Blu-ray Support in Mac OS X 10.5.6?

[MrCrowbar]

You should all take a deep breath and read "The Machine Stops" a short story by E. M. Forster. It provides an interesting insight into a world where someone else (them) control all of the conveniences of life (update would be "control our data"), and when the "machine" breaks...

I like all of my data in the "cloud" where I can get to it anywhere, but some stuff, like my personal docs and media, I want close at hand where I can control it. The cloud and my personal copies on physical media back each other up.

So, no physical media won't die for those of us who actually think about failure modes.

Eddie O

True. But at some point, online storage will get cheaper at a faster rate than personal physical storage gets cheaper. People will like the convenience and opt for the online model when pricing is similar.

Hell, I don't even like IMAP because if you delete an e-mail there (from the web interface), it's pretty much gone for good. Too bad the iPhone wasn't made to handle POP3... never in sync with Mail on your computer. I wish iTunes would sync e-mail messages and apply the rules and junk filter on the iPhone so you don't get notified for junk mail when on the go. A clock syncing wouldn't hurt either, iTunes could set the iPhone time to the computer time (which is synced from the internet). My iPhone is off by a minute every month.

 

[solipsism]

Didn't see you said slimline...

http://fastmac.com/slim_bluray.php

http://store.mcetech.com/Merchant2/...D6XMPINT&Category_Code=STORBD&Product_Count=1

As I stated, It's $1000 for the drive and they won't fit into the most popular Macs because they require a 9.5mm slim-line slot-loading drive. Who is going to pay that much just to have an internal drive? Not many. Those that actually need it for professional reasons can use a external tray-loading drive for half the price.

 

[digitalbiker]

As I stated, It's $1000 for the drive and they won't fit into the most popular Macs because they require a 9.5mm slim-line slot-loading drive. Who is going to pay that much just to have an internal drive? Not many. Those that actually need it for professional reasons can use a external tray-loading drive for half the price.

So how come Sony can offer a 3.4 lb, 1 inch thick, vaio Z with Blu-ray drive for less money and better specs than the current MBPs and MBA?

I guess they didn't get the memo that it was too expensive or too big.

Besides, how do we know what dimensions or what type of drive Apple will use in the new models. Maybe Apple will move away from slot loading drives. There was some speculation that they might use a new design bottom loading drive.

 

[solipsism]

So how come Sony can offer a 3.4 lb, 1 inch thick, vaio Z with Blu-ray drive for less money and better specs than the current MBPs and MBA?

I guess they didn't get the memo that it was too expensive or too big.

1) Sony is behind Blu-ray and is desperately pushing the format before digital downloads get good enough for most people to jump from DVD to digital so they can sell these drives for little profit (like they are with their PCs) or even at a loss (like with the PS3) in the short term to push the format forward.

2) If you have proof of a slot-loading BRD that is at a reasonable price-point then point it out to us. If you have proof of a 9.5mm slot-loading BRD even exists then point it out to us.

3) You don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Z-series start at $1800 without a BRD. You have to pay $2079.99 for a 13" notebook before you even have and option for the BRD, which will cost you an additional $500.

4) The Z-series thickness is 1.0" at the front to 1.3". That is 33% thicker than a MBP and considerably more volume over a MB's current case. Again, exactly where would this fit in a MB or MBP that currently takes a 9.5mm drive? Do you think Apple is going to thicken it's cases and move to a tray-loading drive just to accommodate a few foolish people?

5) It's been stated several times now, the Z-series does not use a slot loading drive, yet it still costs $500 and is twice the thickness of the MB's optical drive. Are the words 'slot' and 'tray' really that difficult to comprehend?

PS: This is usually where someone responds with a lame comment that puts Apple on a pedestal and claims that Apple can have these non-existent 3rd-party drives and a much lower pricepoint than larger, cheaper drives simply because they are Apple.

 

[Porco]

1) Sony is behind Blu-ray and is desperately pushing the format before digital downloads get good enough for most people to jump from DVD[....]

2) If you have proof of a slot-loading BRD that is at a reasonable price-point then point it out to us. [....]
[....]

4) The Z-series thickness is 1.0" at the front to 1.3". That is 33% thicker than a MBP and considerably more volume over a MB's current case.[...] just to accommodate a few foolish people?

[....]

1) It's not the quality of the downloads that is the problem for most people, it's the connection speed (or rather the lack thereof) and downloads caps.

2) Maybe they'll get cheaper soon? Like CD and DVD drives did.

4) Maybe they'll get thinner soon? Like CD and DVD drives did.

 

[digitalbiker]

2) If you have proof of a slot-loading BRD that is at a reasonable price-point then point it out to us. If you have proof of a 9.5mm slot-loading BRD even exists then point it out to us.

3) You don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Z-series start at $1800 without a BRD. You have to pay $2079.99 for a 13" notebook before you even have and option for the BRD, which will cost you an additional $500.

4) The Z-series thickness is 1.0" at the front to 1.3". That is 33% thicker than a MBP and considerably more volume over a MB's current case. Again, exactly where would this fit in a MB or MBP that currently takes a 9.5mm drive? Do you think Apple is going to thicken it's cases and move to a tray-loading drive just to accommodate a few foolish people?

5) It's been stated several times now, the Z-series does not use a slot loading drive, yet it still costs $500 and is twice the thickness of the MB's optical drive. Are the words 'slot' and 'tray' really that difficult to comprehend?

So what's your point? I never said any thing about a slot loading drive. I just said that Sony is able to fit a blu-ray drive in a slim light weight laptop at a price point that is similar to the current MBPs and MBA.

If you haven't noticed everyone is talking re-design this time around for the MBP. How do you know that Apple won't taper the laptop similar to Vaio Z or the MBA and move away from slot-loading drives. Slot loading drives are a pain in the a#% anyway.

 

[solipsism]

1) It's not the quality of the downloads that is the problem for most people, it's the connection speed (or rather the lack thereof) and downloads caps.

I know this is an issue in countries like Australia, but in the US it's just starting become an issue. Still Comcast has put the current cap at 250GB. Currently, a 2 hour HD movie from iTS is about 5GB.

Note: Apple not including an internal BRD doesn't mean they can't include the ability to play BR media through an external drive either offered through them or a 3rd-party.

2) Maybe they'll get cheaper soon? Like CD and DVD drives did.

They will, but will it be cheap enough to be viable. As I've noted several times, a slot-loading BRD is cost and physically prohibitive according to all available sources i can find.

4) Maybe they'll get thinner soon? Like CD and DVD drives did.

They will, but when and how much will that shrunken tech will be. Do you remember the uproar when Apple released their first MBP and the 15" model didn't have a DL-DVD burner, but the 15" PowerBook did, because the tech hadn't caught up to the 9.5mm drives that Apple started using.

Note: Panasonic announced plans for a 9.5mm BRD earlier this year, but it was only an announcement and I can't find any additional info on, not even a demo of it at a convention.

 

[neoelectronaut]

I always have the worst timing with buying Macs.

First I bought my eMac about a month before they introduced USB 2.0

Now I bought my iMac right before they introduce Blu-Ray.

****.

Apple better come up with an external solution.

 

[solipsism]

So what's your point?

My point is that you et al. are only thinking with your Apple dicks and not looking at the big picture of what is feasible and possible at this time.

I never said any thing about a slot loading drive. I just said that Sony is able to fit a blu-ray drive in a slim light weight laptop at a price point that is similar to the current MBPs and MBA.

Do you know how ago it has been since Apple used a tray-loading optical drive in a notebook? BTW, if you think 1.3" is a "slim" notebook I would bet you'd trouble telling Rosie O'Donnell and Keira Knightly apart.

If you haven't noticed everyone is talking re-design this time around for the MBP. How do you know that Apple won't taper the laptop similar to Vaio Z or the MBA and move away from slot-loading drives. Slot loading drives are a pain in the a#% anyway.

A redesign in which Apple uses clunkier tech and requires to them to excessively "fatten" up their devices? Occam's Razor says no. I agree that slot-loading drives has some annoying limitations, but that hasn't stopped Apple from using them exclusively in all their Macs, except the Mac Pro in which a full-sized, full-speed tray-loading drive makes sense.

 

[WelshDog]

That's what people said about CD-Rs. It has to start out expensive

CD-Rs were never that expensive. $12.50 for a Sony BD-R right now and that is a price drop. Dual layer is $30.

BR burning/recording won't become pervasive until those prices are cut down to a small fraction of what they currently are. Burner prices must drop as well. AND the encoding time has to be shortened by building rendering accelerator chips into the computers. Encoding for Blu-Ray video is seriously time consuming even with a fast computer.

 

[jpine]

With the release of Mac OS X 10.5.5 earlier this week, Apple should begin work on Mac OS X 10.5.6. Built-in Blu-ray support into Mac OS X would open the door for Apple to finally incorporate Blu-ray drives into their Macs as well as Blu-ray support into their suite of iLife applications. The 10.5.6 update will not come before the rumored notebook revisions in October, but could conceivably be ready by Macworld San Francisco 2009.

Article Link

Forget iLife. DVDSP is WAY past due for an upgrade. Does anyone know of a professional app from Apple that is this long in the tooth? Besides, I get the impression that Jobs does not think optical media is important anymore given the integration of YouTube into iMovie and the lack of integration between iMovie and iDVD.

 

[Lord Zedd]

If Apple hasn't released it in Tiger OR Leopard they certainly aren't going to do it in a point-point release. Blue-ray in Snow Leopard, MAYBE. In a 10.x.x release? NFW.

Burners are already under $300 for the slimline models and under $250 for desktop models. Even less for a bulk purchase company like Apple.

There is NO reason for them to have delayed so long.

 

[iMacmatician]

Oh I get it now

Now everything comes clear.

MWSF 2009 = iLife '09 (with Blu-ray support) + new Cinema Displays (with Blu-ray movie support) + 10.5.6 (with Blu-ray support) + Nehalem Mac Pro (with Blu-ray drive BTO).

But where's the tablet and/or mini-tablet?

i am puzzled at why Apple makes people wait on this.

To wait until macworld would continue the diasppointment of many consumers. they ought to include Blu-Ray Hardware support on the entire macintosh line as new models come out.

Given that two Macs STILL don't have DVD burners, I wouldn't hold my breath on Blu-ray, even readers, coming to the MacBook and Mac mini.

Some says new macbooks will come out in jan 09, some says shipping and will be out on oct 31, some says it will be launched on oct 14.

Soo many romours.......

Can you link me to those rumors?

If you guys want to compare this kind of capability with a 5Mbps or 6Mbps HD stream for both audio and video, I pity you guys.
...
Yes, this is not how majority of people watch home A/V, but again - we are talking about high quality here, not lowest common denominator.

But the question is whether Apple wants to cater to this high quality that, as you've said, "not how majority of people watch home A/V." If so, then we can see Blu-ray. If not, then the likelihood of Blu-ray is decreased quite a bit.

And I don't see cost being the main reason why there's no Blu-ray BTO in Macs, as there are RAM BTO options on the Mac Pro costing way more than any quoted Blu-ray drive prices in this thread.

 

[solipsism]

Now everything comes clear.

MWSF 2009 = iLife '09 (with Blu-ray support) + new Cinema Displays (with Blu-ray movie support) + 10.5.6 (with Blu-ray support) + Nehalem Mac Pro (with Blu-ray drive BTO).

That sounds pretty reasonable.

 

[digitalbiker]

My point is that you et al. are only thinking with your Apple dicks and not looking at the big picture of what is feasible and possible at this time.



Do you know how ago it has been since Apple used a tray-loading optical drive in a notebook? BTW, if you think 1.3" is a "slim" notebook I would bet you'd trouble telling Rosie O'Donnell and Keira Knightly apart.


A redesign in which Apple uses clunkier tech and requires to them to excessively "fatten" up their devices? Occam's Razor says no. I agree that slot-loading drives has some annoying limitations, but that hasn't stopped Apple from using them exclusively in all their Macs, except the Mac Pro in which a full-sized, full-speed tray-loading drive makes sense.

What's up with all the anger? You do realize that most people don't usually explode and start name-calling when someone mentions the change to a different optical format in a laptop.

For your information, Apple uses a tray loading drive in all the standard MacBooks. Only the MBP, and imac use a slot loading drive. The MBP is due for a redesign.

The Sony Vaio Z is a really nice looking light weight laptop it weighs 3.4 lbs. That is less weight than the MBP and almost the same weight as the MBA. So no a re-design including BD does not have to be clunky.

Maybe you should open your mind a little to more alternatives for tech than just being stuck on a design which has had little significant change since 2000 with the Titanium PB.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

So what's your point? I never said any thing about a slot loading drive. I just said that Sony is able to fit a blu-ray drive in a slim light weight laptop at a price point that is similar to the current MBPs and MBA.

If you haven't noticed everyone is talking re-design this time around for the MBP. How do you know that Apple won't taper the laptop similar to Vaio Z or the MBA and move away from slot-loading drives. Slot loading drives are a pain in the a#% anyway.

The point solipsism is using is called a design constraint when making a concerted effort to determine the requirements for Apple to achieve their end game--native BluRay in Macs with a consumer solution for free, combined with a professional level that incorporates third parties.

The BTO that I mentioned on AppleInsider about 9 months ago is the starting point for BluRay on Mac Pros. You're not going to see the Consumer beat the Pro level on BluRay.

Cinemas also have been discussed to death at AI where I drove the angle that Apple will enter the HDTV market [capable displays for both]. They won't go after the large form factor. They'll target the HD end that allows professionals to have a higher benefits/cost ratio.

Regarding Nehalem and the transition from 45nm to 32nm off of TGDaily:

In 2009, Nehalem will be scaled down from a 45 nm to the 32 nm core Westmere. Sandy Bridge will be the successor of Nehalem’s architecture and debut in 2010 as a 32 nm CPU. Ivy Bridge will shrink Sandy Bridge to 22 nm in 2011 and Haswell will be a completely new architecture that is planned to be introduced in 2012 as a 22 nm chip.

If Mac Pros are outfitted with 45nm CPUs then there is a short term transition to 32nm versions. This is where Apple has a decision to make on either offering two Mac Pro refreshes within 6 months, create a middle tier box to be one revision behind [45nm while the Mac Pro gets the 32nm]--highly unlikely, or will they stretch out the current boxes and add BTO options for BluRay, more GPUs and such until the 32 nm chips are ready to roll.

 

[toke lahti]

True. But at some point, online storage will get cheaper at a faster rate than personal physical storage gets cheaper. People will like the convenience and opt for the online model when pricing is similar.

Hell, I don't even like IMAP because if you delete an e-mail there (from the web interface), it's pretty much gone for good. Too bad the iPhone wasn't made to handle POP3... never in sync with Mail on your computer. I wish iTunes would sync e-mail messages and apply the rules and junk filter on the iPhone so you don't get notified for junk mail when on the go. A clock syncing wouldn't hurt either, iTunes could set the iPhone time to the computer time (which is synced from the internet). My iPhone is off by a minute every month.

Optical media will stay cheaper than hdd/sdd at least for a decade.
Maybe you should set your imap client to put deleted messages to Trash, so you can remove them from there later.

 

[Saladinos]

There are two uses for BluRay:

- Data. Requires UDF 2.60. Leopard already has read/write support for UDF 2.60.

- Movies. Requires codecs (VC-1, H.264, MPEG-2), and HDCP-compliant drivers and displays. OSX supports all but VC-1 out of the box. These codecs are mandatory for any device that claims to allow playback of Blu-Ray media. OSX does not have any support for HDCP, and Apple's displays lack support as well. Without HDCP, devices cannot be marketed as "HD ready" in Europe.

To enable Blu-Ray movie playback, Apple would need to:
- Ship a VC-1 codec. FFMpeg provides a free one, but it's likely Apple will want to write their own. Possibly part of QuickTime X that will be brought back to QT7. This is mandatory.
- Add HDCP support

- To the Apple Cinema Displays
- To notebook displays
- To OSX
- To OSX's device drivers for graphics cards​

HDCP is technically not required for Blu-Ray playback. However, some disks may demand it, and will not play back in HD if the system does not support it. That may lead to class-action lawsuits. These lawsuits stand a reasonable chance of winning, as HDCP is required for "HD ready" marketing in Europe and other territories. A judge might not need much convincing to establish that marketing a non-HDCP device as capable of HD movie playback was wrong and misleading to customers.

I doubt Apple will take that route. A more likely course of action is that, as drivers are rewritten for the true-64-bit Snow Leopard, HDCP support will be added. Perhaps Apple will ship a preliminary solution by giving leopard a VC-1 codec only, but I don't see much incentive for that.

 

[DoFoT9]

1. Movies are slow because of connection speeds. You illegally downloading movies is not exactly a prime comparison to a legitimate business model of buying from itunes, amazon, netlifx etc. You defeated your own argument with your "we struggle to even get ADSL2+ in more than 10% of the nation (if that!)" statement. Until, worldwide, both internet connection speeds and the infrastructure behind the internet are such that they can sustain downloads of that size, in mass, physical media will remain a big seller and cash cow for both music and movie companies. Vinyl has seen over a 15% increase in sales last year... so much for wanting everything digital and downloaded then eh?


2. On the topic however, I have no idea why Apple, a member of the Blu-Ray consortium have yet to add support to their own products. It is rather illogical to me why they haven't added the drives. With the current rumors of new notebooks etc, I can't see them being foolish enough to miss the up and coming holiday period of Christmas by not releasing Blu-Ray capable notebooks.

1. illegally downloaded movies (and everything else) is a darn good comparison. if you think about it..if you go onto a torrent site and look at how many times a movie has been downloaded, you will see that it can easily go higher than 100,000 times. that could mean 100,000 more sales for a company. which is quite a lot! it may not be a true comparison, but it is definately biting into the consumer's decisions about whether to go 'legal' or not.

we struggle to get the faster speeds because of our largeness, that doesnt mean that the 10% (which is where around 80% of our population lives) doesnt have fast speeds. if movies were available at HD/BR quality then many people would download them, even on a 256kb cap it wouldnt take that long and would be much faster than on some torrent sites.

oh and vinyl sales has increased probably because old people still think they are 'hip' and 'in with in', and cant adjust to change. but u know... ahwell (ignore the stereotype)

 

[Mal]

For your information, Apple uses a tray loading drive in all the standard MacBooks. Only the MBP, and imac use a slot loading drive. The MBP is due for a redesign.

Umm, what? No they don't. In fact, none of Apple's products except the Mac Pro have had tray-loading drives since about 2002. Have you ever seen a MacBook?

jW

 

[digitalbiker]

Umm, what? No they don't. In fact, none of Apple's products except the Mac Pro have had tray-loading drives since about 2002. Have you ever seen a MacBook?

jW

Yeah, my wife has one and it uses a tray loading drive. It is on the right hand side. You hit eject and the tray pops out. I haven't looked lately at the new MB but I think it is still the same.

Oops, my mistake! I see that the new one does have a slot loading drive. On hers the the lower portion of the back of the laptop pops out with a tray. I didn't realize that these were changed.

Regardless it still doesn't mean that Apple will have to stick with a slot loading drive.

 

[Galley]

Of course, they are gonna start to support BD soon, because I just bought a PS3 today. D'oh!

 

[comradesnarky]

oh and vinyl sales has increased probably because old people still think they are 'hip' and 'in with in', and cant adjust to change. but u know... ahwell (ignore the stereotype)

It's amazing how inaccurate this is. Vinyl sales are increasing because of young people. Heard of scene kids? That's where your vinyl sales are coming from. Also, I'm sure that those people who enjoy pinching pennies notice that vinyl albums can sometimes be half the price as the CD, and usually include a free digital download.

 

[captnfun]

dont get me wrong. i LOVE the quality of bluray movies. i just HATE media. HD's are perfect because you can take one thing with you and have instant access to many movies. "all at the click of a button".

Until the Hard Drive crashes and you lose them all at once.

 

[solipsism]

Yeah, my wife has one and it uses a tray loading drive. It is on the right hand side. You hit eject and the tray pops out. I haven't looked lately at the new MB but I think it is still the same.

Oops, my mistake! I see that the new one does have a slot loading drive. On hers the the lower portion of the back of the laptop pops out with a tray. I didn't realize that these were changed.

Regardless it still doesn't mean that Apple will have to stick with a slot loading drive.

"The new one"? All MacBooks have had a slot-loading drive. They were never changed. This is why I angry with posters on MacRumurs, as opposed to AI, the average age and/or IQ has got to be much, much lower because even the simplest of Google searches seems to be beyond many posters here. Apple transitioned tray-loadng optical drives out of all but the worlstation almost a decade a go and no Intel Mac has had a tray-loading drive, except for the Mac Pro workstation.

You're right, it doesn't mean Apple has to stick with slot-loading drive, but I pointed out incidents where Apple was willing to sacrifice functionality to maintain thinness and noted that they are obsessed with making their hardware thinner. What rationale do you have that a seldom used optical drive would warrant an excessive thickening of the Mac notebook chassis with a a clunky, un-seamless drive that is too expensive for most users, that takes up more space than any other component in the notebook, and holds very little information and is considerably slow compared to HDD and flash storage mediums?

PS: Apple will be phasing be the optical drive out. On the consumer side, the technology is dying. Installing applications and OSes via optical disc is no longer the best method. People don't use their optical drives much as it is and using a Blu-ray reader on a note book to watch a movie with only the battery is foolish, at best. Either Apple will move the optical drive outside of portable Macs with the upcoming case revision or the one after that. That doesn't mean that Blu-ray still can't be supported or be an option when that happened, it just means it won't be an internal solution.