Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Blu-Ray sales were far better over the 2008 selling season than anyone seemed to anticipate.

It's especially evident as pretty much stores were picked clean by January of all of the entry level models.

There are absolutely valid reasons that having a physical copy of a film, in extremely high quality, that can be played on any compatible machine is preferable to a DRM protected download with inferior quality that can only be played on the machine/account that it was rented/purchased for.

As more and more people get BD players they are going to want to author in that format not to mention be able to view their BD films on their Mac.

Apple needs to realize that BD will be around for another 5-7 years and the sooner they incorporate BD into their products the sooner they can claim to be the market leader again in the area of audio/video performance for home computing.
 
This is actually not true in many cases.

Given that in the past 18 years of having computers with hard drives, I have YET to have a single drive failure, I find your comments suggesting that I might LIKELY have TWO drives (not in a RAID configuration, but full copies of single 2TB drives for example) fail at the same relative time (before I could replace one of them) pretty far-fetched to say the very least. Would a separate 3rd backup be enough for you or do you think one should have 10+ backups (ideally on 7 different continents) JUST TO BE SURE? ;)

The issue is that we're buying BD movies for our home systems, and we can play them on our Windows machines just fine.

I still don't quite understand why I'd WANT to playback a BD movie on a PC. I think I'd prefer to have a BD player of some kind (be it a PS3 or separate player) rather than try to use my computer to playback movies. While my PowerMac server for my whole house ATV/Airport Express system CAN play movies on my 22" widescreen LCD + Klipsch 2.1 THX speaker setup in my den, I don't really WANT to watch movies on it when I have a 6.1 PSB speaker and Panasonic PT-AX100U 93" screen home theater downstairs.... I'm not THAT lazy that I can't get up and move to the better room.
 
Given that in the past 18 years of having computers with hard drives, I have YET to have a single drive failure, I find your comments suggesting that I might LIKELY have TWO drives (not in a RAID configuration, but full copies of single 2TB drives for example) fail at the same relative time (before I could replace one of them) pretty far-fetched to say the very least. Would a separate 3rd backup be enough for you or do you think one should have 10+ backups (ideally on 7 different continents) JUST TO BE SURE? ;)



I still don't quite understand why I'd WANT to playback a BD movie on a PC. I think I'd prefer to have a BD player of some kind (be it a PS3 or separate player) rather than try to use my computer to playback movies. While my PowerMac server for my whole house ATV/Airport Express system CAN play movies on my 22" widescreen LCD + Klipsch 2.1 THX speaker setup in my den, I don't really WANT to watch movies on it when I have a 6.1 PSB speaker and Panasonic PT-AX100U 93" screen home theater downstairs.... I'm not THAT lazy that I can't get up and move to the better room.

Yes, we get it... You have a big expensive screen and setup. You have posted this a few times. I am sure its great and everything, but it doesn't change other people's opinions on their need of Blu-Ray.

I understand you don't need Blu-Ray on your computers. You are already surprisingly happy with heavily compressed 720p material, rather surprising for a supposed audio visual enthusiast. But what you don't seem to understand is other people do want Blu-Ray on a laptop and on their desktops. Instead of bludgeoning other people into your view point by subjecting us to your home setup specs, maybe take a step back and try and see it from our point of view as well.
 
Given that in the past 18 years of having computers with hard drives, I have YET to have a single drive failure....

If you had the same kind of luck in Las Vegas, you'd be richer than Bill Gates and Warren Buffett combined. :eek:


Would a separate 3rd backup be enough for you or do you think one should have 10+ backups (ideally on 7 different continents) JUST TO BE SURE? ;)

My company maintains 3 live replicas on three continents for critical business data, in addition to continual backups.


I still don't quite understand why I'd WANT to playback a BD movie on a PC.

Ever fly on a airplane and want to watch one of your BD movies?
 
Given that in the past 18 years of having computers with hard drives, I have YET to have a single drive failure, I find your comments suggesting that I might LIKELY have TWO drives (not in a RAID configuration, but full copies of single 2TB drives for example) fail at the same relative time (before I could replace one of them) pretty far-fetched to say the very least. Would a separate 3rd backup be enough for you or do you think one should have 10+ backups (ideally on 7 different continents) JUST TO BE SURE? ;)

Well, I've been in the "computer biz" for 15 years and I've never heard of anyone going that long without a drive failure. I've had about 10 drives fail in 15 years out of the 80+ that I own.

And drive/backup failure isn't the only risk with downloaded content. If the content provider is not around in the future to provide you with the tools to watch your DRM laden content you're hosed.

At least with BD you can always buy a used BD player, even if the format is "dead".

And, if the players/burners are available for Mac then eventually you should have some recourse for making a backup copy at very high quality that can be stored on hard disc, etc, if that is your desire.

And, finally, the quality on the small PC screen isn't the entire issue. People want to author the HD content from their HD camcorders and DSLR cameras onto a BD disc that they can watch in high bitrate 1080P Blu-Ray on their nice home theater setups.

If you can't understand that then you need some help.
 
They'll get the license mid-2009 but does anyone have any guesses as to when blu-ray will be incorporated into macs as an option?
 
It's not "if", it's "when" drives fail

Well, I've been in the "computer biz" for 15 years and I've never heard of anyone going that long without a drive failure. I've had about 10 drives fail in 15 years out of the 80+ that I own.

I have one rig of 240 servers with RAID-0 drive pairs. I have one or two drive failures a week in that set of systems alone.

<480 drives> divided by <5 year MTBF> is 100 drive failures a year, or about 2 a week. (And going back to the non-random failure issue - I clearly see that one series of serial numbers are failing at a *much* higher rate than both older and newer drives.)

My bigger disk arrays have modems that "phone home" to the manufacturer's support site. Their tech calls me to say "you have 5 failed drives, can I come in Friday afternoon and replace them?".
 
I think people who want a "physical copy" of the movie will be a shrinking market. MP3s are out selling CDs by a HUGE margin. The same will slowly happen with games, movies and software.

At some point within the next 10 years, physical media will be nearly non-existent. Harddrives will be 1000s of Terabytes, internet bandwidth will be at Super internet speeds, and Super HD will be too large to carry on blu-ray. Blu-Ray will dominate for a few years, but it will never be as big as DVD or vhs. It will be quickly pushed away by digital media downloads.
 
MP3s are out selling CDs by a HUGE margin.


Wrong. They're not estimated to surpass CD sales until 2012 or later.

What forum geeks don't understand is that very few people have their computers hooked up to their TVs. Physical media still has plenty of life left in it.
 
I think people who want a "physical copy" of the movie will be a shrinking market. MP3s are out selling CDs by a HUGE margin. The same will slowly happen with games, movies and software.

At some point within the next 10 years, physical media will be nearly non-existent. Harddrives will be 1000s of Terabytes, internet bandwidth will be at Super internet speeds, and Super HD will be too large to carry on blu-ray. Blu-Ray will dominate for a few years, but it will never be as big as DVD or vhs. It will be quickly pushed away by digital media downloads.

That's assuming of course, that technology keeps the same pace as it has up to today.

Which won't be happening, as we're facing a reprise of the worst aspects of 1929-1939 economically in the next decade.

Of course, people who haven't experienced anything remotely similar in their lives have no clue about what a Depression does to technological advancement.

Or to computer companies who are woefully lagging on technology as it is.

:apple:
 
Well, I've been in the "computer biz" for 15 years and I've never heard of anyone going that long without a drive failure.

Well, now you have. I've had approximately 13 drives in that time (although 7 of those are in service right now on my current 3 computer setup). I guess when you have the 80+ drives you are talking about, you are going to have a few failures.

And drive/backup failure isn't the only risk with downloaded content. If the content provider is not around in the future to provide you with the tools to watch your DRM laden content you're hosed.

I won't buy DRM content except music videos. All my current content (other than some of my music videos) are conversions from disc formats plus a few downloads from misc. sites.

At least with BD you can always buy a used BD player, even if the format is "dead".

Unless software players stop playing .H264 formats any time soon (like there wouldn't be a conversion option at some point regardless), I don't think I have to worry about my conversions running in the future.

And, finally, the quality on the small PC screen isn't the entire issue. People want to author the HD content from their HD camcorders and DSLR cameras onto a BD disc that they can watch in high bitrate 1080P Blu-Ray on their nice home theater setups.

If you can't understand that then you need some help.

What you don't seem to understand is you can do that ALREADY. Final Cut Pro handles HD video just fine. Toast can burn BD discs for you from the output and supports BD burners in Mac OS X. Unless you need to WATCH commercial BD discs, you can already do the things you are talking about.

Despite certain 'perfect vision' types in this thread, you're preaching to the choir. I've already agreed several times Apple should add BD support to OS X. I've only argued against nonsensical claims about 1080P from people who clearly have neither the setup or the seating distance to make the claims they make and to put down this BS garbage about the supposed awful quality of Apple's 720P movie rentals. I'm not blind. It IS BS (or said people have very very POOR scalers in their 1080P sets, which is entirely possible). Insulting my vision proves nothing.

My other point has been to point out some of us don't want another DISC based format, regardless of resolution. I'll take 1080P as a format, but I want a digital mass storage playback system for my house. I don't want to store/handle and move hundreds of plastic drink coasters anymore or watch all those stupid FBI warnings (like everyone on the planet hasn't seen that warning a million times already and as if one more warning will make any difference one way or the other to ANYONE regardless of their position), advertisements and long-winded menus most discs have. Yeah, it would be nice if AppleTV had 1080P support or if it would get it in the next hardware revision (if there is one) and it would be even nicer if Apple would add more official features (without me having to hack it to get them). But that hardly makes AppleTV useless. I'd like to see an AppleTV with a built-in BD/DVD drive with the option of automatically moving titles into the iTunes server library feeding the system, but I doubt it'll ever happen.

The whole point is a modern home theater should be all about convenience. High quality playback has been available for a long time now (relatively speaking). It's time to refine the experience. This could be as easy for the masses as iPods were/are.

Wrong. They're not estimated to surpass CD sales until 2012 or later.

What forum geeks don't understand is that very few people have their computers hooked up to their TVs. Physical media still has plenty of life left in it.

Forum geeks? Is that not supposed to be offensive?
 
Forum geeks? Is that not supposed to be offensive?

What is offensive is the Clueless continually rationalizing a company's refusal to incorporate cutting edge (and now, it's not even cutting edge but rapidly mainstream) technology in favor of easily stolen downloads.

That's what's offensive.

:apple:
 
What is offensive is the Clueless continually rationalizing a company's refusal to incorporate cutting edge (and now, it's not even cutting edge but rapidly mainstream) technology in favor of easily stolen downloads.

That's what's offensive.

:apple:

Between you calling people clueless and the moderator calling people geeks, I'm wondering if the forum rules on personal insults has been changed or something. Frankly, I don't see what the two things you are referring to have to do with each other. Even if some "clueless" person downloaded a 1080P movie off the Net somewhere, they still couldn't play it on an Apple TV in 1080P. Thus Apple's refusal to adopt 1080P or Blu-Ray doesn't hurt or help piracy. They offer a way to rent 720P movies via Apple TV which encourages legitimate rentals (a sale option would be nice, though) and you can buy 720P TV Shows for both Macs and Apple TV. So where is this connection between Apple and encouraging piracy that you are suggesting?

The only thing I've seen recently suggesting such a thing is the debacle of Hulu trying to stop Boxee from carrying their services (ads and all) and a lot of Apple TV users suggesting they will download tv shows instead of watching ad-based Hulu because apparently Hulu doesn't want them to watch Hulu for some insane reasoning. But Boxee is a hack for Apple TV and therefore has nothing to do with Apple or Apple's refusal to support Blu-Ray at this point in time.

I've said several times now I personally support Apple adding Blu-Ray support to OS X, even if I personally would prefer to rip the movies and store them on the hard drive instead of having to get up to put the disc in (you can only do that rip part in Windows thus far), but either way support for the format would be a good thing. Unfortunately, Apple seems to have this idea that supporting one thing would cannibalize sales in another area which is why we never get a mid-range Mac even though a LOT of us (not to mention PC switchers) would really like one.

So I'd imagine the real reason Apple doesn't want to support Blu-Ray is that they have plans to eventually sell HD movies on iTunes. Unfortunately, their SLOW progress along these lines (rentals on ATV excepted) suggests they cannot get studio support for any kind of HD movie sales and so they're just slitting their own throats by holding off Blu-Ray support in the OS. After all, DVDs compete with iTunes SD movie sales and they haven't yanked DVD support in OS X (although they seem to suggest iDVD will languish in the future) just to push iTunes sales because they know it would hurt the platform when the users revolted. I guess they figure they are better off not adding something than being in a situation where they wish they could remove it later. But this all comes down to the IRON GRIP Apple has on OS X and the conflict of interests that it has with itself by having its hands in OS, hardware AND store front sales sides of things. Microsoft didn't hesitate to add BD support because it's not running a movie store and it doesn't withhold hardware options because it doesn't sell computers.

So whereas that kind of vertical integration helps Apple develop things like the iPhone, it tends to hurt their offerings in both the hardware and OS arena because they constantly act like anything they do in one might hurt something in the other. That would never happen if there were hardware competition for OS X. Apple would be forced to keep up in order to survive and sell things that reasonable prices or go out of business. I think this is a clear situation that demonstrates why a virtual monopoly of ANY type is bad for the consumer. Progress is slow, prices are high and the company doesn't listen to its customers.
 
Thus Apple's refusal to adopt 1080P or Blu-Ray doesn't hurt or help piracy.

Apple refuses to incorporate Blu-ray for two reasons:

1. The potential loss of future sales of movies from iTunes store at typical iCrap resolution for the iCrap generation who don't know any better and don't care.

2. Blu-ray is not easily pirated so therefore is of little interest to the majority of the iPirate iCrap generation.

The truth is Jobs has always fostered Apple market share by making piracy easy.

Apple is essentially waiting for a workable crack of Blu-ray content protection before committing. Probably working on the same, underground as I write.

Which is nothing but a big FU to its established base of highend workstation pro video content creators who have needed a way to deliver Blu-ray content to their customers and their plasma screens for almost two years now.

Without going to Windoze to do it.

But that's fine; they give a great big FU back to Apple by not buying, and the sales figures at the high end show it.

That's the connection between piracy and Blu-ray and the reason for the Blu-ray crawl. Well, that and Apple hellbent on devolving into Mattel because, for now, that's where the money seems to be.

It sure isn't in the high end with abysmal lack of cutting edge performance and features.

:apple:
 
The interesting thing is that kids especially do seem to notice the quality difference with BD over downloads.

Several of my work friends with teenage kids mentioned that their kids all wanted Blu-Ray players for Xmas.

Kids aren't stupid. They might prefer MP3 over CD for the convenience factor, but with a movie they can really see and hear the difference on their parents nicer/newer TVs and home theater setups and they know that BD is better than DVD (or downloads). A lot better. Not to mention that they can take that sweet new X-men Blu-Ray over to their buddies house to watch, as opposed to having to lug a laptop over to watch a 720P-lite copy of the movie since there's no way for them to transport the content itself and play it on any computer.

Every year that Apple resists including BD support in its OS and offering BD hardware options for their machines the more foolish and less relevant they become.

Apple set the bar really high for hardware innovation over the last few years which has seen them rise to market share levels they haven't enjoyed since the mid 80's. It would be a shame to see them piss that all away with a lot of arrogance in this particular area.

BD and downloads are going to coexist for a really long time, at least until downloads can match or surpass BD video AND audio quality, AND there is some sort of "media locker" system that will allow you to play your downloads on multiple machines from multiple manufacturers.

Personally I think that it will be at least 5 years before above occurs. Plenty of time for BD to become the mainstream HD format for home use.
 
Is it just me, or do CGI-animated films look SO MUCH BETTER on Blu-Ray than live action films? :confused: My family just got a 46" Sony Bravia HDTV, and the Pixar films like Monsters, Inc., Cars, WALL-E, etc. look amazing, almost 3-D. Whereas live action films tend to look really grainy, especially in low-light scenes. Overall I'm actually not that impressed with the quality of live action Blu-Ray movies. :cool:
 
Check your TV

Is it just me, or do CGI-animated films look SO MUCH BETTER on Blu-Ray than live action films? :confused: My family just got a 46" Sony Bravia HDTV, and the Pixar films like Monsters, Inc., Cars, WALL-E, etc. look amazing, almost 3-D. Whereas live action films tend to look really grainy, especially in low-light scenes. Overall I'm actually not that impressed with the quality of live action Blu-Ray movies. :cool:

Was your television professionally installed and calibrated? That's the best way to ensure proper setup.

If not:
  • Check the "picture" setting on the TV. In the showroom, TVs are often set to "vivid" for impact. The "cinema" setting is much better for movies.
  • Is your BD player sending 1080p to the TV? Most TVs have an "info" button that will show the actual signal type. It's possible that the BD player is down-sampling to lower resolution. Only trust what the TV itself says that it's getting.
  • Get a "calibrate HDTV yourself" BD or DVD, and follow the instructions. See http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_g...eld-keywords=calibration+dvd&sprefix=calibrat
  • Try different noise reduction/image processing settings - those could be causing the problem.

While quality of BD movies does vary (just like CD and DVD quality), most are excellent. You shouldn't see graininess on the good ones.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Is it just me, or do CGI-animated films look SO MUCH BETTER on Blu-Ray than live action films? :confused: My family just got a 46" Sony Bravia HDTV, and the Pixar films like Monsters, Inc., Cars, WALL-E, etc. look amazing, almost 3-D. Whereas live action films tend to look really grainy, especially in low-light scenes. Overall I'm actually not that impressed with the quality of live action Blu-Ray movies. :cool:

Grain is normal, it's part of the film itself. Even in older "grainy" movies I have noticed a remarkable improvement of the BD over older DVD versions of the same movie.

1. Better color.
2. Better contrast.

Just to name a couple. Sharpness is not the be all and end all of a cinema experience.

Also, as mentioned, most typical families have their televisions adjusted horribly for cinema.

Cinema requires a very warm color temperature (D65) and the sharpness on the TV should be almost zero (for most TV types).

If you have contrast and color temp cranked way up, as well as sharpness, then most of the stuff you put on the TV is going to look like crap.
 
Grain is normal, it's part of the film itself.

I assumed that the "grain" was probably noise (like "mosquito noise") which was emphasized by the vivid picture settings, not an accurate reproduction of the original film grain.

In any event, film grain shouldn't be more noticeable than it is in the theatre. A 2 megapixel HDTV image isn't really capable of resolving the grain on a fine-grained 35mm or 70mm print. And, some films are being shot directly to digital - those should be free of grain ;) .
 
In any event, film grain shouldn't be more noticeable than it is in the theatre. And, some films are being shot directly to digital - those should be free of grain ;) .

I would agree for the most part with this with two exceptions:

- Some directors are using film grain filters on digital movies to 'enhance the look' or retain the film feel.

- Depending on how the Blu-Ray version was mastered, the film grain can actually be made more noticeable depending on the original film, and what sacrifices they make during mastering it.
 
Is it just me, or do CGI-animated films look SO MUCH BETTER on Blu-Ray than live action films? :confused: My family just got a 46" Sony Bravia HDTV, and the Pixar films like Monsters, Inc., Cars, WALL-E, etc. look amazing, almost 3-D. Whereas live action films tend to look really grainy, especially in low-light scenes. Overall I'm actually not that impressed with the quality of live action Blu-Ray movies. :cool:

yes me too, but im also not sure how much is my rptv as well.
 
BluRay is getting easier and cheaper to make but yet, I don't think apple will incorporate it into their products for a good long while.
 
I think he was referring to the number one selling Blu-Ray player out there, known as the PS3. It does NOT play DVDs. Period. Besides, the way you worded it, you're wrong anyway. Blu-Ray only plays Blu-Ray. Combi-players (a term from the old Laserdisc days) are another matter. IF a Blu-Ray player plays DVDs it's because it's ALSO a DVD player. The laser pickup for BD will not read DVD (why PS3 won't play DVDs). It needs a 2nd pickup for DVDs. Streaming Pandora radio is more or less a computer function and so again has nothing to do with BD other than sharing the same space as the BD player.

The PS3 DOES play DVD's. Period. I hate it when people try to spread false information in an attempt to make their argument better. I like a healthy debate, but if you are going to debate on a topic make sure that you are using facts that are true.
 
The PS3 DOES play DVD's. Period. I hate it when people try to spread false information in an attempt to make their argument better. I like a healthy debate, but if you are going to debate on a topic make sure that you are using facts that are true.
I almost fell off my chair when I read that comment. Too funny :) Im pretty sure my 100 DVD collection would have been a waste when I bought my PS3 back in 2006 :p
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.