Blu-ray Macs: Early 2007?

[Digitalclips]

It could be a simple BTO option (for the 2G Mac Pro including new 8-Core Model)

I agree and perhaps a burning version too. There is a need out there this for those of us creating HD content with FCPro HD and DVD Pro which will no doubt get an update to support whatever new drives Apple provide.

 

[Digitalclips]

I'll agree that killer hardware needs good killer software to back it up. iDVD greatly complemented the SuperDrives.

Interactivity escapes me on discs. Really are you going to sit through it or do you just want to watch video?

Training and games come to mind ...

 

[Digitalclips]

Betamax, I had a Betamax, even though the tapes were smaller and picture better, the higher capacity VHS won out.

Don't forget Sony won out at the professional end of the market with Beta in one form or another (Umatic, BetacamSP and Digi-Beta etc.) totally dominationg cameras and decks in production and TV studios. It was only the consumers who voted with their check books for crappy VHS.

 

[princealfie]

And why blu-ray? It's expensive and should Mac be on the bleeding edge just to please one guy?

 

[Hobofuzz]

I don't trust Sony.
You never know when their products are going to explode.

 

[Hobofuzz]

Don't forget Sony won out at the professional end of the market with Beta in one form or another (Umatic, BetacamSP and Digi-Beta etc.) totally dominationg cameras and decks in production and TV studios. It was only the consumers who voted with their check books for crappy VHS.

Except in this case, Blu-Ray is the crappy VHS. VHS could hold more video than Betas, but with lower quality. Same goes for Blu-Ray now. Blu-Ray holds more, but uses the crappy old regular DVD encoding. HD-DVD uses a newer encoding method that spits out very, very high-quality video at a fraction of the size of a Blu-Ray movie. That's why Blu-Ray needs so much space, the movie files are huge.

 

[GregA]

Except in this case, Blu-Ray is the crappy VHS. VHS could hold more video than Betas, but with lower quality. Same goes for Blu-Ray now. Blu-Ray holds more, but uses the crappy old regular DVD encoding. HD-DVD uses a newer encoding method that spits out very, very high-quality video at a fraction of the size of a Blu-Ray movie. That's why Blu-Ray needs so much space, the movie files are huge.

I think you ought to get your facts straight.

HD-DVD uses either
1) MPEG2 (ie regular DVD encoding)
2) MPEG4-AVC (ie h264 which Quicktime works tightly with), or
3) VC-1 (ie: Microsofts Windows Media Player 9 format)

Bluray uses either
1) MPEG2
2) MPEG4-AVC, or
3) VC-1

It is the PHYSICAL format of the disk that's different. Nothing else.

edit: Note also that MPEG2 at 25Mbps has been found to be better than MPEG4-AVC or VC-1 at 25Mbps in tests. At 15Mbps the newer ones win easily. Regular DVD maxes out at 10Mbps.

 

[Digitalclips]

Except in this case, Blu-Ray is the crappy VHS. VHS could hold more video than Betas, but with lower quality. Same goes for Blu-Ray now. Blu-Ray holds more, but uses the crappy old regular DVD encoding. HD-DVD uses a newer encoding method that spits out very, very high-quality video at a fraction of the size of a Blu-Ray movie. That's why Blu-Ray needs so much space, the movie files are huge.

Interesting concept. I am pretty sure a 90 minute Betamax held the same length video as a 90 minute VHS . Perhaps you are thinking of the slow record / play mode on VHS decks?

However I think you will find you are totally incorrect about Blu-Ray v HD DVD.

Whatever, I hope there is a dual format support player and burner on the horizon.

 

[Rocketman]

I saw a TV ad today, probably on CNBC for Superman the movie, not sure which one, but probably the latest. Available on DVD, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

All formats.

Rocketman

 

[bozigle]

iLife7

Well
Looking back at the way Apple handle new tech (firewire,bluetooth,HD) they have to do something about bluray and hddvd (not much reason to argue on wich as long as only one remains).
But there is also little point in just providing the player/burner/combo if this is just to play movies.
I guess iLife and DvdStudio need to support those new formats in their next instalment and so does MacOs and quicktime.
Stevy was a strong supporter of HD format very early i don't see that changing now that the supports are out.

Bozigle

 

[Erasmus]

Er...

I'm probably flogging a well dead horse, but...

HD-DVD uses different formats to Blu-Ray?

My CDs full of backed up mp3's have a different format to the original CDs.

Seems to me any disc is in whatever format you put on it. I'm sure that there is nothing but pride stopping Sony from using the HD-DVD encoding on their Blu-Ray discs that is apparently so much better than what they use now.

After all, any computer or media player isn't going to care what media you put in it, as long as it can pull a string of 1's and 0's off it...

 

[bigandy]

However I think you will find you are totally incorrect about Blu-Ray v HD DVD.

You are correct - the two formats can handle the same encoding. MPEG2, MPEG4-AVC and VC1

Er...

I'm probably flogging a well dead horse, but...

HD-DVD uses different formats to Blu-Ray?

My CDs full of backed up mp3's have a different format to the original CDs.

Seems to me any disc is in whatever format you put on it. I'm sure that there is nothing but pride stopping Sony from using the HD-DVD encoding on their Blu-Ray discs that is apparently so much better than what they use now.

After all, any computer or media player isn't going to care what media you put in it, as long as it can pull a string of 1's and 0's off it...

You're slightly off the mark here. Yes, a computer can read those MP3s on your CDs, but what happens if you put them in a bog standard CD Player - they won't work. Same with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Yes, you can store any format on them via a computer, but could the players read them? No. The players have decoders for a specific set of codecs - they won't play a Word file, for example.

The argument here (which has gone round in circles several times due to a lack of information on the subject) is that the standalone players on either side of the fence don't play the same files, or one's better quality than the other, or something.

 

[shayesky]

both formats wont catch on for a while

As someone who produces video for a living for customers (weddings), I can tell you the requests for HD delivery have been few at best. $500 and $900 players and $850 PC burners are just out of the realm of affordability at this point. It is going to take 2 more years before an affordable, and viable customer solution is available for DISC based media. However, the easiest, cheapest and fastest way to deliver HD content to customers is via a Mediacenter which connects directly to the TV. I have had quite a few customers pay the extra few hundred for me to setup one of these units for them, and it works great.

Like most of you, I am holding out for a dual format burner before I start producing HD on DVDs.

 

[bigandy]

As someone who produces video for a living for customers (weddings), I can tell you the requests for HD delivery have been few at best. $500 and $900 players and $850 PC burners are just out of the realm of affordability at this point. It is going to take 2 more years before an affordable, and viable customer solution is available for DISC based media.

just like when DVD came out...

 

[shayesky]

it took DVDs a couple years to catch on. I master everything back to tape
in HDV. So, down the road, I can make those customers HD DVD or Bluray.

 

[Erasmus]

You're slightly off the mark here. Yes, a computer can read those MP3s on your CDs, but what happens if you put them in a bog standard CD Player - they won't work. Same with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Yes, you can store any format on them via a computer, but could the players read them? No. The players have decoders for a specific set of codecs - they won't play a Word file, for example.

The argument here (which has gone round in circles several times due to a lack of information on the subject) is that the standalone players on either side of the fence don't play the same files, or one's better quality than the other, or something.

I'm pretty sure that it's only software that stops this from happening. Modern DVD/CD players can play mp3 CDs, and can probably play mp3 DVDs. I'm sure that they could play short DVD movies recorded onto CDs or a few CDs recorded onto a DVD, although I've never looked or tried it.

Today, you are correct. But in a few years, when third parties start building these things, this will change. The first DVD player we got can't play music on rewritable CDs. The newer, cheap crappy one can.

As "Standalone Players" become more complex and become more and more like computers themselves, what you stick in them and what format it is will become more and more irrelevant.

 

[GregA]

As "Standalone Players" become more complex and become more and more like computers themselves, what you stick in them and what format it is will become more and more irrelevant.

The formats on HD-DVD and BluRay DVD are the same - so no quality difference there. They are the same 3 formats being pursued by HD TV providers around the world often with PayTV

The disks themselves have different capacities and require different lasers to read them. They also have different copy-protection schemes. It's quite possible to make a player that can handle both, but at the moment you can't license both Bluray copy-protection and HDDVD copy-protection on the same player. It'll happen with time.

 

[Links]

....The disks themselves have different capacities and require different lasers to read them....

Wrong, both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD formats use the same 405 nm blue-violet laser diodes.

 

[Links]

X

 

[GregA]

Wrong, both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD formats use the same 405 nm blue-violet laser diodes.

Thanks Links.
All I knew was that Sony was having trouble supplying their blue lasers.
I assumed they were different to HD-DVD.

So one laser will do both eh? Does it need different configuration in any way?

 

[Links]

Thanks Links.
All I knew was that Sony was having trouble supplying their blue lasers.
I assumed they were different to HD-DVD.

So one laser will do both eh? Does it need different configuration in any way?

The lens and focusing systems are different.
Here's a spec sheet comparing the two.

http://www.cyberlink.com/english/support/bdhd_support/bd_vs_hddvd.jsp

 

[GregA]

The lense and focusing systems are different.

But one laser in a single player could be used for both formats?

 

[Erasmus]

But one laser in a single player could be used for both formats?

I daresay the one laser could be used for both formats, plus DVDs plus CDs. Why not? DVD players today use the same laser (99% sure) to read both DVDs and CDs. Just depends where and how well you focus it.

 

[Links]

But one laser in a single player could be used for both formats?

Yes, it's the "brain" the chip that does the work.
There is such as chip, but as you can imagine, neither side would want it to be "approved" for use.

BTW, Toshiba's second gen HD DVD players has been delayed (joining Sony) due to the lack of blue lasers.

 

[Stinkythe1]

Heh... nevermind.