quality than Blu-Ray now.

Even standard definition movies from iTunes take a longer time to download than it takes me to drive to the local grocery store and rent a blu-ray from the RedBox machine. Even if they don't have what I want, Hollywood Video is within walking distance. I can be there and back in less time it takes to download a sub-DVD quality film from iTunes.

And again, wheres the convenience with all of the restrictions put on downloadable movies? If I download a movie from iTunes I have to watch it on my computer, my iPod, or my iPhone. If its a rental I can't even watch it on my 5.5G 80GB iPod because Apple likes to force people into buying new hardware all the time. If I want to hook my UniBody MacBook up to my HDTV to watch the movie I just downloaded, since I can't burn it to a disc, I have to get a mini-DisplayPort adapter to DVI, DVI to HDMI, connect the cables, connect an optical cable with a mini-TOSLink adapter, and then I have to go through the trouble of configuring my home theater system to take audio and video from two different sources when HDMI is designed to do it all in one cable.

And the best part of ALL of that is the fact that after I've connected the mess of cables, compared to the ONE HDMI cable on my blu-ray player, the SPDIF standard that optical cables use can NOT handle the high definition audio formats! So I'd have to spend HOURS downloading the film with equal image quality, go through the hassle of connecting endless amounts of cables, and go through the trouble of getting OS X to disable the built-in display of my MacBook without closing the lid and connecting an external keyboard and mouse, only to discover that the audio standards Apple has chosen to include in all of their Macs cannot handle the new audio formats. Lovely.

They probably don't know it exists or even care, surely not enough to drop $500 on a lousy box to play $30-$50 single movie discs.

Good Blu-Ray players can be had for just a little over $200. That includes Profile 2.0 players.

Movies range from $15-$25 these days with only a few hitting $30.

And a computer is not needed for Apple TV or Netflix's service.

And neither service compares to blu-ray. The "HD" service on both is roughly 3.5-4.5Mbps VC-1 or H.264 (4.5 and H.264 in Apple TV's case), 720p video. Netflix, in their blog, has stated that they cannot offer any sort of true surround sound (multi-channel digital audio) in their current setup, and Apple uses lower than DVD bitrate AC-3 (Dolby Digital).

Blu-Ray is 40Mbps+ H.264/VC-1 and on a handful of old releases MPEG-2, with uncompressed PCM or lossless compressed Dolby TrueHD or DTS Master HD audio.

Theres just no comparison. Thats like putting a golf cart in a street race against a Dodge Viper, with Netflix and Apple TV being the golf card and Blu-Ray being the Viper.

Apple TV/iTunes standard definition service is below DVD quality in terms of audio and video performance and Netflix, I can tell you from experience, might as well be VHS quality.

One final thing: I think people would rather stick with DVDs than go to Apple TV or Netflix streaming for HD. Sure Apple TV and Netflix "HD" might have a higher native resolution than DVD does. But at least upscaled DVDs don't have the massive amounts of compression artifacting that Apple TV HD and Netflix HD do. Plus DVDs tend to have a higher audio bitrate as well as options for DTS sound. Despite the higher native resolution of Apple TV HD and Netflix HD, DVDs still offer a better all around experience.

Bonte
Feb 28, 2009, 04:16 PM
That all depends. The people who train themselves to notice the differences probably aren't actually watching the movie....they just keep staring at the picture telling everybody else how clear it is.

OMG, so me. I want to see the difference so bad but most of the time the action is to fast to notice the better quality, more pixel-counting than actually enjoying the movie. I have high hopes for the Planet Earth disk i ordered, a slow moving documentary seems perfect for BR but i hardly notice it in movies.

cube
Feb 28, 2009, 04:30 PM
One of HD-DVD's major strengths was its lack of region coding, but I believe it was in the specs for HD-DVD and could have been added later had it won the format war (? correct me if that's wrong anyone, it's academic now anyway).


No, the DVD Forum had ideas about it, but it was never added to the spec.

It's not academic. People should not bend over and accept any region locked BD players.

LethalWolfe
Feb 28, 2009, 04:45 PM
Digital music downloads have been outselling physical media such as CD's by 3 to 1 for some time now....
Add that to all the music illegally downloaded, its about 10 to 1 according to official figures, im sure its even more than that in reality.
Digital download sales have been quickly increasing but still lag behind CDs in terms of sales and even w/the all the buzz over digital downloads overall music sales are still declining.

Numbers from 2007 (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/04/the-long-decline-of-the-music-album-continues/):

-There were 500 million CDs and other physical albums sold last year, and another 844 million digital tracks (or 84.4 million digital “albums”).

-That compares to 588 million digital tracks sold in 2006.

-Digital music accounted for 23 percent of all music sales in the U.S. last year.

Article about 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/arts/music/01indu.html?_r=1):

Despite the growth of online music sales, CDs remain by far the most popular format, although that hold is slipping; 361 million CDs were sold in 2008, down almost 20 percent from the previous year. About 84 percent of all album purchases were CDs, down from 90 percent the year before.

And since CDs remain the record industry’s biggest profit engine, many analysts worry that the industry will be particularly vulnerable to inventory reductions at retail stores. Big-box stores like Wal-Mart and Best Buy account for up to 65 percent of all retail purchases, and many of those stores are sharply reducing the floor space allotted to music, said Richard Greenfield, a media analyst at Pali Research in New York.

Comparing digital downloads to physical sales can be tricky because they are tracked differently. Digital single sales can be tracked independent of complete digital album sales and tracking services might say '10 singles equals 1 album' so a better comparison between album sales (physical and or digital) can be seen.

Lethal

JesterJJZ
Feb 28, 2009, 04:47 PM
'Cds need to go away before anything else does, so there's not much of point in discussing the end of physical media for video yet'

LP's and other Vinyl's are still around yet CD's were dominant, so your theory has failed. Give up and admit you were wrong.

You can't buy LPs at Best Buy. You fail admit you are wrong. :rolleyes:

Every format will always retain a specially niche market in some capacity. We're talking about mainstream. CDs will be mainstream for a long while.

Porco
Feb 28, 2009, 04:50 PM
No, the DVD Forum had ideas about it, but it was never added to the spec.

It's not academic. People should not bend over and accept any region locked BD players.

Oh ok, thanks cube. I meant it was academic in relation to HD-DVD since it lost the format war with Blu-ray, not that region coding per se is academic, I completely agree that ideally people shouldn't accept any region locking, but my point was that iTunes is, in its own way, more controlled by region than Blu-ray or even DVD is, and so that line of criticism when comparing iTunes with Blu-ray is not a good argument for iTunes. And if everything is online, it's a lot easier for the studios to control who and where their movies get sold by legitimately, which is bad for consumers.

Michael CM1
Feb 28, 2009, 04:57 PM
Sorry, they were $50 per disc when I lost interest. Now they are $30 per disc, only 3 times the price of an iTunes movie. Pardon me.

You're absolutely on target regarding Apple's poor selection, but quite obviously, that is for the time being. Once the negotiations succeed the way they have for music, it WILL be an alternative to the blu ray disc experience, at a fraction of the cost.

Not to mention convenience, convenience, convenience.

You're still comparing SD movies on iTunes at their cheapest to Blu-ray (high definition) movies at their most expensive. You should get a job in politics.

I can also tell you that I don't remember any time that the movies were consistently more than $30 anywhere. Best Buy will have a few movies at $35, but I press you to find the people who buy them. As I said, I have not spent more than $30 on any single movie. I have spent more than $25 on one or two. The sets I have spent more than $30 on: Lost Season 3, Lost Season 4, Smallville Season 7.

I bought Lost S3 for $60, Lost S4 for $50, Smallville S7 for $40. Please go to iTunes and tell much how much the season pass for the 720p versions of those shows are. FRACTION OF THE COST MY ASS.

You mention convenience. Well, the only convenience iTunes has is all you have to do is click a few times. I can go down to Best Buy and get a BD movie in less time than it takes to download (at least an hour). As for just easy clicking, I can buy almost anything on BD from Amazon with a few clicks. iTunes wins if you just want a few clicks, don't want to leave the house and don't mind waiting an hour or so. But there is still no purchasing of HD movies and they will likely only be 720p when available for purchase. Then a couple of years later, iTunes will magically let you upgrade to 1080p for just 30 percent of the cost! YAY! It still won't have all the top-notch audio and will be confined to iTunes and AppleTV. Hooray for portability.

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 05:00 PM
You can't buy LPs at Best Buy. You fail admit you are wrong. :rolleyes:

Every format will always retain a specially niche market in some capacity. We're talking about mainstream. CDs will be mainstream for a long while.

So your basing your prediction on future MP3 downloads and sales on the fact BestBuy doesn't sell LP's?
Jeez your making me laugh

JesterJJZ
Feb 28, 2009, 05:39 PM
So your basing your prediction on future MP3 downloads and sales on the fact BestBuy doesn't sell LP's?
Jeez your making me laugh

Best Buy, Target, Walmart, whatever...any retailer. Man you are thick. Best Buy is an easy example, I didn't think I needed to spell it out for you. My point it that until the day comes that a store like Best Buy no longer carries CD, we have no reason to worry about any other physical media going anywhere. It will be DECADES before physical media is fully replaced by digital downloads.

Michael CM1
Feb 28, 2009, 05:56 PM
Best Buy, Target, Walmart, whatever...any retailer. Man you are thick. Best Buy is an easy example, I didn't think I needed to spell it out for you. My point it that until the day comes that a store like Best Buy no longer carries CD, we have no reason to worry about any other physical media going anywhere. It will be DECADES before physical media is fully replaced by digital downloads.

I don't know if downloads will ever kill physical media like CDs. Optical discs are still much more reliable than magnetic disks like hard disk drives. SSDs are super expensive and still infants, so we don't know how reliable they will be.

But your point is right on. Wal-Mart, Best Buy and Target still make a ton of money selling CDs, DVDs and BDs to people. This won't change in 16 months. Even if you presumed that every iPod ever sold went to a different American, half the country would be without an iPod. Since most of us iPod/iPhone owners have owned multiples and iPods are sold in other countries, that's obviously not the case. More people still buy music on CDs BY FAR than in digital formats. It's just that Apple and Amazon rule the rest of the competition in sales, while CDs are split up among hundreds or thousands of companies.

kastenbrust
Feb 28, 2009, 06:00 PM
Best Buy, Target, Walmart, whatever...any retailer. Man you are thick. Best Buy is an easy example, I didn't think I needed to spell it out for you. My point it that until the day comes that a store like Best Buy no longer carries CD, we have no reason to worry about any other physical media going anywhere. It will be DECADES before physical media is fully replaced by digital downloads.

Please don't use personal insults on this forum. It's against the forum rules.

"It will be DECADES before physical media is fully replaced by digital downloads."

Just like it took DECADES for CD's to replace Floppy Disks when Apple decided to get rid of Floppy Drives in their machines...:rolleyes:

Some people are just so scared of change its unbelievable...