iPodHub claims that according to anonymous sources, Apple is asking Blu-ray content providers to add iPod video content onto their Blu-ray discs.
Reliability of this site is unknown.
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.
iPod Videos in Blu-Ray Discs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iPodHub claims that according to anonymous sources, Apple is asking Blu-ray content providers to add iPod video content onto their Blu-ray discs.
Reliability of this site is unknown.
Considering that you can put DVD-ROM content on any DVD or BD, it seems perfectly doable to have the BD-ROM content be files for iPod.
BTW, is Blu-Ray totally dependent on the (often-postponed) PS3 release date? Or with PS3 delayed, is there hope of seeing Blu-Ray arrive ahead of PS3?
Blu-Ray is so much better than HD-DVD, I'd hate to lose it just because a game console is late.
BTW, is Blu-Ray totally dependent on the (often-postponed) PS3 release date? Or with PS3 delayed, is there hope of seeing Blu-Ray arrive ahead of PS3?
Blu-Ray is so much better than HD-DVD, I'd hate to lose it just because a game console is late.
nagromme said:
Yea ok even if it means that it costs alot more to produce these than HD-DVD. I don't know about you , but I dont want to buy expensive media when a cheaper alternative nearly as good is right there.
dukebound85 said:
You may want to check the prices for Blu-ray and HD DVD movies on amazon. They cost pretty much exactly the same.
nagromme said:
Well, you're wrong. You haven't seen Blu-Ray yet, they're not even out yet. Why judge when you don't see one yet?
BTW, I check HD-DVD at Best Buy and it looks nice. Not too sure about Blu-Ray since it's kinda similar to BetaMax. Also, I don't know people will go for PS3 since all games are going to be at least $70-$100. That's way too pricey plus too expensive. But that's me.
It would actually discourage piracy, and be in the content providers interest to do so.
Computer Genius: "Boy, I love this movie, I want it on my ipod. Oh I have to get around the encryption. Okay that was easy, I am sure other people would like to do the same, I will share it on the internet."
Everyone then Rips Blu-Ray discs like crazy.
vs.
Computer Genius: "Boy, I love this movie, I want it on my ipod. Oh look! They included a version for my iPod! I don't need to hack their encryption scheme!"
Computer Genius: "Boy, I love this movie, I want it on my ipod. Oh I have to get around the encryption. Okay that was easy, I am sure other people would like to do the same, I will share it on the internet."
Everyone then Rips Blu-Ray discs like crazy.
vs.
Computer Genius: "Boy, I love this movie, I want it on my ipod. Oh look! They included a version for my iPod! I don't need to hack their encryption scheme!"
nagromme said:
I hope it doesn't turn out to be another Sony screw-up. I've read good things about Blu-ray, and I was happy to see Apple get on board rather than lump themselves in with the HD-DVD crowd because it could mean a better experience for the end user...whenever that is.
The question in my mind is where does the iPod go from here? Is the 1.8" 100 GB HDD on the way any time soon, or will the flash storage capacity catch up soon enough to take over? 54 GB for a Blu-ray disc is about 6x bigger than my iTunes library, it would be cool for Apple to implement this technology in a portable solution (larger touchscreen iPod Pro with BD drive?).
I'm gonna call this rumor highly unlikely.
No way is the MPAA gonna include easily shared content on their discs; it would totally defeat the Advanced Access Content Sytem (AACS) the studios have been developing.
The discs would need to include some sort of random serial number on each disc/package that would then be used by an included program (or iTunes) to DRM'ize the video to your account. Imagine Windows style activation in order to watch/transfer the videos. Sounds like a crap solution to me.
EDIT: On second though, maybe Apple would use the supposed TPM in Intel macs to secure the content. Now wouldn't that give the anti-DRM league some panic attacks.
No way is the MPAA gonna include easily shared content on their discs; it would totally defeat the Advanced Access Content Sytem (AACS) the studios have been developing.
The discs would need to include some sort of random serial number on each disc/package that would then be used by an included program (or iTunes) to DRM'ize the video to your account. Imagine Windows style activation in order to watch/transfer the videos. Sounds like a crap solution to me.
EDIT: On second though, maybe Apple would use the supposed TPM in Intel macs to secure the content. Now wouldn't that give the anti-DRM league some panic attacks.
no way in hell. unless there is some way to lock down the portable formatted file, it's not going to happen. blockbuster and netflix would basically be giving away unprotected copies of every single movie they rented.
not going to happen without SOME form of DRM. not that i want that but dont get all giddy in anticipation of this actually happening in a way that's as unlimited as we might hope.
not going to happen without SOME form of DRM. not that i want that but dont get all giddy in anticipation of this actually happening in a way that's as unlimited as we might hope.
In what way? BetaMax failed mainly because the tapes has too small a capacity compared to VHS, but the quality of the video was basically the same as VHS, so in essense it was worse. Anybody tells you anything else is believing an urban myth, or backed the wrong horse in the early 80s.supremedesigner said:
Blu-Ray *IS* better and has larger capacity than HD-DVD. Its just a case of whether getting to the market first counts (BTW - I believe Betamax was on the market first).
Yeah blu-ray is 50 gigs compared to 35 for hd-dvd(numbers might be off a gig or two).
What hd-dvd has going for it is cost to manufacture. The existing regular dvd pressing plants require little modification to make new hd-dvd disks. Blu-ray requires almost new lines and so the cost is greater at least for now. I also believe that hd-dvd is backwards compatible and blu-ray will require the inclusion of a second laser to be backwards compatible so not all players will be.
Blu-ray players will be coming fairly soon they won't wait for the ps3.
What hd-dvd has going for it is cost to manufacture. The existing regular dvd pressing plants require little modification to make new hd-dvd disks. Blu-ray requires almost new lines and so the cost is greater at least for now. I also believe that hd-dvd is backwards compatible and blu-ray will require the inclusion of a second laser to be backwards compatible so not all players will be.
Blu-ray players will be coming fairly soon they won't wait for the ps3.
joshuawaire said:
While it is true that Apple is a member of the DVD Forum, it is not on the steering committee i.e., the companies that make the real decisions.
But Apple is a member of the Blu-Ray Association Board of Directors.
While I have no doubt Apple may swing to HD-DVD if it wins, they are backing BR for the time being.
Can someone please explain to me why ANYONE is looking forward to Blu Ray or HDDVD? Is the supposed "amazing" resolution really worth the price and encryption hassles?
I'll stick with plain DVDs, thanks.
I'll stick with plain DVDs, thanks.
This makes total sense, and doesn't flam with the studio's and MPAA's insistence on AACS, either.
The whole point of AACS is to prevent the easy duplication of <i>high definition</i> content in the digital realm; even with full HDCP implemented, you can still pull an old fashioned Standard Def 480i signal out of any of these next gen hi-def players.
What they're talking about is letting you, with ease, get an ipod (or upcoming iPod Video) resolution file on the disc. This is not the piracy threat they're worried about, because as we all know, nobody's going to watch those small res files on their flat panel 42" TV; that's what the original blu-ray disc is for in the first place.
With regard to DRM, i'm sure the way you'd pull the file off the disc would be directly through iTunes, so any DRM'ing could happen at that stage....
This is very exciting.
The whole point of AACS is to prevent the easy duplication of <i>high definition</i> content in the digital realm; even with full HDCP implemented, you can still pull an old fashioned Standard Def 480i signal out of any of these next gen hi-def players.
What they're talking about is letting you, with ease, get an ipod (or upcoming iPod Video) resolution file on the disc. This is not the piracy threat they're worried about, because as we all know, nobody's going to watch those small res files on their flat panel 42" TV; that's what the original blu-ray disc is for in the first place.
With regard to DRM, i'm sure the way you'd pull the file off the disc would be directly through iTunes, so any DRM'ing could happen at that stage....
This is very exciting.
You could've asked the same thing about VHS vs. DVD. It wasn't too long ago that DVD players were expensive playthings of videophiles with money.Thataboy said:
Seeing how consumers are snatching up HDTVs in droves, I imagine HD-DVD/Blue-Ray adoption will be pretty fast. The main thing that'll hold up the adoption is that there is no clear winner yet--we prolly won't know for a few years.
Thataboy said:
Honestly, I have no idea what you are talking about. Both formats will alllow you to watch movies you already have on a disc, on a disc. Except you may have to buy a new television to see the higher quality.
Bet you wonder why you asked now, don't you?
dr_lha said:
Um no. Betamax was significantly HIGHER quality than VHS. If you believe anything else, you are a muppet.
I am not believing an urban myth, I was there, it was painfully clear what the difference was (and I was a geek so I knew the specs too).
I did not back the wrong horse, I coudln't afford a Betamax player, so I had to get a VHS one (JVC top-loader... *sigh* happy days!), gutted at the time, chuffed 10 years later when it turns out I'd made the right decision for the wrong reasons.
Guess you are partly right, betamax was worse, because it lost.