Macbook Pro with 16:9 and blu-ray

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by .Chris, Sep 12, 2008.

?

Is this a good idea?

  1. Yes, I sure do want the ultimate computer (with an option for no blu-ray of course)

    98 vote(s)
    58.3%
  2. No, Keep it the way it is. Even if there is an option for no bluray

    48 vote(s)
    28.6%
  3. May be, 50/50 here

    22 vote(s)
    13.1%
  1. .Chris macrumors 6502a

    .Chris

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #1
    Want your opinion on this, what if Apple went to blu-ray and offered 16:9 screens. Would you be willing to pay a bit extra for it?

    I know I would, as I would be using the mac as well as boot camp vista ultimate with it. This way I'll have the best of both worlds and have the ultimate computer for work, fun and just what ever.

    Plus if Apple did go this way, no one can complete with them as they will be the only ones out there with this set up. It will be considered the ultimate computer you'll only ever need. Mac osx, windows, blu-ray and more.... what more can you ask for.

    As long as its an option, others will be happy. We only need a bluray read only drive, as the bl;u-ray burners havent really settled in yet.
     
  2. panzer06 macrumors 68030

    panzer06

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    Kilrath
    #2
    This is only partially true. There are plenty of 16:9 1080p Windows laptops with blu-ray drives. For the most part they are less than $1500.00. They just can't do OS X & Vista.

    Cheers,
     
  3. .Chris thread starter macrumors 6502a

    .Chris

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #3
    I know there are windows laptops with blu-ray drives. I was explaning since macs can run windows, people will have the best of both worlds as well as blu-ray.

    huge seller point to with blu-ray
     
  4. panzer06 macrumors 68030

    panzer06

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    Kilrath
    #4
    Apple needs to build in hardware support for Blu-Ray video streams. The DVD and HD web content takes much more CPU on a Mac than on Vista systems.

    I prefer Macs but they still need to tweak a few things before we have perfection.

    Cheers,
     
  5. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #5
    Don't want to nitpick but most laptops are 16:10 ratio already. The thing were all waiting for is for Apple to add a BD drive option for CTO orders.
     
  6. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #6
    What do you mean the web content takes more CPU on a mac? Most HD content these days is encoded in .h264 which Apple has invested a lot in. Unless you're talking some flash content which would take more work on the mac side.
     
  7. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
  8. panzer06 macrumors 68030

    panzer06

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    Kilrath
    #8
    I don't know but my MB with x3100 (before we bought MBPs) struggled with 1080p movie trailers while my company-provided HP laptop with the same x3100 played the files without difficulty. Perhaps its just drivers. Don't know but I've got to believe there is a reason Apple has been so slow to adopt Blu-ray.

    Cheers,
     
  9. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #9
    Dude... I don't know what your complaining about. with the current range of MacBooks and MacBookPros the display is wider than 19:9, they're actually 16:10.

    Until Apple adds support for Blu-Ray we're not gonna get Blu-Ray hardware on the Mac, moan as much as you like.. it won't happen till Apple does something. Having said that Fast-Mac has a slim Blu-ray drive that users can install. However on the Mac side it'll be used for data back up or (if your applications supports it) film production outputting to BD-R/BD-RW
     
  10. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #10
    Well you've got me there. So you played the same file 1080p trailer from quicktime? Can you try to save it to disk and play it from VLC on both computers?
     
  11. .Chris thread starter macrumors 6502a

    .Chris

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #11
    Perhaps offer one model with 16:9 and another one with out
    Dude.... I'm not complaning nor am i moaning. Your just someone who wants to start trouble. Never did I once complain or moan about this :rolleyes:

    Like I said, they will need to add support, and i know that

    re read what I said, your the only one here that is saying i'm complaning. no one else but you
     
  12. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #12
    Trouble?
    Right, outside now!...


    hehe..

    Sorry... My fault, i miss read :rolleyes:


    There are way too many threads on this, I think Apple will add support when they feel it's the right format to go. I can understand why they never did before. Personally, I wish some third party other than Roxio started supporting Blu Ray as well... it would be nice!
     
  13. richard.mac macrumors 603

    richard.mac

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    51.50024, -0.12662
    #13
    why would you want 16:9 :confused: widescreen laptops today are 16:10 and they still steal pixel height. having a dock & menubar on a 16:9 13" or 15" MacBook would seriously steal height on web pages and documents.

    Blu-ray on the other hand will come when Apples ready. they need to add HDCP compatible displays and graphics on all Mac and display models (except for the Air) and add software capable of viewing and burning Blu-ray out of the box i.e. DVD Player, iLife Final Cut Studio. PC Blu-ray players/burners are 100-200 bucks which is still too expensive atm.
     
  14. panzer06 macrumors 68030

    panzer06

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    Kilrath
    #14
    I've heard of VLC but never tried it. Might have been a good experiment but we sold the MB.

    I guess the point is, we'll just wait until Blu-ray support is added and all will be well. :)
     
  15. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #15
    umm...no

    16:10 means its a bit taller than 16:9 screens

    16:10 means:

    they are 16 units wide for ever 10 units tall

    so if you were talking inches, it would be 16" by 10" a 16x9 would be 16" by 9" which is wider than a 16x10 screen

    try and watch a 16x9 movie on it, theres is extra unused room at the top and bottom
     
  16. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #16
    I know what it means, thanks...

    The current resolutions of the MBP is 1440 by 900
    Do some maths and I'll assure you those pixels will come down to 16 x 10, which is taller than 16 by 9...

    This is true for all of Apple's products. From the MacBook Air to iMac to the Cinema Displays. Even on the 30" (where i type to you.. the screen resolution is 2560 by 1600, it's exactly 16:10).
     
  17. Brien macrumors 68020

    Brien

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    #17
    I don't know what all the hoopla is over 16:9. I prefer 16:10, that way I can watch full HD and keep the menubar/playback controls. I guess they might switch aspect ratios eventually but meh, don't care too much either way.
     
  18. Aranince macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #18
    1000000x!
     
  19. Minimoose 360 macrumors 65816

    Minimoose 360

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Location:
    NY
    #19
    Yea having a 16:9 screen is idiotic. A lot of films are in 2.9:1 anyway so your going to be boxed. I love my extra pixels (as so many others before me) and the letter-boxing does not bother me as the film is still in the correct aspect ratio that the director intended it to be viewed...even with the black bar from the screen that is too large, and the actual letter-box from most films being presented even wider than 16:9

    And I'll keep my Blu-Ray player with my home theater until Blu-Ray drives are around the same price as current DVD/CD-RW drives. :]
     
  20. skatetolivelts macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    #20
    Laptops are going 16:9 now because movies are (often even wider than) 16:9. They are making the screens wider, so although you may be loosing some pixels vertically, you will be getting larger screens in the long run. 15.4" screens are 16" when they are 16:9.

    I would rather have 16:9 screens than 16:10 any day.
     
  21. Minimoose 360 macrumors 65816

    Minimoose 360

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Location:
    NY
    #21
    What, you can't live with black boxes?

    I'm sorry, the MBP isn't really meant to be a media computer for watching movies...(although I'm sure many of you do at some point) it's meant to have work done upon it... where people enjoy the the increased number of pixels.
     
  22. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #22
    lol he is talking about the same thing. Why are you disagreeing?
     
  23. Loge macrumors 68020

    Loge

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #23
    Larger screen and fewer pixels means lower dpi and a less sharp image. It's incredible that some people think that this is an improvement.

    Now if the 16:9 screens were adding horizontal pixels instead of taking away vertical pixels it would not be so bad, although I still think 16:10 is a better ratio for working with most apps.
     
  24. MacinJosh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Location:
    Finland
    #24
    First poster in this thread that actually has a clue. I agree. However, 1080p is 1080p no matter what and 1080p is 1920x1080. So that would be the only 16:9 screen that would make sense as it's the native resolution of Full-HD. Any other 16:9 screen would make no sense as any other resolution would force you to scale the video, essentially defeating the purpose of having a 16:9 screen. A 16:9 screen is only good when it's 1080p and when you watch all your Full-HD movies in fullscreen. That's it. On a laptop, a 16:9 screen becomes too wide and a 4:3 screen is too thin to do anything. 16:10 is a good compromise. Personally, I'll leave 16:9 and Blu-Ray to my home-theatre.
     
  25. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #25
    If you're going to offer Deth-to-batte-rey in computers, just make the screen resolution 2.39:1 like all movies are. That way you get rid of the black bars completely.

    Seriously, 16:9 is a dumb idea, and Blu-ray is even more so.
     

Share This Page