Phil Schiller Claims Customers Aren't Asking for Built-In Blu-Ray Anymore

[janstett]

Hmm, that's what I thought. But apparently not.

Funny that you quote me as evidence of your misguided logic... Some of you just don't get it.

I have a very nice home theater setup. Two of them, in fact. A 60" 1080p 24hz LED and a 65" 24hz Plasma. Driven by HTPCs, 7.1 surround, et al. I would love it if those HTPCs could be Mac Minis, but they can't be since Apple doesn't support Blu-Ray -- remember this thread we are in?

I also have high end Apple computers that have displays greater than 1080p. A 30" Cinema Display 2560x1600 and a 15" rMBP. I spend a lot of time on them and, gasp, sometimes watch videos on them.

I'm not supposed to want high quality material when I am on my Macs?

This same idiotic logic would dictate that I can't listen to music anywhere but my home theater. I should be strung up if I listen to music on my Mac, right?

Some of you seem to have some messed up logic.

1) Wanting high quality video on the Mac does not mean you don't have an enjoyable home theater system. And even if you didn't, what's wrong with wanting high quality video on them? And then what about the case of FUSING the Mac and a high end home theater system, the HTPC? In this case the Mac and the home theater ARE THE SAME THING.

2) Many of the fanboys making this argument against watching videos on a Mac are the same ones watching videos on 4" iPhones or 9" iPad screens.

3) Videos obviously are, and have been for a long time, watched on computer screens. Not exclusively, but they are. Apple doesn't block people from watching iTunes movies on their Macs and they include a DVD player app, so your argument that people don't watch videos on their computers is ABSURD. So why not enable them to watch the highest quality videos available instead of stretching 720x480 DVDs?

Today's video consumption is about consuming video EVERYWHERE -- phones, tablets, computers, big screens. Why not have the best available quality at each place?

 

[iBug2]

Funny that you quote me as evidence of your misguided logic... Some of you just don't get it.

I have a very nice home theater setup. Two of them, in fact. A 60" 1080p 24hz LED and a 65" 24hz Plasma. Driven by HTPCs, 7.1 surround, et al. I would love it if those HTPCs could be Mac Minis, but they can't be since Apple doesn't support Blu-Ray -- remember this thread we are in?

I also have high end Apple computers that have displays greater than 1080p. A 30" Cinema Display 2560x1600 and a 15" rMBP. I spend a lot of time on them and, gasp, sometimes watch videos on them.

I'm not supposed to want high quality material when I am on my Macs?

This same idiotic logic would dictate that I can't listen to music anywhere but my home theater. I should be strung up if I listen to music on my Mac, right?

Some of you seem to have some messed up logic.

1) Wanting high quality video on the Mac does not mean you don't have an enjoyable home theater system. And even if you didn't, what's wrong with wanting high quality video on them? And then what about the case of FUSING the Mac and a high end home theater system, the HTPC? In this case the Mac and the home theater ARE THE SAME THING.

2) Many of the fanboys making this argument against watching videos on a Mac are the same ones watching videos on 4" iPhones or 9" iPad screens.

3) Videos obviously are, and have been for a long time, watched on computer screens. Not exclusively, but they are. Apple doesn't block people from watching iTunes movies on their Macs and they include a DVD player app, so your argument that people don't watch videos on their computers is ABSURD. So why not enable them to watch the highest quality videos available instead of stretching 720x480 DVDs?

Today's video consumption is about consuming video EVERYWHERE -- phones, tablets, computers, big screens. Why not have the best available quality at each place?

It's your choice if you don't watch your blu rays on your Mac. I do. Apple doesn't support Blu Ray officially but nobody is stopping you from doing that. Again, if you are ok with ripping your discs to your HD in the first place, you may as well rip them to .mkv and then watch them directly out of your Mac, using your Mac as a movie server.

 

[nelmat]

Apparently people aren't asking for optical drives or sufficient storage any longer, either . . .

Three terabytes plus a time machine back up and external drive not enough then? I can't remember the last time I used my optical drive, it serves no purpose.

 

[Gizmotoy]

I'm not sure this is true. First of all, you can decode DTS-HD on OS X using the .dll from Power DVD on windows. (You can use them in VLC or mplayer with some voodoo). Second, the audio isn't the issue. To decode a Blu-Ray movie, you need to have the encryption key, which are at the moment being "broken" by any player which plays Blu-Ray content. That only means that nobody is paying the licence to get the decryption keys. And, you don't need to have DTS-HD audio to have a working Blu-Ray playback on OS X. Apple's own DVD Player never had DTS decoding either, so all our DTS tracked DVD's were played using the dolby track if we played them using DVD Player, which we were "ok" with. So I think people can live with the Core DTS track which is embedded in every DTS-HD track, which every player app can decode live on OS X. Not to mention, what's the point of having DTS-HD decoding on OS X if you cannot output that audio anyway? Apple does not put a 7.1 out on their macs, you'd need a separate hardware for it, which already would have to include a DTS-HD decoder in it anyway since you cannot output DTS-HD or True HD through optical for legal reasons I think, so the OS wouldn't have to decode the track in the first place. Until a 3rd party vendor actually produces a DTS-HD decoder soundcard for macs, this is all moot. It doesn't make sense on Windows without 3rd party hardware either unless you actually want to listen to a 7.1 DTS-HD track through stereo speakers or headphones.

If no Blu-Ray player software is available on OS X, I think it's because nobody wants to pay the licence fees to make such a player because it wouldn't sell. It wouldn't sell because not many people would buy external Blu-Ray drives for that.

The audio is most certainly the issue. As you mention, there is software available to play Blu Rays, and none of them support HD Audio. You backed up the main point of my post in your first few sentences, so I'm not sure what you think I've said that is untrue.

You state there are hacks to decode the HD audio formats using Windows software, which is the first time I've heard that (are you sure it's not just decoding DTS Core and DD5.1?), but in any case that's not what we want. All recent Macs with HDMI ports do in fact have hardware support for 5.1/7.1 HD Audio, despite your claim, available over HDMI. What we want is for the kernel to support streaming the HD Audio from the disc out over the HDMI port, which is called bitstreaming or passthrough. The hardware supports this, but OS X and its kernel do not. This is not the same thing as decoding the audio.

There is no software available to bitstream the HD Audio formats because it involves modifications to the kernel drivers for their graphics cards, which Apple exclusively controls on OS X. On Windows and Linux, the vendor-provided or open-source drivers have the necessary support.

There's tons of reading available on this topic if you're interested. Here's a few:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=133163
http://lists.apple.com/archives/coreaudio-api/2012/Apr/msg00014.html
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1387397/br-lpcm-tracks-working-in-osx-w-plex-and-hdmi-mac-mini

 

[Naimfan]

Three terabytes plus a time machine back up and external drive not enough then? I can't remember the last time I used my optical drive, it serves no purpose.

When you're travelling, no, that doesn't work. And bringing an external drive defeats the purpose of having an all-in-one laptop. As for optical discs, a lot of my work prohibits thumb drives, etc., and so data is transferred via optical discs. Try using a thumb drive (or wifi) in a government office . . .

 

[linux2mac]

Future, you say? Prometheus is old news, it was released on Blu-Ray weeks ago. Perhaps you are speaking of rental availability.

I've been enjoying it for weeks already and just last night watched it in glorious 3D when my internet service went down because of Sandy.

"Boom!", as they say.

Hey what's going on Janstett? It's been a while - since the infamous "Blu-ray thread."

*Waiting for all the other lovers of physical media in that thread to crawl out of the woodwork for a reunion. *

When we last communicated I mentioned I was going to buy the Star Wars BD set on Amazon, but I ended up canceling that order a few weeks before the release after l learned that George messed it up with his "tinkering." That was the closest I ever got to purchasing a Blu-ray disc. Having amassed a 400 plus DVD collection there was no way I was re-investing in a dead on arrival format. Looking forward to 4K/8K. 1080p BD's are like DVD quality now. Stay safe!

PS- Can't wait to watch The Amazing Spider Man tonight in HD. Looks like it won't be available on physical media until November 9.

http://comicbook.com/blog/2012/10/3...-goes-digital-first-with-early-release-today/

 

[Gizmotoy]

1080p BD's are like DVD quality now

PS- Can't wait to watch The Amazing Spider Man tonight in HD.

Is your implication here that iTunes' HD encodes are better than what's on a Blu Ray?

 

[BSben]

Some films come withe different language tracks on DVD and Blu-Ray, in iTunes I usually have to buy the film at full price in each language, subtitles mostly are non optional. And last but not least physical formats are usually cheaper than the iTunes download. And since when does Phil Schiller know what people want, the top people at Apple are not exactly in touch with their customer base.

 

[Artful Dodger]

That's great that you make your living with discs. You will have business for several more years. You have a need for an optical drive for your business. As I said, have at it. Your needs, however, do not define where the market is going over the coming years. Discs are dying.



So taking the drive out "limits ones choice", but leaving it IN doesn't?? Forcing me to buy an optical drive that will never be used limits MY choice. You can still add an external drive - I CAN'T remove the optical drive and gain back the design compromises that were made to accomodate it.

Well up until now you had a choice, 13" MBA which aside from the screen has what you wanted, oh wait you wanted a MBP without a drive, the 15" rMBP for you then, whoops not the correct size, a bit heavy still?

You could have a data doubler installed and it would give you even more or let's go with your words, a drive adds (can we paraphrase here) weight, bulk or more something you don't want and that's fine. By me having to "buy" an external that adds a very unaesthetic look, feel and extra weight/size same as what you don't like by having one yet it's ok for those that need it? Odd suggestion when you mention a phrase of forcing, either way it will be interesting what happens though I still pay in the end for what Apple wants and not as a customer.

I should also add that try sending huge files to clients that don't have the same speed or resources as what how many Big City environments have when people want stuff. I know some people also have a work machine so to speak that never touches the internet other than to get updates, thus a place with 6-12 machines have a dvd passed around but I'm going to say one still has to pay for large data exchange so one way or another no cost savings, choice is given when things are taken away.

But hey we are not just talking iTunes here people, get tunnel vision out of your heads, it's more than being lazy sitting around and pressing a button (we still do that right?) No no no it's all about iTunes and only iTunes and…

 

[FlatlinerG]

I can see why they wouldn't even consider it with iMac's. At least for me, anyway, I never use my desktop to watch movies.

My MacBook pro is another story. I've been craving for bluray playback on that for quite a while as I have a pretty extensive collection.

 

[finchna]

Well, Phil's wrong. I've never stopped asking for BR on Macs since BR was released -- Apple hasn't listened, but that's another story. I use BR for viewing movies along with streaming and other sources and BR is far higher quality and you get the behind the scenes content, etc. that I also find interesting and is not available through streaming.

When streaming quality (and content availability) is truly the same as BR (and DVD) and offers all the features that BR disc sets offer then perhaps it'll be time to give them up, but there are still plenty of reasons to continue to get discs.

 

[Teddy's]

Me too! I want BR drives but...

After playing HD content, my 3 year old MBP well could be used as a George Foreman Grill. HOT!

Can you imagine it playing a BR?

 

[iBug2]

The audio is most certainly the issue. As you mention, there is software available to play Blu Rays, and none of them support HD Audio. You backed up the main point of my post in your first few sentences, so I'm not sure what you think I've said that is untrue.

You state there are hacks to decode the HD audio formats using Windows software, which is the first time I've heard that (are you sure it's not just decoding DTS Core and DD5.1?), but in any case that's not what we want. All recent Macs with HDMI ports do in fact have hardware support for 5.1/7.1 HD Audio, despite your claim, available over HDMI. What we want is for the kernel to support streaming the HD Audio from the disc out over the HDMI port, which is called bitstreaming or passthrough. The hardware supports this, but OS X and its kernel do not. This is not the same thing as decoding the audio.

There is no software available to bitstream the HD Audio formats because it involves modifications to the kernel drivers for their graphics cards, which Apple exclusively controls on OS X. On Windows and Linux, the vendor-provided or open-source drivers have the necessary support.

There's tons of reading available on this topic if you're interested. Here's a few:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=133163
http://lists.apple.com/archives/coreaudio-api/2012/Apr/msg00014.html
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1387397/br-lpcm-tracks-working-in-osx-w-plex-and-hdmi-mac-mini

Os x does bitstream dts core through Hdmi. It doesn't do it for dts hd? If it doesn't that is a problem. But like I said, the audio is not the issue. In worst case we'd use dts core and still watch the movies but we cannot because no app does decrypt the AACS live due to licencing. That is the main problem. I'm sure that whenever someone writes an app which does that yet does not decode Dts hd, people would be ok with that like they were ok with DVD player not decoding Dts. The issue is AACS, Dts hd is secondary. And like I said you can software decode DTS HD using win dll's and ffmpeg software decodes True Hd anyway.

 

[Gizmotoy]

Os x does bitstream dts core through Hdmi. It doesn't do it for dts hd? If it doesn't that is a problem. But like I said, the audio is not the issue. In worst case we'd use dts core and still watch the movies but we cannot because no app does decrypt the AACS live due to licencing. That is the main problem. I'm sure that whenever someone writes an app which does that yet does not decode Dts hd, people would be ok with that like they were ok with DVD player not decoding Dts. The issue is AACS, Dts hd is secondary. And like I said you can software decode DTS HD using win dll's and ffmpeg software decodes True Hd anyway.

I still don't understand what you're trying to say. OS X DOES NOT bitstream DTS-HD MA or True HD. There are several ways to watch a Blu Ray on OS X currently as long as you don't want HD Audio. Mac Blu Ray Player (that's actually the name, $40, available here: http://www.macblurayplayer.com/) is a fully-licensed BD player as of last month (http://blog.macblurayplayer.com/macgo-joined-one-blue-licensing-program/). There are several unlicensed players available as well. If there's something you don't understand, let me know, but let me be perfectly clear: OS X has no issue whatsoever playing full-rate BD video with SD audio. There's no built-in app, sure, but it's fully capable of it.

OS X is not capable of bitstreaming HD audio without Apple's intervention, so I reiterate that HD Audio is the main issue at this point. If Apple doesn't want to include BD drives in their machines that's fine (I'd still prefer they did, but we can live with an external), but without that support we can't properly play all Blu Ray audio on Macs even with 3rd party software.

Software decoding the HD Audio formats using some hacked DLL from Windows provides absolutely zero benefit because only HDMI has the throughput necessary to stream these formats (not even optical will work). The logical solution in the absence of HD audio support from Apple is to use DD and DTS Core, which is what all the current players do.

Edit: After a reread of your post, it sounds like your main complaint is that there's no licensed software BD player for OS X, which as I noted above, is now false. That's probably where the disconnect lies.

 

[iBug2]

I still don't understand what you're trying to say. OS X DOES NOT bitstream DTS-HD MA or True HD. There are several ways to watch a Blu Ray on OS X currently as long as you don't want HD Audio. Mac Blu Ray Player (that's actually the name, $40, available here: http://www.macblurayplayer.com/) is a fully-licensed BD player (http://blog.macblurayplayer.com/macgo-joined-one-blue-licensing-program/), and has been available for more than a year. There are several unlicensed players available as well. If there's something you don't understand, let me know, but let me be perfectly clear: OS X has no issue whatsoever playing full-rate BD video with SD audio. There's no built-in app, sure, but it's fully capable of it.

OS X is not capable of bitstreaming HD audio without Apple's intervention, so I reiterate that HD Audio is the main issue at this point. If Apple doesn't want to include BD drives in their machines that's fine (I'd still prefer they did, but we can live with an external), but without that support we can't properly play all Blu Ray audio on Macs even with 3rd party software.

Software decoding the HD Audio formats using some hacked DLL from Windows provides absolutely zero benefit because only HDMI has the throughput necessary to stream these formats (not even optical will work). The logical solution in the absence of HD audio support from Apple is to use DD and DTS Core, which is what all the current players do.

Edit: After a reread of your post, it sounds like your main complaint is that there's no licensed software BD player for OS X, which as I noted above, is false. That's probably where the disconnect lies.

The last time I tried that player it was buggy as hell so I gave up. I can check it again, maybe they did some work on it. But if you cannot bitstream Dts-hd do what I do. Convert it to Flac using the dll and you have an 2 channel flac, which can be bitstreamed through even Usb if you like to any external decoder with flac support. True Hd can be decoded live using Vlc or Mplayer but then you are left with 2 channel mix of it if you cannot bitstream. Still better than 2 channel mix of core dolby. Currently I watch all my blu rays on my mac and I watch them with True hd and Dts Hd tracks mixed for 2 channels, which I always did for my movies (once you own a 10k costing stereo setup it beats equivalently priced 8 speaker setups obviously) so for me as long as I get the ultimate bitrate for audio I don't mind if it is 2 channel. What I want is a player which can live decode video and one that actually works.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Smaller for chips means less heat per transistor, but it also means they can pack more transistors onto the same size chip to run faster, which is the primary goal. Thus, it doesn't necessarily mean it will run cooler overall. That would require sacrificing absolute power/speed. Would Intel choose a cooler chip that is slower and lets AMD pass them by or would they choose to keep temperature numbers the same and keep performance at a maximum? I guess if they were run by Tim Cook, they'd do as you suggest.

I'm sure they will offer cool running mobile chips, but they will always be noticeably slower than the desktop models. It's the same reason an iPad can't compete with a notebook and a notebook can't compete with a desktop for performance. Heat is your enemy and making cases thinner and smaller increases heat and thus requires using less power. If your ultimate goal is products like the iPod Nano, you're golden. Sadly, an iPod Nano won't replace my Macbook Pro.

Smaller geometries allow for more flexibility. Yes I can pack in more transistors or clock within the same power envelope or I can keep the existing transistors/core and halve my power. It doesn't change the fact that Haswell and Broadwell will deliver more power in a smaller package that is more energy efficient. Apple switched to Intel because of "power per watt" and that trend isn't going to change and the design of Retina MBP and now iMacs is simply following the trend.

Smaller & lighter also means less weight to ship millions of units and the ability to put more on a pallet. Consumers don't have to care about supply side issues but Apple's supposed to be on the forefront of Supply Chain efficiency.

We'll see if there are any cooling issue with the new chassis but at this point i'm not worried. If I want a full size GPU and 130 watt processors I'll get a Mac Pro.

 

[Gizmotoy]

The last time I tried that player it was buggy as hell so I gave up. I can check it again, maybe they did some work on it. But if you cannot bitstream Dts-hd do what I do. Convert it to Flac using the dll and you have an 2 channel flac, which can be bitstreamed through even Usb if you like to any external decoder with flac support. True Hd can be decoded live using Vlc or Mplayer but then you are left with 2 channel mix of it if you cannot bitstream. Still better than 2 channel mix of core dolby. Currently I watch all my blu rays on my mac and I watch them with True hd and Dts Hd tracks mixed for 2 channels, which I always did for my movies (once you own a 10k costing stereo setup it beats equivalently priced 8 speaker setups obviously) so for me as long as I get the ultimate bitrate for audio I don't mind if it is 2 channel. What I want is a player which can live decode video and one that actually works.

Seems to work OK for me. It's been getting good reviews since their last major revision, so it's probably improved, especially if you tried it more than a month ago. With proper licensing comes documentation to implement the spec correctly, instead of reverse-engineering it like it used to.

I watch movies on my Mac through a home theater system, so a 2 speaker setup isn't going to cut it. I just use XBMC under Linux on my Mac mini instead.

It would be nice to be able to run in OS X to cut down on the number of headaches I have to deal with, but I seriously doubt Apple will ever bother to update their drivers with HD audio support as long as movies in their store don't support it.

 

[intz2nu]

Personally I'm quite a bit behind in times and I believe Blu-Ray movies costs more? Plus I think I would rather have my movie or any other type of media content on my computers HD to watch from directly. And if ever an iMac 27" is too small to view it on or I was to prefer watching the movie or whatever it is with the family I guess you can just easly project it onto a large HDTV. Because of how behind in times I am I can't say that I really pickup on the Blu-Ray concept as in I can't really see the huge difference or the I just must have, need to have, Blu-Ray.

All-n-all I almost feel as if CD's and DVD's as we know it will most likely soon become much of what happened to the VHS and VCR's. I am almost positive that the future of the Disc as we know it will most likely thin out and become completely a thing of the pass much like a VHS.

I would say I miss an optical drive mainly for installing Driver Support for my printer, and when installing Windows and or other Drivers. But honestly this is the only times I'm using an actual Optical Drive (Ever). I can't remember the year I actually burned a music CD or DVD but I think it was maybe over 5 - 6 years ago?

This all being said I think Phil Schiller may also be thinking of moving ahead in times with eliminating all things Disc related as I and most likely he himself cannot see a future any longer for the good'ol Disc as we know it.

I also I believe Sony mainly just over hyped Blu-Ray into something more or bigger than it really is. The same goes for 3D HDTV's there is really no real future for that stuff. I say Apple is just staying ahead of it's time mean while other computer manufactures are busy integrating things into products that will soon become a thing of the pass.

 

[iBug2]

It would be nice to be able to run in OS X to cut down on the number of headaches I have to deal with, but I seriously doubt Apple will ever bother to update their drivers with HD audio support as long as movies in their store don't support it.

I don't see it happening either, but then again, I still don't understand why we need codecs like Dolby or DTS to watch movies when there are free codecs such as FLAC, which are just as efficient and good as DTS-HD imho.

 

[Hamstring]

Apple wants to sell movies through itunes, why would they support a competing format?

 

[Gizmotoy]

I don't see it happening either, but then again, I still don't understand why we need codecs like Dolby or DTS to watch movies when there are free codecs such as FLAC, which are just as efficient and good as DTS-HD imho.

Because FLAC isn't encrypted, and movie studios won't release movies to consumers without encryption. It's as simple as that.

You could add an encryption layer on top of FLAC, but then we're back where we started with the format not being free-to-implement.

 

[n8mac]

After reading a bit too much of this thread over the weekend, rather than making me want an iMac, it made me look into Blu-ray again after years of assuming it was too expensive. Last time I looked was when it beat out HD-DVD and the PS3 was $700. Now I found a recommended BR player on ebay for $120, not bad.

I have been relegated to a cheap DVD player with my 42" HDTV which was good enough. When I streamed netflix to it I was like "wow that looks bad", but it was mostly old sitcoms to replace cable so I was there for the comedy and plot so it was good enough.

I usually just watched action movies in the theater, but then I looked on Amazon and found the Dark Knight trilogy is coming in Dec for only $30. So I hope to have a decent setup this December for under $200 or a little more with a speaker setup.

Oh and regarding the iMacs, I still use CDs and DVDs so would prefer an internal drive. Blu-ray would be a plus.

 

[marzer]

Funny that you quote me as evidence of your misguided logic... Some of you just don't get it.

I have a very nice home theater setup. Two of them, in fact. A 60" 1080p 24hz LED and a 65" 24hz Plasma. Driven by HTPCs, 7.1 surround, et al. I would love it if those HTPCs could be Mac Minis, but they can't be since Apple doesn't support Blu-Ray -- remember this thread we are in?

I also have high end Apple computers that have displays greater than 1080p. A 30" Cinema Display 2560x1600 and a 15" rMBP. I spend a lot of time on them and, gasp, sometimes watch videos on them.

I'm not supposed to want high quality material when I am on my Macs?

This same idiotic logic would dictate that I can't listen to music anywhere but my home theater. I should be strung up if I listen to music on my Mac, right?

Some of you seem to have some messed up logic.

1) Wanting high quality video on the Mac does not mean you don't have an enjoyable home theater system. And even if you didn't, what's wrong with wanting high quality video on them? And then what about the case of FUSING the Mac and a high end home theater system, the HTPC? In this case the Mac and the home theater ARE THE SAME THING.

2) Many of the fanboys making this argument against watching videos on a Mac are the same ones watching videos on 4" iPhones or 9" iPad screens.

3) Videos obviously are, and have been for a long time, watched on computer screens. Not exclusively, but they are. Apple doesn't block people from watching iTunes movies on their Macs and they include a DVD player app, so your argument that people don't watch videos on their computers is ABSURD. So why not enable them to watch the highest quality videos available instead of stretching 720x480 DVDs?

Today's video consumption is about consuming video EVERYWHERE -- phones, tablets, computers, big screens. Why not have the best available quality at each place?

I just can't understand how anyone considering themselves a proponent of BR quality could possibly lay argue to the worthiness of such a inadequately sized screen for HD video viewing. I guess nothing more than arguing for the sake of argument.

 

[KnightWRX]

Because FLAC isn't encrypted, and movie studios won't release movies to consumers without encryption. It's as simple as that.

You could add an encryption layer on top of FLAC, but then we're back where we started with the format not being free-to-implement.

DRM on files and Codecs have nothing to do with one another. DRM is a function of the container.

 

[BFizzzle]

i understand there is a want for BR on mac. I for one dont need it....Now on my xbox.. thats a different story