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.
Steve Jobs Suggests Blu-ray Not Coming to Mac Anytime Soon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
True, but that observation is completely irrelevant to the point that was made: the Studios are changing their product line-ups ...today... to sell a multi-format (BR+DVD+DC) product.
A conveniently self-fulfililng prediction because it seeks nothing less than the best possible. Oops:
Better is the enemy of Good Enough.
- Sergey Gorshkov (alternatively, Carl von Clausewitz, or Volare)
What you've clearly ignored is the basic business case. Try changing the question to ask what can be done today for a business to be profitable...today.
Thus, ask if the time is right via a sufficient penetration of bandwidth which is adequate for delivery of a "good enough" quality (ie, 720 streamed media) product to be financially viable (profitable).
Answer: Netflix and Wii are risking their own dollars on exactly that venture...today. Apple appears to be doing so too.
Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a nut...but I don't think you've gotten lucky here with your blind guesses.
You've neglected to consider that Apple isn't an IP-owner of the content, nor do they sell pipes. As such, you've neglected to consider how they could possibly make a buck ...today... in a marketplace of nothing less than 1080 level of content.
The future will eventually come, sure. However, as you stated above, the future for high bandwidth for full 1080p (or higher) real time streaming isn't just around the corner, so there are going to be intermediary and transitional steps.
One such available step is a "good enough" image to reduce the bandwidth demand, compared to what the state of the shelf is for the pipes being rented from ISPs by the disposable income friendly early mainstream targeted customer base.
Perhaps you'll even come to eventually recognize the chronological parallels with the early days of the iPod, where ~90% of the consumer's content was locally ripped, in part because he already owned that library and in part because he didn't have the ISP bandwidth to make downloading of music equally convenient.
or maybe not.
-hh
All I did is price out the computer you have in your signature, which is 3,200 at bare minimum. I know that you won't be able to understand this, but others might. No one wants Bluray to be required in every mac, however some people want it as an option if they want to pay more for it. I know people at my office would love to watch a 1920x1080p Hi-def Blu Ray on their macs vs a 720x480 sd dvd.
I never said anything about the "apple tax", even though we all know what it is. I do agree with you though that most likely Apple would charge an obscene amount for a Blu ray dive.
No one is saying that every mac is required to have a Blu ray drive, but people should be given the option. I know that it must seem like rocket science but it is not.
TV Screens getting larger... people are going to want Blu-ray quality
Bolstering my arguments above, here's the latest:
http://lifeinc.todayshow.com/_news/2010/10/04/5215677-watching-the-us-fall-apart-in-glorious-hi-def
Blu-ray is going to do just fine; Apple COMPUTERS, on the other hand?
Not so well.
And that "point" doesn't prove anything except that both formats are currently in use and studios can reasonably expect that they might sell more in multi-format. Not to me, because I seek out the pure Blu-ray release to save a few bucks.
And you could just as easily make the nonsensical argument that they include DVD's because DVD quality is better. Multi-format releases in no way make any kind of argument that the market is dying.
Being a (most likely) fascist ****** fostering inferior crap on a clueless public is nothing to be proud of, when superior alternatives exist and are in standard use by people who have half a brain and can afford large plasma screens (more and more, much to Job's chagrin).
I remember an Apple that used to actually really MAKE cutting edge computers, and was proud of them. That took justified pride in offering people the very best available.
Not media hucksters. Not cheap overpriced fad toymakers easily destroyed by Chinese competition.
No kidding. And in the decade interim there will be Blu-ray. Jobs be damned or not.
Perhaps you'll realize just how "well" Apple Computers would have done had they refused to put superdrives in their computers for a decade because they'd had the iTunes store up five years sooner.
We wouldn't be here discussing it, that's for sure, because there would be no Apple to talk about.
And JUSTIFIABLY so.
Bolstering my arguments above, here's the latest:
http://lifeinc.todayshow.com/_news/2010/10/04/5215677-watching-the-us-fall-apart-in-glorious-hi-def
Blu-ray is going to do just fine; Apple COMPUTERS, on the other hand?
Not so well.
And that "point" doesn't prove anything except that both formats are currently in use and studios can reasonably expect that they might sell more in multi-format. Not to me, because I seek out the pure Blu-ray release to save a few bucks.
And you could just as easily make the nonsensical argument that they include DVD's because DVD quality is better. Multi-format releases in no way make any kind of argument that the market is dying.
Being a (most likely) fascist ****** fostering inferior crap on a clueless public is nothing to be proud of, when superior alternatives exist and are in standard use by people who have half a brain and can afford large plasma screens (more and more, much to Job's chagrin).
I remember an Apple that used to actually really MAKE cutting edge computers, and was proud of them. That took justified pride in offering people the very best available.
Not media hucksters. Not cheap overpriced fad toymakers easily destroyed by Chinese competition.
No kidding. And in the decade interim there will be Blu-ray. Jobs be damned or not.
Perhaps you'll realize just how "well" Apple Computers would have done had they refused to put superdrives in their computers for a decade because they'd had the iTunes store up five years sooner.
We wouldn't be here discussing it, that's for sure, because there would be no Apple to talk about.
And JUSTIFIABLY so.
<yawn> Okay... if you say so.
What else you got?
The only "chagrin" around here seems to be oozing out of your mouth. You're the one who's "clueless"... clueless that many (MANY!) folks don't care if there is a BD player/burner **inside** their Mac or not. And you just can't deal with it. If i want to watch a BD disk, it won't be on my MBP's tiny 15" screen (any more jokes?). I'll go in the living room and view it on my 46" Toshiba. No BD burner in my Mac either? Oh boo-hoo. Anyone serious enough to care will simply buy an external or get a PeeCee instead. Big-effing-deal. Besides, W.T.H. do you expect anyone here to do for you?
. . . cry in our beer? [Methinks thou doth protest too much. I'm not defending Apple's decisions or even arguing against your POV. I will remark though that: a lot of what you're saying is being presented in a really assedelic fashion... in no way interesting or engaging, if you know what i mean. So what do you hope to gain from that?]
Well if he followed my link he would've noticed I put in external blue-ray burner.
Here is my reality: in the last fifteen years, my internet connection speeds have improved from 28 kbit/s to 30 Mbit/s. In other words, the internet is 1000 times faster for me now than it was 15 years ago. And the race goes on. In the next years, connection speeds > 100 Mbit/s will be a common thing, and HD streaming a normality.
And sabotaging a large chunk of their own customers, by withholding the newest technology options like BluRay, USB 3.0, eSATA ports and high-end Nvidia graphics card from them would not be a perverse move?
I'm a Mac user of 16 years and recovering Apple evangelist. But I'm no longer sure if their hardware and platform has much future in my profession (graphic designer and videographer).
Not even during the darkest days in the 90ies have I felt as pessimistic about my relationship with Apple, as I'm feeling now!
Unfortunately, xbjllb doesn't even have anything here: the article's lead-in sentence states (emphasis added):
And sure, while the statistics look pretty good (almost 60%), there's several important facts missing. Just to name a few:
- The Feds turned off NTSC in 2009 (during the report period)
- Not all of these HD sets are 1080
- Not all of these HD sets have an HDMI port
And the relevance of each of these points are, in order:
- Feds = market force causing consumer demand & a bubble
- Because this topic has been claiming that 720 isn't good enough
- Because you can't use a BD player {edit: at 1080p} without an HDMI port
FWIW, a much more useful statistic would be how much market penetration growth there has been just within the past 6-9 months (post- Fed created demand bubble).
Except that your hand-waving explanation attempt fails to explain any of the business case motivations: that this was a change in their marketing direction, and done so without a sufficiently meaningful price markup so as to increase profits.
Ah, xbjllb has invoked a Red Herring ("you could have XYZ"). How cute! Of course, there's no reason to do so when you had previously claimed to have "Devistated" all comers to this debate ... unless ... well, you realize that your argument isn't logical, but is built in quicksand and bullying statements.
Why speaking of bulling statements. Since I'm not 100% sure if you're insulting me, I've saved you from the 'Report' button...for now.
Of course xbjllb is clearly insulting & namecalling someone, and the important question is Why? IMO, the reason was probably to try to distract the MR readership from the point being made, because xbjllb has no counter-argument. To refresh:
"What you've clearly ignored is the basic business case. Try changing the question to ask what can be done today for a business to be profitable...today.
Thus, ask if the time is right via a sufficient penetration of bandwidth which is adequate for delivery of a "good enough" quality (ie, 720 streamed media) product to be financially viable (profitable).
Answer: Netflix and Wii are risking their own dollars on exactly that venture...today. Apple appears to be doing so too."
xbjllb's insult = no logical response = forfeit.
You've permanently lost this point in the debate.
I do too. Where we differ is that I more strongly embrace that which you also chose to delete from the quote that you slung your insult at:
Better is the enemy of Good Enough.
- Sergey Gorshkov (alternatively, Carl von Clausewitz, or Volare)
Its one thing to build utterly the best... but without a supporting foundation of solid core business, you'll be quickly marginalized because of your high operating costs. For example, compare the MSRP of a Rolls Royce or Maybach to the larger sales volume alternatives.
Yes ... but gosh, ... there still remains this tiny little problem of reality, because of how the Studios aren't doing what you're claiming that they are. I remind you again that the Studios are hedging their bets on BD by changing to market multi-format product sales.
The Superdrive parallel doesn't work well, because its cost served to exasperate the "Apple Tax" of the day, which was why it wasn't a standard component for so long. The simple business case was that it remained separate until such time that it became cheaper for Apple to include it because doing so allowed them to save money by streamlining logistics and inventory (reduced product lines permutations).
This doesn't apply to the BR situation, because the licensing provisions are the key to adoption, and just not the simple cost of a piece of hardware.
Frankly, I recognize xbjllb's perspective is a common one: this is the sort of "customer" feedback I see when they believe that they're spending someone else's money (and not their own). When the fully burdened lifecycle costs of what they're asking for are calculated and presented to them, this sort of customer never pays up for what they said that they can't live without.
-hh
That was a long long long post/series of replies. And I haven't read every post (not even nearly) in this thread. But here is my .02.
Studios are releasing their videos in various formats for one simple reason. To reach the largest market possible. It's the most logical business maneuver and it's pretty cost effective. The costs involved in creating media is mostly in the actual content creation. The physical media is negligible. If a company wants to put out a blu-ray - it costs them next to nothing to also offer it as a DVD or digital download. But any small incremental cost is offset by the increased market they can appeal to. The fact that they support these mediums isn't a vote in one direction or the other. It's a vote for survival.
And as long as people demand high quality video AND audio - physical media is not in ANY danger until internet companies can stream dozen of gigs quickly and efficiently.
Yes - there will always be people who settle for mediocrity whether they realize it or not. Whether they are confused or duped by the media as to what is and what isn't HD. But there are enough people who demand more to keep the medium well above water UNTIL that time when bandwidth opens up.
Apple isn't doing anything "wrong" by not offering blu-ray options. It's just a peculiar decision IF (and I say IF) they want to continue to position their flagship video product - Final Cut Studio - as all encompassing featuring BD content creation. You would think that - at least in desktop systems - they would offer the OPTION to add an internal BD drive at time of config.
But I believe or at least think strongly that Apple is at odds with itself. On one hand they want to be the cutting edge in content creation with FCP while at the same time moving their business model to be completely cloud based services (iTunes). Those two conflict with each other.
Studios are releasing their videos in various formats for one simple reason. To reach the largest market possible. It's the most logical business maneuver and it's pretty cost effective. The costs involved in creating media is mostly in the actual content creation. The physical media is negligible. If a company wants to put out a blu-ray - it costs them next to nothing to also offer it as a DVD or digital download. But any small incremental cost is offset by the increased market they can appeal to. The fact that they support these mediums isn't a vote in one direction or the other. It's a vote for survival.
And as long as people demand high quality video AND audio - physical media is not in ANY danger until internet companies can stream dozen of gigs quickly and efficiently.
Yes - there will always be people who settle for mediocrity whether they realize it or not. Whether they are confused or duped by the media as to what is and what isn't HD. But there are enough people who demand more to keep the medium well above water UNTIL that time when bandwidth opens up.
Apple isn't doing anything "wrong" by not offering blu-ray options. It's just a peculiar decision IF (and I say IF) they want to continue to position their flagship video product - Final Cut Studio - as all encompassing featuring BD content creation. You would think that - at least in desktop systems - they would offer the OPTION to add an internal BD drive at time of config.
But I believe or at least think strongly that Apple is at odds with itself. On one hand they want to be the cutting edge in content creation with FCP while at the same time moving their business model to be completely cloud based services (iTunes). Those two conflict with each other.
Recession is over. Wake up and start spending. My company is hiring engineers and cannot find enough qualified people!
I'm not going to browse the 3,000+ post autopsy that's already been and gone. I'll simply express my point of view:
As someone who likes both Macs and Blu-ray, I'd like the option of combining these two interests. I don't understand why I'm not allowed. I don't expect anybody other than me to pay for this - if Apple want to fist me for £100 to swap out the SuperDrive for a £40 BD reader (figures consistent with their borderline-criminal hard drive policy...), I'll take it on the chin. If there's a licence fee, they can fist me twice.
What gives?
As someone who likes both Macs and Blu-ray, I'd like the option of combining these two interests. I don't understand why I'm not allowed. I don't expect anybody other than me to pay for this - if Apple want to fist me for £100 to swap out the SuperDrive for a £40 BD reader (figures consistent with their borderline-criminal hard drive policy...), I'll take it on the chin. If there's a licence fee, they can fist me twice.
What gives?
Blu-ray is going to do just fine; Apple COMPUTERS, on the other hand?
Not so well.
Interesting thought but I am not seeing it. I am seeing more and more people with MBP's at the airport when I am traveling and more college students ( I live in a city with about a dozen colleges) with them. Plus the iPad is unstoppable. Anyone trying to make a better tablet is like anyone trying to make a better iPod. They all try but end up bringing junk to market. So I just laugh when I see your statement. It's about as ridiculous as those that believed an alien space craft was following the Hale-Bopp comet.
<yawn> Okay... if you say so.
What else you got?
Besides, W.T.H. do you expect anyone here to do for you?
[Methinks thou doth protest too much. I'm not defending Apple's decisions or even arguing against your POV. I will remark though that: a lot of what you're saying is being presented in a really assedelic fashion... in no way interesting or engaging, if you know what i mean. So what do you hope to gain from that?]
So why do we have DVD drives and burners in our computers? who wants to to watch DVD's in their computer? Who wants to burn DVD's in their computer...
Exactly! My Macs are for work. When I want to watch a BD movie I do so on my dedicated home theater with HD projector and Draper Onyx screen. Hmmm...let me think, watch BD movie on my Draper Onyx screen or 27" iMac? Or wait better yet, watch BD movie on my 13" MBP - LOL You are right he is clueless!!
P.S. I am trying to picture my iMac on the floor next to my home theater rig to use as a BD player (if it did have one). Damn it SJ, please put BD players in iMac - LOL !!
And what if your work - like many with Macs IS video production and the BD recorder is a necessity. It's not all about watching movies on your small screen.
You can only output HD through the HDMI port, so BD is pointless for the rest.
that maybe.... 90% correct
since the picture companies are all anal about content protection (HDCP and what hdmi was created around)
without HDMI and HDCP you cannot output 1080p, only 720P to my knowledge, you will still get a picture, sound and everything else, but not MAXIMUM quality if you use lets say.. component.
still, component on an older 40"-50" + 720p still looks ok.
this is not a limitation of the component medium, the bluray player, or ANYTHING ELSE other than the picture companies greed. component has MORE than enough bandwidth.
this is also the same argument for optical, you cannot output DTS master audio or Dolby HD sound on optical, you MUST use HDMI + HDCP. their explanation or switching standards was optical did not have enough bandwidth LMFAO
I'd go external. That was easy!
well you'd have to - that's the current situation. What people are suggesting here is that there should be an option. That the same company that touts it's leading edge editing software which boasts blu-ray authoring should at least offer the OPTION to get an internal blu-ray recorder.
You can say that you don't need it. That's fine. But the OPTION hurts no one.
http://www.ipadnewsdaily.com/ipad-sets-adoption-records-beats-dvd-player--0953/
"It's no secret that the iPad has been successful. It sells about 4.5 million units each quarter. Now, according to Bernstein Research, this initial adoption rate of the iPad was the "fastest ever," surpassing the debut of the iPhone in 2007 and the DVD player in 1994."
Yea...Apple's not doing so well.
Exactly (at least for "Nothing Less than 1080p")
My apologies, but I'm going to assume that most posters are sufficiently mature & respectful of others to retain conversational context, without the need to make every post even longer by restating every point in every single last post.
-hh
My TivoHD will output 1080i via the component video outputs, but after 2010 analog output (including component) on newly-manufactured devices that play back AACS-licensed content will be limited to 480i and analog output will not be supported at all on such devices manufactured after 2013.
So consumers are effectively required to "buy HDMI" if they want to future-proof their hardware purchases.
Component will carry 1080i and 720p, so it is definitely HD. And, as it has been said frequently, that 40+ Mbps BD stream scaled to 720p will look much better than a low bitrate download (the only legal kind AFAIK for movies), and the 7.1 soundtrack will sound much better.
So, there are advantages to watching a BD on a 720p television - just as there are advantages to watching BD on a 13" laptop. It is not pointless.
Note that the optical link uses a blinking red LED (think Morse code), not a modulated laser beam like network/SAN fibre links. The bandwidth limitation is real - TOSlink can't support the better BD sound bitstreams.
See Apple's description of TOSlink bandwidth on Apple computers.
Fortunately, even most of the cheapest flat panel TVs have HDMI inputs, like this $139.99 15" HDTV at Best Buy. It would be hard to find an HDTV (outside of the smallest portables) without an HDMI input or two.
- Status