Note to Apple: Blu-ray is catching on


DocStone

macrumors regular
Nov 27, 2006
183
3
Republic of Texas


Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: Note to Apple: Blu-ray is catching on
Description:: New research from The NPD Group shows that Blu-ray is, indeed, catching on. Which, it seems to me, shows that Apple is making a mistake in ignoring the technology.

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
Note to researchers: CD's are dead no matter what the format. (Music, DVD's, Blu-Ray) I have a blu-ray player and I hardly use it. I rip all own movies or download them from Amazon or iTunes and have them in a digital format. No more disks for me and I think it is not long before they disappear.

Really, with thumb drives and wifi transfer, why do you need to burn CD's too? Pointless if you ask me. Just my opinion. Have a great day.
 

davidw

macrumors member
Jun 6, 2005
52
2
New York City
Blu-ray is NOT catching on. I bought a PS3 as soon as it was released and made sure that my fancy new 1080p TV was connected to the Blu-ray source with a fancy HDMI cable and I marveled at my first Blu-ray disc.

I mean, I wanted to marvel at it. It wasn't really all that impressive; I had seen higher definition material on superior computer monitors for quite a while. It must have been that particular movie, right?

So I bought more. A few more, anyway. I even bought Planet Earth. And you know what?

That was the last Blu-ray film I ever bought. It will be the last Blu-ray film I ever buy. Even if the capacity for Blu-ray becomes 200 GB, the fact is that hard drives are getting bigger and cheaper and internet connections are getting faster and faster and there's no room left for physical, removable media.
 

Smaugg

macrumors member
Nov 24, 2007
38
0
Apple doesn't make money on Blu-ray discs sold; Apple makes money on movies downloaded from iTunes. Steve Jobs, in his infinite wisdom, knows that it's not in Apple's best interest to include Blu-ray drives in Apple's computers, or did anyone actually buy the "bag of hurt" excuse?

I've never bought a Blu-ray disc and never will. They have little raison d'être.
 

blackpond

macrumors 6502a
Mar 31, 2008
516
15
I'm fine with 720p, iTunes and digital downloads. Really, I am. After all, my 52" plasma is 720P and likely won't be replaced for a good eight years or so.
 

Superdrive

macrumors 6502a
Oct 21, 2003
762
26
Dallas, Tx
It's catching on? Why would I want to go to a store to get my media? Downloading is where it is at. Physical media is dead.
 

Spankey

macrumors 6502a
Sep 30, 2007
751
235
NJ
It's catching on? Why would I want to go to a store to get my media? Downloading is where it is at. Physical media is dead.
Because there is nowhere to download a movie with the video and audio quality afforded by Blu-ray. Movies are still meant to be seen on a big screen and inferior video quality is much more noticeable than inferior audio.
 

Anuba

macrumors 68040
Feb 9, 2005
3,752
311
It's catching on? Why would I want to go to a store to get my media? Downloading is where it is at. Physical media is dead.
That's what I said in the late 90's when I stopped using cash completely in favor of cards. Later, to my amazement, I discovered that not everyone is like me. :eek: Even later, I realized that the whole "X is so dead because I'm using Y" schtick makes people look even lamer than the ones who use X.

I haven't bothered with physical media for years, I have everything on a NAS drive... but I belong to a minority, and so do you. DVD:s are still selling like hotcakes and they're one generation behind the latest physical format. A lot of people want Blu-ray discs and will continue to do so for many years to come.

The "bag of hurt" was a reference to the pain Steve feels in his scrotum every time he thinks about paying a license fee to someone else. You have to pay a few bucks to Sony/Samsung/Philips for every Blu-ray capable unit sold. Apple only wants in on everyone else's money (record labels, app developers, movie distributors etc), they want nothing to do with others who want the same. Reminds me of my cousin when we were kids and were given a bag of candy each (different types). He asked if he could try my candy and I said sure. Then I asked if I could try his in return and he immediately started crying and yelling for mom. A future Steve Jobs?
 

SailorTom

macrumors regular
May 15, 2008
125
0
The market for HD is not complete as such, leading me to an interesting idea. Here is my point of view:

I like many others prefer downloadable content. Problem is I haven't found anywhere with a decent catalogue of 1080 films I can download to rent and in some cases buy (in UK at least, plus I haven't tried that hard admittedly; still if there is such a service haven't seen it advertised). Would I still buy a blu-ray player? Yes, because for some films I like watching the extra features. Are these available with online films? Well not really. Some films have websites with extra content, but this is clumsy to access and is not comparable to what's available on the disc.

This article also suggests that TVs and blu-ray players are increasingly coming equipped with network connectivity. I agree this is quite cool, with innovating developers a huge amount of interesting things could happen. Still, at the moment best you can do is just watch a film you have stored locally or is streaming over the internet, and in that case not at 1080. Until there is a standard method used by the majority of TV manufacturers and content providers, this network connectivity doesn't really give much added value. There is no standard method of delivery of bonus content, and the social aspects remain limited.

The market is still missing something then, and definitely not mature. I think Apple understand this, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are working on it. They were the first to portable music, smartphones or the tablet/netbook sector, but they do arguably have the best products in these markets. Apple already have iTunes LP for packaging up albums with interactive content, HTML5 for interactive web content, and a long history with streaming and content delivery.

I guess what i'm basically saying is, keep an eye on :apple:TV. If apple leverage the knowledge, technology and products they already have, HD is the next market they could revolutionise.
 

Rodimus Prime

macrumors G4
Oct 9, 2006
10,132
4
Apple is going to regret it. Blu-Ray for movies is the big thing right now but it is only a matter of time before you started seeing Blu-ray be used for software. I remember in 2004 putting some software on my computer that took 4-5 CDs. That pushed companies to use DVD for any software they sold. Only a few years ago I installed a game that was on 2 DVDs because of how large it was.

Windows XP came on a CD. windows Vista came only on a DVD.

OSX came on a CD threw 10.3 and it was possible to get it on a CD for 10.4

Now it is DVD only. It is only a matter of time before the OS will be moving over to Blu-Ray. They have been getting bigger over time as well. They used to be only a few 100 megs but now they are Gigs in size and growing. I would not be surprised in the next 10 years to see just the OS be 20+ gigs in size by itself.

As for download content as things keep getting bigger I can tell you right now the ISP are going to start really complaining as people start trying to download true Blu-Ray quality and software that could fill up a good part of a blu-Ray disk. Lets not for get how long it would take to download a 10-20 gig file. 4 gigs takes a little while to download.
 

Jett0516

macrumors 6502a
Mar 5, 2010
716
304
to all the nay sayers....wait til Redbox puts out blu-ray movies.

you'll wish your mac has a blu ray drive.
 

Porco

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2005
3,031
5,638
It's funny, when the iPad sells 1 million units in a month that's a big success. Yeah, I agree with that, it is.

The initial bare-bones edition of Avatar just sold 4 million copies on Blu-ray in 10 days.

We don't need to rehearse all the arguments that are in numerous threads already. Blu-ray is continuing to grow in adoption and Apple should have given its customers the option by now. If you aren't interested that's fine, but stop acting like no-one else is.

And Steve Jobs is just a big old hypocrite while Apple are on the Blu-ray Association's Board and whilst having a position at Disney - who are selling loads of (very good) Blu-rays that will play more easily on his rival's products that his own for no good reason. The situation is a sad, unfunny farce.
 

Winni

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,114
923
Germany.
I doubt that BluRay is catching on, but I'm absolutely positive that BluRay rips are in increasing demand. Nobody needs or wants the BluRay medium, but everybody wants the high quality movie file.

Oh. And NOBODY wants a movie file that's crippled by DRM.
 

awesomebase

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2004
100
0
Maryland
Rethink...

It's funny, when the iPad sells 1 million units in a month that's a big success. Yeah, I agree with that, it is.

The initial bare-bones edition of Avatar just sold 4 million copies on Blu-ray in 10 days.

We don't need to rehearse all the arguments that are in numerous threads already. Blu-ray is continuing to grow in adoption and Apple should have given its customers the option by now. If you aren't interested that's fine, but stop acting like no-one else is.

And Steve Jobs is just a big old hypocrite while Apple are on the Blu-ray Association's Board and whilst having a position at Disney - who are selling loads of (very good) Blu-rays that will play more easily on his rival's products that his own for no good reason. The situation is a sad, unfunny farce.
You can't compare the sale of a full-fledged product like a computer with the sale of a freakin' movie... never mind the best-selling movie of all time.
Yes, blu-ray is continuing to grow and Apple knows this. This isn't the premise for Apple excluding it from their products. The premise is that blu-ray and DVD are hardly distinguishable on 20" lcds... many of which can't play 1080p content natively anyway.
The point is blu-ray is meant for larger screens. And the main systems feeding larger screens are largely absent a blu-ray drive (with the exception of the PS3) such as media drives, HTPCs, DVRs, AppleTVs, etc... most of those systems are simply boxed hard drives with added capability to display 1080p content. Otherwise a blu-ray player is much cheaper (and in some cases almost as capable) as a media drive.
It doesn't make sense to add it to a computer where OSs are compressed onto cheaper DVDs, updates are done via fast internet connections, and where the majority of media is purely digital anyway.
It isn't a missed opportunity for Apple; it is just that most computer users that they target HAVE big screen TVs and it doesn't make sense to put a blu-ray player into a computer to watch it when you've got 50" TVs in the house.
At the very least, I think the strategy for holding off isn't a terrible one... nobody is really ripping blu-rays for home use (i.e. from their video cameras, etc.) as that is mainly done via digital sharing now. So, the motivation to provide that capability isn't really there either. If nothing else, an implementation later on will just ensure cheaper drives.
To me though, it still doesn't make much sense... this is appealing pretty much only for those where their computer monitor is their sole source of entertainment.
 

Rodimus Prime

macrumors G4
Oct 9, 2006
10,132
4
You can't compare the sale of a full-fledged product like a computer with the sale of a freakin' movie... never mind the best-selling movie of all time.
Yes, blu-ray is continuing to grow and Apple knows this. This isn't the premise for Apple excluding it from their products. The premise is that blu-ray and DVD are hardly distinguishable on 20" lcds... many of which can't play 1080p content natively anyway.
The point is blu-ray is meant for larger screens. And the main systems feeding larger screens are largely absent a blu-ray drive (with the exception of the PS3) such as media drives, HTPCs, DVRs, AppleTVs, etc... most of those systems are simply boxed hard drives with added capability to display 1080p content. Otherwise a blu-ray player is much cheaper (and in some cases almost as capable) as a media drive.
It doesn't make sense to add it to a computer where OSs are compressed onto cheaper DVDs, updates are done via fast internet connections, and where the majority of media is purely digital anyway.
It isn't a missed opportunity for Apple; it is just that most computer users that they target HAVE big screen TVs and it doesn't make sense to put a blu-ray player into a computer to watch it when you've got 50" TVs in the house.
At the very least, I think the strategy for holding off isn't a terrible one... nobody is really ripping blu-rays for home use (i.e. from their video cameras, etc.) as that is mainly done via digital sharing now. So, the motivation to provide that capability isn't really there either. If nothing else, an implementation later on will just ensure cheaper drives.
To me though, it still doesn't make much sense... this is appealing pretty much only for those where their computer monitor is their sole source of entertainment.
What about the people who own that nice 50in TV with a bluRay player who travel from time to time. Should they have to buy a DVD copy of their movies as well so they can watch them on the road? Or if their TV is being used for something else and they want to go watch a movie on their computer? Can not play a Blu-Ray movie on a normal DVD drive. It is not always about the higher quality on the uses of if.

Hell I can add on laptops is I have hook laptops up to my TV to play movies threw the laptop to the TV. If I had a bluRay in my laptop and a movie I would just hook the laptop up to the TV and go from there.

I know when I travel I tend to grab some of my DVDs to watch them. Now I do not own a BluRay player for my TV yet so not an issue but I do plan on getting one at some point.
 

awesomebase

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2004
100
0
Maryland
Good Point

What about the people who own that nice 50in TV with a bluRay player who travel from time to time. Should they have to buy a DVD copy of their movies as well so they can watch them on the road? Or if their TV is being used for something else and they want to go watch a movie on their computer? Can not play a Blu-Ray movie on a normal DVD drive. It is not always about the higher quality on the uses of if.

Hell I can add on laptops is I have hook laptops up to my TV to play movies threw the laptop to the TV. If I had a bluRay in my laptop and a movie I would just hook the laptop up to the TV and go from there.

I know when I travel I tend to grab some of my DVDs to watch them. Now I do not own a BluRay player for my TV yet so not an issue but I do plan on getting one at some point.
That is true, but most Blu-Ray movie titles come with a DVD and/or Digital Copy that can be used on computers, so it isn't like you have to buy two copies...
 

Porco

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2005
3,031
5,638
You can't compare the sale of a full-fledged product like a computer with the sale of a freakin' movie... never mind the best-selling movie of all time.
Well, yes, I think I just did.

I can't be bothered to rehash several other threads again, go MRoogle my posts if you want. Suffice to say Blu-ray is doing fine, there are plenty of people who want it supported properly on the mac.

Now please set your display's resolution to 640x480, because it looks the same as 1920x1080 doesn't it? :p
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,678
1,183
New Zealand
That is true, but most Blu-Ray movie titles come with a DVD and/or Digital Copy that can be used on computers, so it isn't like you have to buy two copies...
Do you have a source on "most"? I have 31 Blu-rays and only 2 include a DVD copy.
 

danpass

macrumors 68020
Jun 27, 2009
2,443
110
Miami, FL
I switched my Netlfix to Blu-ray back in October. I love high def.

I also like having physical media.


Guess what? If I like the movie I go out and buy it, then rip it to the computer and stream it or stick it on the iPad if I'm traveling.


Pretty soon I'll be at 1/month on the Netflix :D
 

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
5,834
2,219
California, United States
This forum never amazes me as to how many ill informed people there still are on blu-ray's success.

4 million copies of Avatar sold in 10 days and still I read "blu-ray is DEAD. It will never catch on".

For those die hard digital download zealots, can you please tell me how many copies of Avatar sold digitally, on iTunes? Is it 4 million? Is it? :(

What exactly will it take for these people to comprehend?

Really.

Then why were Blu-ray sales for the first two months of this year higher than digital downloads for the whole of 2009?
Exactly. People can. not. comprehend. sales. data.
 

col sandurz

macrumors member
Apr 2, 2010
42
0
I would not be surprised in the next 10 years to see just the OS be 20+ gigs in size by itself… Lets not for get how long it would take to download a 10-20 gig file. 4 gigs takes a little while to download.
Excellent point! Even the best internet pales in comparison of bandwidth to that of current external local data transfer (USB and Firewire), which pales in comparison to the bandwidth of internal local data transfer (SATA etc.). Wait till LightPeak comes out. With current and near future tech, it will always be easier and faster downloading, uploading, storing, and using data locally than from the cloud.

Oh. And NOBODY wants a movie file that's crippled by DRM.
When you actually own a physical copy of the data, the DRM doesn’t cripple you. You can store it, transfer to a new computer, and even sell it. Try selling someone your used iTunes MP3s, even the DRM-free ones. You think Apple will let you do that? Or the government?

Apple doesn't make money on Blu-ray discs sold; Apple makes money on movies downloaded from iTunes. Steve Jobs, in his infinite wisdom, knows that it's not in Apple's best interest to include Blu-ray drives in Apple's computers, or did anyone actually buy the "bag of hurt" excuse?

I've never bought a Blu-ray disc and never will. They have little raison d'être.
You say discs have no reason to exist, yet your comments preceding explain why they do. Simply put, they are cheaper. Pressing a 20 GB Blu-Ray is mere cents, and it can be sold for much more. [So Apple wins.] But when you have to download your software, you need to pay for the software (same price without physical copy) and the increased internet connection necessary. And what happens if you lose connection. [So You lose.] Why argue for what costs you more?
 

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
5,834
2,219
California, United States
When you actually own a physical copy of the data, the DRM doesn’t cripple you. You can store it, transfer to a new computer, and even sell it. Try selling someone your used iTunes MP3s, even the DRM-free ones. You think Apple will let you do that? Or the government?
Logic speaks the truth. Very well said.

Once you purchase a digitally downloaded item, you are STUCK with it.

And DRM? Don't forget to authorize iTunes on your brand new Mac before playing that new HD movie you purchased. Oh, only 5 computers, right? Yea. And just forget about taking that movie to watch at your friend's house on their home theater setup. Why deal with all this sh*t? :confused:

We may take a second look at this debate once the Cloud gets deeper, and broadband infrastructure gets faster, but that time is not now.

For now, eat up the fact that blu-rays outsell DD by a wide, wide margin, and accept the fact that physical media is where the industry has it's support.
 

awesomebase

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2004
100
0
Maryland
Repeated

Well, yes, I think I just did.

I can't be bothered to rehash several other threads again, go MRoogle my posts if you want. Suffice to say Blu-ray is doing fine, there are plenty of people who want it supported properly on the mac.

Now please set your display's resolution to 640x480, because it looks the same as 1920x1080 doesn't it? :p
Just because an assertion is repeated doesn't mean it becomes any better. Media sales will always eclipse the sales of products meant to play them. Let me know when TVs outsell the number of movies/tv shows/commercials that play on them... it isn't ever going to happen. Much like you'll always buy more gallons of gas than actual cars. You should have compared either sales of blu-ray players to things like PMPs, iPads, etc. or blu-ray movies to digital movie sales.

But if you're trying to make a point about digital vs. blu-ray that is fine. No question Blu-Ray is kicking digital downloads in the butt when it comes to sales.

However, it seems like the main point here is being missed. Blu-Ray offers no real advantages on a computer system for several reasons...
  1. More and more systems are portable with smaller screens thereby negating the most major benefit of blu-ray technology (i.e. netbooks and most systems with screens less than 15.4" do not display 1080p content)
  2. Internet download speeds are increasing and becoming more wide-spread there facilitating larger and larger downloads at faster speeds.
  3. Electronics and comptures are increasingly being connected reducing the value of having a physical source at just one location (i.e. it is easier to have one digital copy viewed across multiple screens and platforms than it is to make everything come with a blu-ray player.)
  4. People are not burning their home movies to blu-ray discs like they did with DVDs... they're merely posting short videos online, the "formality" of the media has been rendered virtually useless (a previous key advantage that DVD had over VHS)

I think people need to realize that it isn't a matter of whether blu-ray is popular or not... it is that it isn't a media form that is relevant to computers. It is far more relevant to that projector of 50" LCD you have. DVDs came at a time when internet connection speeds were still very slow, the media was cheap, video cameras were just migrating to digitally capture content and distribution was still very much a physical necessity.

However, the mistake many are making is thinking that this is somehow directly transferable to blu-ray when it is far from it. Blu-ray's advantages are on a big-screen, plain and simple. The market has changed. Now we want to watch "Avatar" on our phones, computers, TVs AND media players... Blu-Rays can't physically be played on half of those and there isn't much of a case for trying to go that way.

In the long run, digital is going to over-run every form of media out there. It isn't a matter of "if" it is a matter of when... TV companies are bundling internet access, hard drives and digital storage guides for this purpose. Netflix, Blockbuster and other video retailers are gearing up for streaming digital content. Blu-ray is merely here to fill in the gap for the time being. But I'm fairly certain that, much like those who insisted the floppy drive should stay despite USB and external storage, in about 10 years time, this won't even be a conversation...
 

Runt888

macrumors 6502a
Nov 17, 2008
837
25
Now we want to watch "Avatar" on our phones, computers, TVs AND media players... Blu-Rays can't physically be played on half of those and there isn't much of a case for trying to go that way.
It sure would be nice to be able to stick my blu-ray disks in my laptop to rip and encode for my smaller devices. Out of the 50 or blu-ray movies I own, fewer than ten came with a DVD or a digital copy.