Steve Jobs Suggests Blu-ray Not Coming to Mac Anytime Soon

[DoFoT9]

True, but that doesn't help people who wish to use services like NetFlix, Amazon, iTunes and such. And as a TivoHD owner, I cannot access Comcast OnDemand (I expect Tru2way will never make it out of CableLabs labs), so I am solely dependent on those other sources for "on demand" content.

not at all, but over here in australia most of those services dont exist - so the ISPs have taken a pretty good role in providing those (and for free bandwidth, which is the big plus for us less fortunate to have unlimited caps).

the competition is nice, and i really would go with a company over my silly ISP - but its just not possible with a 50GB cap for $80 a month!

 

[Hal Itosis]

You don't give '2.*** about BlewWray' then why the fux do you post in this thread??

That's a dumbass question... and is one example of why i've posted here: simply to expose jokers who talk nonsense. Use the "who posted" search to see for yourself.

Maybe you're so infatuated by SJ that you feel the need to jump in here and defend anything anyone says that remotely goes against what SJ says. You're hilarious. Every thread you post in is SJ is right you are wrong. Winbloze sucks.

Obviously you don't know how to search through a forum and read threads for context. What you said there is totally false. Didn't i just two posts back mention the option of purchasing Sony or Toshiba PeeCees? Either you're very confused or just making stuff up to get attention.

 

[weespeed]

Obviously you don't know how to search through a forum and read threads for context. What you said there is totally false. Didn't i just two posts back mention the option of purchasing Sony or Toshiba PeeCees? Either you're very confused or just making stuff up to get attention.

I didn't do a search. I was reading the posts and was mixing your post with linux2mac's post. I apologize if you're not the fanboy I accused you of.
I do question why you bother posting in a thread about blewwray if you don't give 2.fuks about it.

 

[arogge]

I may be confused, how do you stream hidef when you are on a long car ride or on an airplane?

How do you enjoy HD video without a large screen? Unless I'm using the video for a purpose other than personal entertainment, I've been happy watching low-resolution videos on my phone. It's the audio quality there that could be better, but I can't beat the convenience.

Yes, Apple is pretty stupid to lock out Blu-ray. It's not like its prices are low, or anything below premium rates. Also stupid is not offering a product line of different-size towers, laptops that aren't several times the price of a comparable Dell, and not putting HPC and other professional markets above consumers' portable entertainment.

There's a reason why Apple doesn't get many government and corporate sales contracts that I've seen. Everything goes to companies that can deliver on price and volume, but also on customizable functionality. It's the demand for the PC guy instead of the "cool" Mac, a system that just does business instead of finding faces in iPhoto while you play with the iChat camera.

I've met many people who turn up their noses at the suggestion of Apple, and I figured out why. Apple just doesn't get it in a lot of areas, and it's by choice. Apple has a lot of potential to compete, but instead of delivering enterprise-level hardware at competitive prices, it chases after the crowd that buys small-capacity iPods and needs reminders that a file on the Desktop was downloaded from the Internet and could be risky. Apple is catering too much to the layman instead of the people who want to do work and go home at the end of the day, and with its latest pricing schemes Apple is pushing more people towards less-expensive and more-customizable solutions to meet their industry requirements.

 

[AidenShaw]

Visual angle is the key factor

How do you enjoy HD video without a large screen?

Think about the logic behind the marketing term "Retina Display".

When a screen is close to your eyes, it's visually larger (visual angle is greater) than when held far away.

That 13" laptop on your tray table is visually larger than a 60" bigscreen 4m from your sofa.

Do you want to watch 307 Kpixel images (DVD) or 2 Mpixel images (BD)?

 

[linux2mac]

Apple must be doing worse than I thought if more people have screen and projector set ups than iMac and MacBooks.

Facts please.

I may be confused, how do you stream hidef when you are on a long car ride or on an airplane?

I don't do long car rides. If I have to drive longer than 4 hours I fly. If I am in a car, I am the driver. Where I come from its not a good idea to watch a movie while driving.

On a plane, I watch a movie on my iPhone4 or sleep. No BD in my iPhone4 either.

 

[samcraig]

As it's been said over and over (by me and others)

Bandwidth is not at the point that TRUE HD video and full dynamic sound can be streamed or downloaded in a practical way. Having HD "dimensions" is marketing. It's all about bitrates and compression.

Blu-Ray isn't going anywhere as long as people demand high quality audio and video.

I am still amazed at the number of people who rally to destroy a SUPERIOR experience and are willing to accept MEDIOCRITY in its place. Especially those who are so Pro-Apple.

 

[toke lahti]

Um... all those numbers only mean something when viewed in the living room on a 42-inch screen (or larger). The notion that Mac users should be getting all worked-up about having (or not having) such "impressive" technology jammed into a MacBook Pro with a 15-inch screen is hilarious!!!

In case you didn't yet get it,
I'll try one more time:
Perceivable resolution is not about physical size, it's about field of view.
17"@2' is same as 136"@16'. Just hold your laptop in front of your living room tv where you sit watching tv. Which one seems bigger?

 

[leroypants]

Facts please.

Do you what what a "fact" is because based on your posts i am sure you do not. Your claim that all 1080p is equal is typical of your "facts".

I don't do long car rides. If I have to drive longer than 4 hours I fly. If I am in a car, I am the driver.

Plenty of people do long car ride, i do them all the time as both a driver and a passenger. I am glad i can't watch a high quality Blu ray on a mac because you don't do long car rides. Once again no one is saying macs should be required to have a blu ray drive, just that they should be an option. However since SJ said they shouldn't be people like you post backing him up to no end, rather than being a free independent thinker. Some people base their opinions on what SJ tells them.....

On a plane, I watch a movie on my iPhone4 or sleep. No BD in my iPhone4 either.

SFW, what about the other people who want to watch blu ray on a mac?

 

[samcraig]

Leroy -

The "problem" is that some people think they're use case is the dominant one (or the ONLY one).

To the people who are so against it - why? What's bad about having the OPTION? If you don't want to exercise the option - don't. But why stand in the way of those that do. Ridiculous. And again illustrates how silly it is that people will argue for an inferior experience.

 

[arogge]

That 13" laptop on your tray table is visually larger than a 60" bigscreen 4m from your sofa.

Do you want to watch 307 Kpixel images (DVD) or 2 Mpixel images (BD)?

The problem seems to be the screen resolution more than the viewing distance. If the screen is not able to display the resolution adequately, and if I have no desire to put my nose up against the monitor, I don't perceive any benefit from the higher resolution playback. I've watched both HD and Standard Definition video entertainment from Apple on a 13-inch iBook screen and I can't tell the difference between the two resolutions.

 

[KnightWRX]

The problem seems to be the screen resolution more than the viewing distance.

No, the issue is purely screen resolution in relation to viewing distance. The farther away from a screen, the less you notice higher resolutions and the more you have to bump up the screen size (and thus the pixel size) to start noticeing it again.

The problem is not more one than the other, they are all linked together.

 

[linux2mac]

Leroy -

The "problem" is that some people think they're use case is the dominant one (or the ONLY one).

To the people who are so against it - why? What's bad about having the OPTION? If you don't want to exercise the option - don't. But why stand in the way of those that do. Ridiculous. And again illustrates how silly it is that people will argue for an inferior experience.

I am not against it being an option when in fact BD on a Mac is an option - it's called OWC.

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/blu-ray

This is no different then going out and buying a Toshiba or Sony BD for a PC. I just think its ludicrous that people find this another reason to hate on Apple.

If I really needed a BD for my Mac OWC is where I would turn. But there is no reason for me to have BD in my Mac because number one it will go the way of the dodo soon ( I posted plenty of supporting links already). Also for movie watching I have dedicated BD players and I would prefer to watch my BD movies in my home theater which has a much larger screen than my 27" iMac plus I have better seating in my theater than the desk where my iMac sits.

I am no Apple fan. I go with who makes the best products. And right now SJ and Co. make the best products. If Banana Computer made better products I would drop Apple like a hot potato and go with Banana.

 

[samcraig]

I am not against it being an option when in fact BD on a Mac is an option - it's called OWC.

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/blu-ray

This is no different then going out and buying a Toshiba or Sony BD for a PC. I just think its ludicrous that people find this another reason to hate on Apple.

If I really needed a BD for my Mac OWC is where I would turn. But there is no reason for me to have BD in my Mac because number one it will go the way of the dodo soon ( I posted plenty of supporting links already). Also for movie watching I have dedicated BD players and I would prefer to watch my BD movies in my home theater which has a much larger screen than my 27" iMac plus I have better seating in my theater than the desk where my iMac sits.

I am no Apple fan. I go with who makes the best products. And right now SJ and Co. make the best products. If Banana Computer made better products I would drop Apple like a hot potato and go with Banana.

That's your use case. And having a blu-ray player isn't just about playing back content. It's also about content creation.

Apple wants to tout how amazing their blu-ray authoring is with the FCP suite and yet doesn't really support blu-ray. A bit hypocritical if you ask me.

ETA: And blu-ray isn't going anywhere for awhile for reasons discussed already. But you can have your fantasy there...

 

[Hal Itosis]

Think about the logic behind the marketing term "Retina Display".

When a screen is close to your eyes, it's visually larger (visual angle is greater) than when held far away.

That 13" laptop on your tray table is visually larger than a 60" bigscreen 4m from your sofa.

Do you want to watch 307 Kpixel images (DVD) or 2 Mpixel images (BD)?

People constantly need to read stuff on their tiny iPhone screen. Many, many, many, many hours per week. Watching movies on a 15" (or 13" whatever) falls much lower on the list of what people actually use laptops for. If you spend 3 hours a day watching movies on a computer, then maybe the Mac wasn't designed with your lifestyle in mind.

In case you didn't yet get it,
I'll try one more time:
Perceivable resolution is not about physical size, it's about field of view.
17"@2' is same as 136"@16'. Just hold your laptop in front of your living room tv where you sit watching tv. Which one seems bigger?

I don't question that it looks "better" perceivably. But is it really worth the trouble? How many hours per week does one spend staring at movies on a 15" screen? Most folks use computers for work and other activities... and when they want to watch a flick, they head to the living room. Anyone so fanatical about BD can simply buy external players (or burners) and get their nerdgasms that way.

 

[AidenShaw]

The problem seems to be the screen resolution more than the viewing distance. If the screen is not able to display the resolution adequately, and if I have no desire to put my nose up against the monitor, I don't perceive any benefit from the higher resolution playback. I've watched both HD and Standard Definition video entertainment from Apple on a 13-inch iBook screen and I can't tell the difference between the two resolutions.

Wow, so many things wrong here....

• If the screen is not able to display the resolution adequately

True, but as far as I know Apple laptops and desktops have screens that are more than DVD 640x480 resolution.

• I've watched both HD and Standard Definition video entertainment from Apple on a 13-inch iBook screen

Yes - video content "from Apple" !!!!!

Are you really surprised that you can't tell the difference between an overly compressed SD image and an overly compressed HD image?

I'd bet if you compared an 8 Mbps DVD stream to any compressed Apple stream that you'd prefer the 480 DVD.
_________

Anyway, it's mind boggling that people are arguing that Apple should not provide the option of BD for those who wish to pay extra for higher quality. Mind boggling.
________________________

If you spend 3 hours a day watching movies on a computer, then maybe the Mac wasn't designed with your lifestyle in mind.

That's not exactly what the turtlenecked overlord is saying:

Every MacBook Pro has a pristine LED-backlit display with wide-angle viewing and a color gamut usually seen only on a desktop display. So whether you’re watching a movie or making one, you’ve got the perfect canvas.

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html

Apple seems to think that their laptops are good for watching movies - why don't you think so?

I don't question that it looks "better" perceivably. But is it really worth the trouble? How many hours per week does one spend staring at movies on a 15" screen? Most folks use computers for work and other activities... and when they want to watch a flick, they head to the living room. Anyone so fanatical about BD can simply buy external players (or burners) and get their nerdgasms that way.

Maybe I said this already, but:

It's mind boggling that people are arguing that Apple should not provide the option of BD for those who wish to pay extra for higher quality. Mind boggling.

 

[JAT]

Lack of choice is why I can't find any use for Apple products in my home entertainment environment.
Their gadgets are way too limited format and interface-wise and iTunes offers far from state-of-the-art picture and sound quality.

I think you meant "lack of trying". My Mini is one shelf up from my BDp in the rack. Both look great on the 90", both get frequent input from Netflix (Mini: streaming, BD: discs).

Interesting tidbit: Apple is not the only source of content for running through an Apple computer. Probably didn't know that, huh?

 

[Hal Itosis]

It's mind boggling that people are arguing that Apple should not provide the option of BD for those who wish to pay extra for higher quality. Mind boggling.

Well... sure seems like something is boggled alright. Because no one has EVER said "should not"... at least i've not seen that posted anywhere. What i've been suggesting is that i can understand why Apple might not want to get into it. If they ever do adopt BD, you won't hear me complain (or anyone else i imagine).

Like most others in this thread, the "argument" being made is somewhat contrived.

 

[toke lahti]

I've watched both HD and Standard Definition video entertainment from Apple on a 13-inch iBook screen and I can't tell the difference between the two resolutions.

Maybe you should watch little bit closer or pay a visit to optician.
Or the problem is that there is just not single on "SD" and single one "HD".
MB's horizontal rez is 1280 pixels.
There is "SD" that has 360, 480, 512, 640, 702, 720 or 1024 horz pixels.
Then there is "HD" that is 960, 1024, 1280, 1440 or 1920.
There can be big difference or not.
Secondly there's bitrate. Thirdly compression efficiency.
Last but not least: original visual quality of content.

 

[spyda]

Mac is still living in the Stone Ages, sorry folks.

 

[toke lahti]

I am not against it being an option when in fact BD on a Mac is an option - it's called OWC.

Then it would be really nice to watch bd movies on an aeroplane?

 

[toke lahti]

I don't question that it looks "better" perceivably. But is it really worth the trouble? How many hours per week does one spend staring at movies on a 15" screen? Most folks use computers for work and other activities... and when they want to watch a flick, they head to the living room. Anyone so fanatical about BD can simply buy external players (or burners) and get their nerdgasms that way.

Worth the trouble?
Computers in general are used to lessen the trouble.
Once again there's nothing wrong with 15" screen if it's at right distance.

If you go to the trip, do you want to have separate device for each function?
Would you carry your bookshelf, typewriter, turntable, radio, television & darkroom with you?
Fundamental idea of a laptop is that you can do all with one device.
If I would like to watch a movie with my laptop once a week and it's not possible, I'll miss 50 movies a year.

For example, 5 persons in a family. Should they all have separate computer & bd-player in each room? Or pay for digital download for every person & device separately? Pay 20 times more than one bd, that everybody can watch with every device when they want to and as meny times as they want to.

I'm not fixated in certain media type. I'm interested in content.
If I could get a hard copy with bd quality and unlimited watching time, place & devices with resale value, I don't mind what the media is. Unfortunately, there's no alternative to bd.
(Like there's no alternative for Macs, if you don't want windows...)

 

[iEdd]

Worth the trouble?

I actually get a chuckle out of those saying "is it worth the trouble?".

<sarcasm>No, popping a Blu-Ray disc in is too much trouble. It would be much easier to buy a Windows PC, rip a copy of the BD to DVD, then take that in my MacBook. OR pay for the same content twice by getting it on iTunes.</sarcasm>

 

[nickane]

Wow. I can't believe this one's still going. I gave up waiting and bought a Sony s370 a few weeks ago. Bluray is awesome but the discs are still too dear to buy as many as I'd like.

I think what's mindboggling is that this thread is still going.

There is nothing surprising about Jobs apologists telling users of this forum why they're wrong to want a feature. I'll never forget how widespread the view was here that Apple would never update the iPod to be anything like the iPhone as it would cannibalize iPhone sales. It took apple all of 3 months to release the iPod Touch and drop the price of the iPhone amid rumours that the 2nd gen handset would be 3G and subsidized by the carrier (which it eventually was).

You get the same morons defending Apple when they remove a feature like matte screens or firewire (on the smaller laptops) and you never hear them admit they were wrong to assert his Jobsness's infallibility when Apple deigns to bring back those features that so many people missed.

That's not mindboggling, Aiden, that's just par for the course.

I suspect Apple may be forced to adopt bluray in about 3 years time (by which time many professionals will have moved back to Avid and Linux/Windows), but that they can probably live without adopting it quite comfortably and keep shafting us the way they always have, safe in the knowledge that there will always be enough idiots fervent enough to argue their non-existent case.

 

[diamond.g]

Wow. I can't believe this one's still going. I gave up waiting and bought a Sony s370 a few weeks ago. Bluray is awesome but the discs are still too dear to buy as many as I'd like.

I think what's mindboggling is that this thread is still going.

There is nothing surprising about Jobs apologists telling users of this forum why they're wrong to want a feature. I'll never forget how widespread the view was here that Apple would never update the iPod to be anything like the iPhone as it would cannibalize iPhone sales. It took apple all of 3 months to release the iPod Touch and drop the price of the iPhone amid rumours that the 2nd gen handset would be 3G and subsidized by the carrier (which it eventually was).

You get the same morons defending Apple when they remove a feature like matte screens or firewire (on the smaller laptops) and you never hear them admit they were wrong to assert his Jobsness's infallibility when Apple deigns to bring back those features that so many people missed.

That's not mindboggling, Aiden, that's just par for the course.

I suspect Apple may be forced to adopt bluray in about 3 years time (by which time many professionals will have moved back to Avid and Linux/Windows), but that they can probably live without adopting it quite comfortably and keep shafting us the way they always have, safe in the knowledge that there will always be enough idiots fervent enough to argue their non-existent case.

I believe what you are talking about is cognitive dissonance. It is very interesting to watch...