Sure, AIC and ProRes is easier to edit with but with any transcoding there is loss of the original video. I can see a big difference between edited AVCHD into one of these formats vs original footage. Blu ray players are in many homes now. I would like to edit natively and burn to disk to share (if I were still using a Mac to edit) which is why I dumped apple and went back to PC to do this. I'm sure allot more folks are doing the same thing. Time for apple to get off their high horse and provide what customers want. They will be willing to pay the extra fee for this instead of the additional steps required to do this on a Mac.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Final Cut Updates in March or April? Xserve Controversy and Jobs on Blu-ray
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sure, AIC and ProRes is easier to edit with but with any transcoding there is loss of the original video. I can see a big difference between edited AVCHD into one of these formats vs original footage. Blu ray players are in many homes now. I would like to edit natively and burn to disk to share (if I were still using a Mac to edit) which is why I dumped apple and went back to PC to do this. I'm sure allot more folks are doing the same thing. Time for apple to get off their high horse and provide what customers want. They will be willing to pay the extra fee for this instead of the additional steps required to do this on a Mac.
before we go apple bashing lets not forget that the same reason why itunes has drm is the same reason why blurays do- the studios.
lets also not forget that microsoft isn't putting bluray into the xbox either- they've backed downloading too.. (as well as backed hd-dvd)
and apple isnt the only company with their own ecosystem.... ever tried playing a ps3 game on a 360? that has been going on since the beginning of game consoles- yet no one ever complains about that bc its accepted as common sense!!! its no different! you think a movie downloaded on one console will play on another? will Zune content play on itunes? ever tried playing a region 3 disc on a region one commercial player? hmm once again.. studios (and game companies)...
as Neo would say "it was all just another level of control". it's simply up to you to decide which eco system you want to belong too
at least apple gave you the ability to burn your itunes songs onto a cd and re-import or play on other devices drm free
--from an owner of an atv2 (great for tv shows and movies i dont need in HD), a sony blu-ray (for the big budget movies i do want in HD), and an hd-dvd player- bc well.. surprise surprise... the movies are still 1080p and in most cases are the same freaking transfer for only a couple of dollars off ebay and for some strange reason they still play..fine.
I'm sure that many are aware of this, another reason for me to stick with optical media for the time being, as I won't purchase any movie/TV show/music digitally unless it's quality and price is comparable to it's optical counterpart, and unless it will play on all devices I have, i.e. iPhone, PC, mac, 360, PS3. Unfortunately I really cannot see that happening within the next 5 to 10 years if that, as I can't see the studios and hardware manufacturers agreeing on such a solution.
This is another reason that I love Steam as a platform, as long as your PC of Mac is within specification (and the game runs on mac and PC) you can play the game you bought on any system as long as you have logged in online once, after that you can play in offline mode, like I have to at the moment until the broadband is fitted in my new flat.
Wow, this thread cracks me up.
It's amazing that people are are okay with "FairPlay" DRM for video playback, but not blu-ray disc? Which format has the more restrictive DRM? Let's see here.
"FairPlay" (iTunes) content requires HDCP for the monitor, display output, and connection. The video file can only be played on a certain number of computers, and it can only be played on Apple portable devices. You cannot lend the file to a friend nor can you sell it. You also can't take it over to a friends house unless you lug Apple hardware with you and all the appropriate adapters to connect the hardware.
Blu-ray disc requires HDCP the same as iTunes for HD content. The disc can be played on any device that has a blu-ray reader. It can be played on everything from game consoles to PC blu-ray readers, to any set top blu-ray player. It can literally be played anywhere. Plus you can lend it to a friend, take just the disc and not all the hardware to a friends house, and you can sell the disc if you ever choose to.
As for all the other nonsense you hear about blu-ray playback, it's just that, nonsense. I have absolutely NEVER had to update the firmware in my standalone player to play a new movie. Never. Not once. And I only ever had to update the software player in Windows ONE time to play a new movie.
Blu-ray disc is truly plug and play. While you have to jump through all kinds of hoops and use proprietary hardware as well as proprietary adapters to get your iTunes content on to your TV.
Then it comes down to quality. Blu-ray disc video is encoded at up to 1920x1080, up to 45Mbps H.264 or VC-1 video (only a handful of very old first generation discs used MPEG-2), with lossless or sometimes uncompressed audio. iTunes "HD" content? Encoded at 1280x720, slightly less than half the resolution, 4-5Mbps H.264 video (yes, about 1/10th the max bit-rate), and sub DVD quality 384Kbps Dolby Digital audio.
Now let's talk about price.
RedBox does individual blu-ray rentals for $1.50 per night. iTunes is $4.99. And given the file size, even on my FiOS connection, it's still faster for me to go to the local RedBox and get the blu-ray disc I want. Plus I can get that $1.50 blu-ray disc and take it over a friends house and watch it there and not have to lug my Mac, adapters, and cables along with me to watch it.
For purchases, iTunes charges around $20. Target, Walmart, Best Buy, Fry's, Amazon, etc. have a ton of blu-ray discs under $20. In fact, Target and Walmart both have a section dedicated to $10 blu-ray discs. These aren't the same movies you'll find in the $5 DVD bin, but recent releases.
As for sales numbers, I don't see why people keep saying "DVD is outselling blu-ray disc!". For one, thats not always true. Two, people seem to forget that DVD was on the market for 7 full years before it FINALLY overtook VHS, in 2003. DVD's success was NOT overnight. Blu-ray is being adopted faster than DVD was, about twice the rate. Blu-ray disc sales set records nearly every quarter. Blu-ray disc will kill DVD at some point in the future.
But online streaming? People seem to think that "On Demand" and online streaming services will kill blu-ray disc. Not a chance. For a few reasons. One, On Demand is expensive. Again, $5 or sometimes even $6 for a high definition movie. Same movie at RedBox with better quality is $1.50. Or if you watch a lot of movies, a Blockbuster or Netflix subscription costs the same as 3 On Demand movies. If people try to use On Demand services the way they currently watch blu-ray discs or DVDs, they'll be in for a major case of sticker shock at the end of the month when their TV bill comes and it has an extra $40-$50 tacked on.
Online streaming won't kill blu-ray disc or DVD any time soon either. Why? A couple of reasons. One is quality. As myself and others have pointed out already, blu-ray disc runs at twice the resolution with up to 10x the video bit-rate of iTunes "HD" content. Not to mention the better audio. Even the standard definition stuff doesn't match up because theres no good way of scaling H.264 SD video to higher quality displays, while a good upscaling DVD player can easily make a DVD look better (due to lack of compression artifacting) than iTunes "HD" video.
The second biggest reason online streaming won't kill optical media is both bandwidth and metered billing. Believe it or not, in most places around the world, metered billing (Bandwidth caps) is a way of life. ISPs here in the US drool over the thought of metered billing and several have already imposed caps. Smaller cable operators in small towns already have extremely low caps. We have yet to see how things will play out, but we'll probably see metered billing with high overages before we see online video overtake optical media. Then you'd have to factor in the cost to download plus the cost of the video. Online video would die pretty quick if you had to pay $5 for the file then another $2 for bandwidth. Plus theres actual speed. Some of us are lucky enough to live in areas that have FiOS or other high speed connections, but the recent FCC survey showed that most people are on sub-3Mbps connections. That means it would take longer to download that iTunes movie than it would to watch it. With the average blu-ray file being around 25-30Mbps, that means it could take as long as ten times as long as the movie is to download it. I don't know about you, but if I didn't have my FiOS connection, I sure wouldn't wait several hours just to download a movie. Not when I could go to RedBox and get it for a fraction of the price, or have a Blockbuster by Mail subscription that includes in-store exchanges. And the situation regarding internet service in this country isn't going to get any better since the Democrats have no spine and won't stand up for consumers stuck with a duopoly and the "Party of No" have enough people in Congress to stop progress.
So let's summarize here:
All of this nonsense about blu-ray DRM is a myth. OS X already supports HDCP. AACS and BD+ are the "encryption" schemes used by blu-ray disc, the same way CSS and other various forms of disc protection are used on DVD. This would be supported by the player. The same way CSS and other DVD protections have to be supported and updated in the player. blu-ray is absolutely 100% a plug and play technology for every single standalone blu-ray player and the vast majority of computers shipped over the last couple of years. Every shipping Mac supports HDCP, and every Mac with a mini DisplayPort since 2008 supports it.
And most importantly, all of this nonsense regarding blu-ray licensing is also 100% fiction. Shortly after Jobs made that short sighted "bag of hurt" comment, the BDA made changes to licensing fees. Now its a one stop shop and one fee. Just like DVD.
So, the fact that Macs support HDCP, the encryption DRM needs to be supported in the player the exact same way as DVD, and licensing is now no different than DVD means there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for Macs to not support blu-ray disc in OS X. Especially considering I can reboot into Windows on my 2008 unibody MacBook and play a blu-ray disc without issues.
It's amazing that people are are okay with "FairPlay" DRM for video playback, but not blu-ray disc? Which format has the more restrictive DRM? Let's see here.
"FairPlay" (iTunes) content requires HDCP for the monitor, display output, and connection. The video file can only be played on a certain number of computers, and it can only be played on Apple portable devices. You cannot lend the file to a friend nor can you sell it. You also can't take it over to a friends house unless you lug Apple hardware with you and all the appropriate adapters to connect the hardware.
Blu-ray disc requires HDCP the same as iTunes for HD content. The disc can be played on any device that has a blu-ray reader. It can be played on everything from game consoles to PC blu-ray readers, to any set top blu-ray player. It can literally be played anywhere. Plus you can lend it to a friend, take just the disc and not all the hardware to a friends house, and you can sell the disc if you ever choose to.
As for all the other nonsense you hear about blu-ray playback, it's just that, nonsense. I have absolutely NEVER had to update the firmware in my standalone player to play a new movie. Never. Not once. And I only ever had to update the software player in Windows ONE time to play a new movie.
Blu-ray disc is truly plug and play. While you have to jump through all kinds of hoops and use proprietary hardware as well as proprietary adapters to get your iTunes content on to your TV.
Then it comes down to quality. Blu-ray disc video is encoded at up to 1920x1080, up to 45Mbps H.264 or VC-1 video (only a handful of very old first generation discs used MPEG-2), with lossless or sometimes uncompressed audio. iTunes "HD" content? Encoded at 1280x720, slightly less than half the resolution, 4-5Mbps H.264 video (yes, about 1/10th the max bit-rate), and sub DVD quality 384Kbps Dolby Digital audio.
Now let's talk about price.
RedBox does individual blu-ray rentals for $1.50 per night. iTunes is $4.99. And given the file size, even on my FiOS connection, it's still faster for me to go to the local RedBox and get the blu-ray disc I want. Plus I can get that $1.50 blu-ray disc and take it over a friends house and watch it there and not have to lug my Mac, adapters, and cables along with me to watch it.
For purchases, iTunes charges around $20. Target, Walmart, Best Buy, Fry's, Amazon, etc. have a ton of blu-ray discs under $20. In fact, Target and Walmart both have a section dedicated to $10 blu-ray discs. These aren't the same movies you'll find in the $5 DVD bin, but recent releases.
As for sales numbers, I don't see why people keep saying "DVD is outselling blu-ray disc!". For one, thats not always true. Two, people seem to forget that DVD was on the market for 7 full years before it FINALLY overtook VHS, in 2003. DVD's success was NOT overnight. Blu-ray is being adopted faster than DVD was, about twice the rate. Blu-ray disc sales set records nearly every quarter. Blu-ray disc will kill DVD at some point in the future.
But online streaming? People seem to think that "On Demand" and online streaming services will kill blu-ray disc. Not a chance. For a few reasons. One, On Demand is expensive. Again, $5 or sometimes even $6 for a high definition movie. Same movie at RedBox with better quality is $1.50. Or if you watch a lot of movies, a Blockbuster or Netflix subscription costs the same as 3 On Demand movies. If people try to use On Demand services the way they currently watch blu-ray discs or DVDs, they'll be in for a major case of sticker shock at the end of the month when their TV bill comes and it has an extra $40-$50 tacked on.
Online streaming won't kill blu-ray disc or DVD any time soon either. Why? A couple of reasons. One is quality. As myself and others have pointed out already, blu-ray disc runs at twice the resolution with up to 10x the video bit-rate of iTunes "HD" content. Not to mention the better audio. Even the standard definition stuff doesn't match up because theres no good way of scaling H.264 SD video to higher quality displays, while a good upscaling DVD player can easily make a DVD look better (due to lack of compression artifacting) than iTunes "HD" video.
The second biggest reason online streaming won't kill optical media is both bandwidth and metered billing. Believe it or not, in most places around the world, metered billing (Bandwidth caps) is a way of life. ISPs here in the US drool over the thought of metered billing and several have already imposed caps. Smaller cable operators in small towns already have extremely low caps. We have yet to see how things will play out, but we'll probably see metered billing with high overages before we see online video overtake optical media. Then you'd have to factor in the cost to download plus the cost of the video. Online video would die pretty quick if you had to pay $5 for the file then another $2 for bandwidth. Plus theres actual speed. Some of us are lucky enough to live in areas that have FiOS or other high speed connections, but the recent FCC survey showed that most people are on sub-3Mbps connections. That means it would take longer to download that iTunes movie than it would to watch it. With the average blu-ray file being around 25-30Mbps, that means it could take as long as ten times as long as the movie is to download it. I don't know about you, but if I didn't have my FiOS connection, I sure wouldn't wait several hours just to download a movie. Not when I could go to RedBox and get it for a fraction of the price, or have a Blockbuster by Mail subscription that includes in-store exchanges. And the situation regarding internet service in this country isn't going to get any better since the Democrats have no spine and won't stand up for consumers stuck with a duopoly and the "Party of No" have enough people in Congress to stop progress.
So let's summarize here:
All of this nonsense about blu-ray DRM is a myth. OS X already supports HDCP. AACS and BD+ are the "encryption" schemes used by blu-ray disc, the same way CSS and other various forms of disc protection are used on DVD. This would be supported by the player. The same way CSS and other DVD protections have to be supported and updated in the player. blu-ray is absolutely 100% a plug and play technology for every single standalone blu-ray player and the vast majority of computers shipped over the last couple of years. Every shipping Mac supports HDCP, and every Mac with a mini DisplayPort since 2008 supports it.
And most importantly, all of this nonsense regarding blu-ray licensing is also 100% fiction. Shortly after Jobs made that short sighted "bag of hurt" comment, the BDA made changes to licensing fees. Now its a one stop shop and one fee. Just like DVD.
So, the fact that Macs support HDCP, the encryption DRM needs to be supported in the player the exact same way as DVD, and licensing is now no different than DVD means there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for Macs to not support blu-ray disc in OS X. Especially considering I can reboot into Windows on my 2008 unibody MacBook and play a blu-ray disc without issues.
What he said
Also just ordered Rome Season 1 & 2 on Blu-Ray for £10 cheaper than the SD versions on iTunes, I may not have them straight away, but I'd rather wait and have them in better quality and at a cheaper price, so I win 10 internets
15 meg unlimited ADSL is unfortunately not even enough to stream half quality blu-ray which has around "50 meg" worth of bitrate.
Unless you're saying you have 120 mbps ADSL or 15 MBps ADSL, which is ludicrous in and of itself since even ADSL++ is only 50 mbps fast and it doesn't cost 12$ a month.
So really, no, even you don't have the Internet infrastructure required to stream blu-ray quality. Heck, most of the world doesn't. It's still much faster to drive to the store, pick up the movie and come back than download it. Not to mention probably cheaper and you get a physical copy for your trouble.
The real "bag of hurt" is the fact that a sub 1000 USD PC and a 70 USD software from Ulead offers more multimedia functionality and speed than my Mac Pro. Think about cheaply available GPU power that can be tapped properly, AVCHD editing, proper BR authoring, faster or richer Windows equivalent of the same software, and so on... This clearly isn't why I switched in 2005. Apple really got me going with this BR fiasco. I would have have never thought back in the early 90's dreaming about macs that some day I'd be owning a pro workstation from Apple and some major features are not possible on the platform. "It just doesn't work" or should I say it's "half as amazing". For me it's mind boggling that the Macintosh lags behind so much in multimedia content creation and consumption I have to say it's becoming more and more difficult to see a Mac Pro in my future if things keep going on like this. It doesn't help either that in Europe the quad core base model costs 3200 USD
I have to say it's becoming more and more difficult to see a Mac Pro in my future if things keep going on like this. It doesn't help either that in Europe the quad core base model costs 3200 USD 
Why is Blu Ray *still* a topic of discussion? (well, in obscure tech circles. Consumers don't really care. They keep buying more Apple gear.)
Macs will never have it.
Macs have sold in record numbers without it.
Blue Ray doesn't matter. It has never mattered when it comes to Apple products, nor will it matter in the future. Same as Flash.
Macs will never have it.
Macs have sold in record numbers without it.
Blue Ray doesn't matter. It has never mattered when it comes to Apple products, nor will it matter in the future. Same as Flash.
I will grant that you may be correct on this one. Apple, for whatever its hang up is with Blu-Ray, will likely not concede any time soon. That does not seem to matter to consumers, because there are plenty of other reasons to buy Macs.
And maybe, just maybe, Apple will be able to ride this one out. If they keep pretending it doesn't exist, eventually it will come true, and when digital streaming downloads mature to the point where we can watch films over the internet, Apple can say "See? We were right all along."
Or it could go the other way, and Apple finds itself being the only computer that can't play Blu-Ray discs. That would be like being the only computer without a DVD capable drive back in the 2000's. People might start complaining
The only reason I had been interested in having Blu-Ray on a Mac is solely for large capacity storage, and that's it... who the hell cares about playing and watching movies on our computers?! That's what nice large screen HDTVs are for and a living room are for! Not sitting uncomfortably at my computer desk, or watching something on a small inch screen laptop, or iPad or iPhone at that! <-- that to me, is ridiculous!
I agree though about flash drives, as that is the route I have decided to go and take, for it's quick copying, reuse, and stability and portability and accessibility. Sure, the largest size you can get is 64 GB, but that is sufficient enough for me, who uses it mostly as backup for all my RAW photo files, other than on my hard drive. I also like the idea of SSD drives in computers, and is why I ultimately ended up purchasing the new 13" MacBook Air (though it was between that and the 13" MBP with a SSD upgrade).
Though, for film projects, ability to burn to Blu-Ray would be something I would like and want. Again though, there are external Blu-Ray burners... if they would just be compatible friendly with FC to be able to be sent and burnt to such devices.
before we go apple bashing lets not forget that the same reason why itunes has drm is the same reason why blurays do- the studios.
lets also not forget that microsoft isn't putting bluray into the xbox either- they've backed downloading too.. (as well as backed hd-dvd)
and apple isnt the only company with their own ecosystem.... ever tried playing a ps3 game on a 360? that has been going on since the beginning of game consoles- yet no one ever complains about that bc its accepted as common sense!!! its no different! you think a movie downloaded on one console will play on another? will Zune content play on itunes? ever tried playing a region 3 disc on a region one commercial player? hmm once again.. studios (and game companies)...
as Neo would say "it was all just another level of control". it's simply up to you to decide which eco system you want to belong too
at least apple gave you the ability to burn your itunes songs onto a cd and re-import or play on other devices drm free
--from an owner of an atv2 (great for tv shows and movies i dont need in HD), a sony blu-ray (for the big budget movies i do want in HD), and an hd-dvd player- bc well.. surprise surprise... the movies are still 1080p and in most cases are the same freaking transfer for only a couple of dollars off ebay and for some strange reason they still play..fine.
People under stand the games. I also understand why the 360 only have as DVD drive in it. It would be nice if it would include a bluRay player but just not going to happen.
As for MS DRM there is one big difference between MS and Apple in that department. MS is very willing and will licences out their DRM to other manufactures to be able to play the content. They could care less who makes it.
Apple locks you in to their very limited use stuff. MS on the other hand opens it up to a much larger place. iTunes could play MS DRM providing Apple would be willing to licences it. Apple only wants to use Apple stuff and lock you in and lock everyone out.
I hate the DRM on DVD but I am getting better at stripping it so I can scream the files off my computer to my 360.
I see a lot more artifacts on my HD cable than I do streaming NF. I do have a consistent 23Mb/s internet connection though. Now that I think about it, with the compression that the satellite and cable providers use in order to squeeze in more channels they could inadvertently be training people to think NF streaming quality is good enough. I would bet the average person already thinks it's good enough. The benefits of instant on are a big draw.
I've seen BR on my TV model and sure it looks better, but it doesn't look good enough for me change from NF streaming or just playing rented DVDs upscaled on my xbox360.
The only way I see myself buying physical movies again is if I build a theater in the basement with 100"+ HD projector.
Even limiting the discussion to just digital cinematography I still think saying that 4k, let alone 8k, is common capture res is being very, very generous. RED One is the only camera that shoots over 2k, the SI-2k and Arri Alexa are the only 2k cameras (IIRC), and everyone else is 1080p (Genesis, Viper, F23, F35, etc.,). I doubt RED One is used on more productions than everyone else combined.
3D is more bark than bite IMO and while I know the TV makers will always try and find new ways to get people to buy sets I don't think they can outrun the technological hurdles of the broadcast industry (bandwidth limitations, old satellites designed to handle only MPEG-2, etc.,). I honestly don't think we'll see another major viewing quality 'upgrade' until IPTV becomes the norm and everyone's TV is basically a screen w/a built in HTPC. Of course trying to do things over the internet has it's own set of problems as well.
If you can see a difference, especially a big difference, between the original and the ProRes transcode something has gone very, very wrong during the transcode.
Globally approx 25 million people bought Blu-Ray players in 2010 (which is an 80% jump over '09). Last time I checked that's slightly more than the number of
TVs sold. Just sayin'...Lethal
i still wonder people care more about the quality of the bluray movies .
unless you will get an eyesore on watching 720p movies .
i don't see any real benefit of watching 1080p vs 720p movies , they look the same to most people using laptops to watch movies .
if you want to watch HD movies on your 50" screen , bluray player is a better choice .
are we still talking about bluray on macs or blurays in general?
unless you will get an eyesore on watching 720p movies .
i don't see any real benefit of watching 1080p vs 720p movies , they look the same to most people using laptops to watch movies .
if you want to watch HD movies on your 50" screen , bluray player is a better choice .
are we still talking about bluray on macs or blurays in general?
Why does the topic have to be seperate ? I buy Blu-ray movies to watch on my surround sound home theater get up with a big 1080p screen. However, if I happen to want to re-watch a movie and all I have is my Mac since I'm traveling, then I'm kind of screwed now am I ?
People aren't arguing to get BD support to watch primarly on a Mac I think. People are arguing for choice so that buyers of the tech aren't stuck with coasters outside their homes or with a PC laptop.
That's an easy thing to say if you're a one man shop, but if you're a freelancer that works with multiple producers, you're tied to what they use. In my particular case, that means FCP.
There's no question Apple has some catching up to do, but they're only one update from matching or exceeding the gains that Adobe has made. Don't forget that AVID isn't 64 bit either, and very likely won't get there before Final Cut.
Unfortunately, Final Cut's development has been tied to OSX and Quicktime restrictions. So until those issues are sorted out, Final Cut can only progress so far. Looking at the original article, this is apparent. Though we'll see an update in Mar/Apr, these will likely be UI and feature based; leaving the move to full 64bit and nonQT formats until Lion makes them possible.
And I have nothing against AVID, I worked on it for the first 5 years of my career, they aren't invulnerable. The last 10 years has seen their user base splinter and shrink- they haven't had a profitable quarter in years. While Apple and Adobe can use their broader business to subsidize their Pro Video Apps, AVID MC is a one trick pony. So conceivably, if Apple and/or Adobe, Sony Vegas, etc. continue to erode their user base, it won't matter that they're still the most used platform in high end feature and tv- because you can only run an unprofitable business for so long...
I want a few things from Final Cut Studio:
(1) Final Cut 64-bit Cocoa app that leverages Quicktime-X and is Multi-Core/Thread aware via Grand Central and even Open CL. If Apple does just this, the problem will fly. Currently FCP is bloated and slow using the exact same footage when compared to Avid. HUGE problem.
(2) Interface Redesign - The look is old, and the menu system is complicated. It needs some serious attention.
(3) Media Management - a major request from many...hopefully Apple finally addresses it.
(4) Native AVCHD Editing - I know it is taxing on machines, but I have a quad core i7 iMac. It will handle it fine. It is ridiculous that this is not an option at least (should come to iMovie too). It would help with file size, as well as data rates.
(5) iTunes Extra / LP Authoring - Since Apple is pushing this, it would be nice to be able to create this via a neat program.
(6) Full Blu-Ray Authoring...HA! Not coming, even though it should. I agree with Jobs, but the reality is that Blu-Ray is here to stay for a while. Apple should adopt it.
(1) Final Cut 64-bit Cocoa app that leverages Quicktime-X and is Multi-Core/Thread aware via Grand Central and even Open CL. If Apple does just this, the problem will fly. Currently FCP is bloated and slow using the exact same footage when compared to Avid. HUGE problem.
(2) Interface Redesign - The look is old, and the menu system is complicated. It needs some serious attention.
(3) Media Management - a major request from many...hopefully Apple finally addresses it.
(4) Native AVCHD Editing - I know it is taxing on machines, but I have a quad core i7 iMac. It will handle it fine. It is ridiculous that this is not an option at least (should come to iMovie too). It would help with file size, as well as data rates.
(5) iTunes Extra / LP Authoring - Since Apple is pushing this, it would be nice to be able to create this via a neat program.
(6) Full Blu-Ray Authoring...HA! Not coming, even though it should. I agree with Jobs, but the reality is that Blu-Ray is here to stay for a while. Apple should adopt it.
Why does the topic have to be seperate ? I buy Blu-ray movies to watch on my surround sound home theater get up with a big 1080p screen. However, if I happen to want to re-watch a movie and all I have is my Mac since I'm traveling, then I'm kind of screwed now am I ?
People aren't arguing to get BD support to watch primarly on a Mac I think. People are arguing for choice so that buyers of the tech aren't stuck with coasters outside their homes or with a PC laptop.
SuperDrive with BD capabilities?
i believe soon they will have one....from apple or 3rd party
sorry but this made me laugh, Blu Ray a premium product? youve got to be kidding. Blu Ray is simply a higher capacity optical disc that is at best an in between technology. Movies studios and retailers love it because they make more money from it - and that is the benefits that it provides. Thats the reason its pushed so hard instore and is doing well. It does a great job of taking money from the uneducated.
While your at it, its time to change the bluray, go on, get off the couch and sort through the mountain of discs you own to find what you want to watch. oh and want to see the latest movie, better get off down to the store to get it. want to take a few movies with you on holiday, hope youve got a big suitcase, oh and take your blu ray player cause its region specific....
The future is digital files/ streaming etc. it always has been and always will be.
Yeah for the people who did buy Xserve, its not just they buy the servers and thats it, they invested double, triple, or more of that into server software licenses, proprietary programming, and employee training for the OS X Server platform. Apple essentially discontinuing the OS X Server platform for them is terrible because they can no longer expand and replace their hardware. Their investment becomes a total loss.
Sales of blu-ray players and blu-ray discs tell a completely different story. Blu-ray is being adopted faster than DVD was. Blu-ray disc sales set records nearly every quarter. Blu-ray players sell in the tens of millions every year now. Blu-ray will supplant DVD and be the dominant format.
On the topic of blu-ray disc's success, Apple is basically playing the child putting their fingers in their ears and saying "lalala I'm not listening".
Some people do travel and want entertainment with them.
Some people live in dorms or small apartments where their large computer monitor is their primary display.
Blu-ray is night and day difference compared to DVD on any high definition display. It looks significantly better on everything from my 13.3" MacBook display to my 24" desktop monitor to larger HDTVs. Knowing what sort of quality I would be missing out on, theres no reason to stick to DVDs or Netflix poor streaming library. I wish Netflix still offered plans with no streaming. The library is terrible and the quality is even worse.
The uneducated? Please enlightenment as to how a 720p 4-5Mbps H.264 video from iTunes with sub-DVD quality audio is somehow better than blu-ray disc, with double the resolution, 10x the video bit-rate, and lossless or uncompressed audio. Please enlightenment as to how its better to spend more time downloading a file from iTunes that can only be played on Apple software or hardware is better than spending 5 minutes driving to the closest RedBox kiosk and spending a fraction of the money on a blu-ray disc? Please enlightenment as to how its better to "buy" a video from iTunes that costs more than a blu-ray disc, has significantly lower quality than a blu-ray disc, and can only be played on Apple software or hardware while the blu-ray disc can be played virtually anywhere?
Because its so hard to get off the couch and look through discs? Seriously? It's such an inconvenience for you to get up?
Again, let's go back to the issue of quality. Blu-ray discs already use the same compression that iTunes uses. So you can't use the argument of just applying more or better compression to the video. If more compression is applied then quality is lost.
While you're sitting on your couch waiting for that newest movie to download, I've already driven to the store, bought the disc, came home, opened it, and started watching it. I have FiOS at home currently and get a steady 20Mbps down. Even for iTunes low quality downloads, that still means 30-40 minutes of download. I can go to Best Buy, Walmart, Target, etc. all in that amount of time and buy the higher quality copy and be home watching it before the download is complete. Or I can rent the blu-ray disc for $1.50 at RedBox.
Streaming? No thanks. Quality is awful. And the library of the two biggest sources so far, Hulu and Netflix, isn't worth paying for. I'd rather have Netflix or Blockbuster send me the blu-ray disc of the previous season TV show than watch it streaming.
I'm certainly not going to spend $5 or $6 for "On Demand" either, when there are literally 4 RedBox kiosks within a 5 minute round trip of my house.
Maybe the distant future. But immediate future? Even the next decade? Not likely. Why? Internet service provider speeds just can't keep up with the bandwidth requirements to provide blu-ray quality video. Plus, nearly every ISP these days has video services they have a great interest in seeing succeed. They'd rather you use those, so what does that mean? Speeds won't advance the way they should, plus we're seeing ISPs cap usage. For instance, Charter started enforcing their caps and put a new cap on their top tier. Cablevision has caps depending on who they compete with. If you live in an area that competes with FiOS then they have no cap. If you live in an area that competes with DSL, you can bet they have caps. Look at Time Warner too. Thanks to consumer backlash regarding their low cap high overage trials, they basically canceled all DOCSIS 3.0 upgrades in areas that don't compete with FiOS. I forget who it was exactly at Time Warner, but he got all whiney and said because consumers wouldn't accept their low caps (40-60GB) and high overages ($1+ per GB) that they "couldn't afford" to upgrade their systems. Even though their quarterly earnings show record profits that continue to increase.
Thats not going to change unless the government steps in. But you can bet that we'll first see low caps and high overages like AT&T and Time Warner tried to introduce a couple of years ago. That will kill internet video as we know it today. The only way things will change, in the US at least, is if people can stand up and make the Democrats finally grow a spine and tell the "Party of No" that they better become the "Party of Yes" and end the government sanctioned duopolies of cable and telephone companies.
Hey thanks - thats a useful page!
( I knew that Apple had included some GPL apps, such as ( Ugh.. CVS!) FetchMail, Grep and Bash et al - apps that a *Nix based OS should really have - but things like JavaScriptCore, didn't realize ).
If I am not mistaken, Blu-Ray content require hardware decoding which also involves licensing from Sony. Though
All of a sudden, I wish that HD-DVD had won the format wars.
Jobs is a jerk.
Just imagine, a MiniMac with a BluRay, the perfect tool in any living room.
Jobs is so blinded by try to impose his rule to the world that he is missing a great opportunity with blu ray in a mac.
to me I keep my PS3 which I can play games, music and watch dvds and bluray and it's too bad because I'd love a Minimac with bluray!
Just imagine, a MiniMac with a BluRay, the perfect tool in any living room.
Jobs is so blinded by try to impose his rule to the world that he is missing a great opportunity with blu ray in a mac.
to me I keep my PS3 which I can play games, music and watch dvds and bluray and it's too bad because I'd love a Minimac with bluray!
All of a sudden, I wish that HD-DVD had won the format wars.
Why? Basically, what the person was saying that you quoted was wrong.
HD DVD and blu-ray disc use the same DRM. HDCP, already supported by Apple in OS X, and AACS, an encryption standard. Some blu-ray discs use BD+ but that has proven completely ineffective. However, AACS and BD+ are transparent to the users the same way CSS and other DVD protection methods are. You'll never see it and you'll never be affected by it.
I'm going to say that every single negative thing you read in this thread about blu-ray disc is flat out false. Things made up by the anti-blu-ray crowd or those who have never watched a movie on blu-ray, or just take Jobs word as gospel.
And, again, as the anti-blu-ray crowd keeps seeming to forget and ignore, licensing for blu-ray is now a one stop shop. You pay one fee to one entity. That changed shortly after Jobs "bag of hurt" comment and the change to that setup was already in motion prior to his comment.