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

[linux2mac]

Lol. It's a high resolution IPS screen, and far higher pixel-density than your home theatre is. I just got back from visiting my brother who has one, and HUGE would be the word I'd use to describe it, not 'dinky'.

iTunes content doesn't come close to taking advantage of a screen that nice.

Likewise, the Mac Mini would make a great media centre under the TV if it could play Blu-ray. Right now, it's as useless as an unhacked Apple TV.

You are right, my home theater does not have 2560X1440 resolution. But I am perfectly okay with a 1080p picture at 92" than a 27" IPS screen. Until the weight and price of plasma displays in excess of 85" comes down, I have to go with fixed projection to suit my large screen needs. Here is a link for you to peruse the possibilities of a fixed projection screen in a home theater. This is the same model of my screen.

http://www.draperinc.com/ProjectionScreens/ScreensProducts.asp?detail=236#

Now, do you think linux2mac would really want to watch a movie on his 27" iMac or his home theater? Like I said earlier, I use my Macs strictly for work because Macs are the best work machines.

 

[iEdd]

Looking at that link, is that all they cost? $1000 or so?

The way you kept mentioning it by name, I thought these must've been $10k screens. Maybe they do cost that much in Australia.

 

[MacNewsFix]

Looking at that link, is that all they cost? $1000 or so?

The way you kept mentioning it by name, I thought these must've been $10k screens. Maybe they do cost that much in Australia.

Don't forget about the projector. That's another couple thousand (USD).

As envious as I am of your brother with a new iMac, he'd have to sit pretty close to get the full benefit of 1080p on a 27" screen.

http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2360666,00.asp

 

[MacNewsFix]

Hey sparky, you're the monumentally ignorant one, as here's what Jobs himself said:

"Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt. I don't mean from the consumer point of view. It's great to watch movies, but the licensing is so complex. We're waiting until things settle down, and waiting until Blu-ray takes off in the marketplace before we burden our customers with the cost of the licensing and the cost of the drives."

Strange, eh? I don't see any squealing about changes to the operating system in that statement, do you? In fact I don't see anything suggesting there is any technical hurdle whatsoever to be overcome. It's all crying about the "burden" of costs.

From ArsTechnica:

This is important but rarely acknowledged in these discussions (and my journo discussion partner was rather surprised to learn this): Apple will also have to adopt a strict DRM regimen at the most fundamental levels of Mac OS X in order to be able to (legally) play back AACS-protected Blu-ray or HD DVD discs (e.g., most commercial discs in those formats). Apple thus far has avoided criticism, but only because the company has not unveiled its full plans for appeasing the various requirements imposed by the AACS Licensing Administrator for next-gen optical disc DRM. When Apple does, we'll all see that Blu-ray/HD DVD support comes with plenty of strings attached—strings that Apple will have to work into its OS, too. There is no way around it; something similar to Microsoft's Protected Media scheme will be required of Mac OS X if Apple is a licensee to AACS. (The same would be true for Linux, except that AACS won't be licensed for Linux desktop use. There's no way to securely implement it since desktop Linux is an open environment, and AACS requires keeping secrets.)

Here's the basic rundown: AACS has "robustness rules" that include strict mandates for the path that video data takes through a software-based system, like a modern PC. These rules require that decrypted video "not be present on any User-Accessible Bus in analog or unencrypted, compressed form," because users could possibly record or redirect that content. Companies like Apple and Microsoft are additionally required to use "encryption, execution of a portion of the implementation in ring zero or supervisor mode (i.e., in kernel mode), and/or embodiment in a secure physical implementation," or any other method that can "effectively" keep encryption keys secret. Furthermore, they are required to use "techniques of obfuscation clearly designed to effectively disguise and hamper attempts to discover the approaches used" to secure the systems. Thus, video content must travel through the system encrypted and must only interact with authorized components over authorized pathways.

Again, these are the requirements of AACS, and they're not simple to accomplish, especially in an operating system where there are multiple ways to attack the system. This is why AACS goes even further, requiring that operating systems constantly monitor the "integrity" of the content protection system and purposely stop playing content in the event that any "unauthorized modifications" are detected. In this way, the system not only watches the video path as video travels on it, but it monitors the state of the PC as a whole.

Perhaps you wish he meant items such as HDCP content protection (already used for protected iTunes content) or PAP? I'm fully aware of the HDCP and protected video/audio path requirements and they aren't rocket science -- inconvenient, yes, but not some insurmountable challenge. Apple is telling us the dog ate their homework; most of what they need is already there, as you so eloquently pointed out. Hardware-wise, it's already there as playback works in Boot Camp. The idiots at Microsoft could do it, but the cherubs at Apple are stumped?

And how does Microsoft feel about Blu-Ray?

From Crunchgear:

"Actually Blu-ray is going to be passed by as a format."
-Stephen McGill, Microsoft UK

I have thrown down this gauntlet several times and nobody has stepped up to the challenge. I'd like to hear your opinion.

- Can you not apply the same logic to DVD playback?
- Shouldn't all video be seen on the best screen in the house? Why just Blu-Ray? Why is some video on the Mac OK but not Blu-Ray? Why are you dividing the digital world by what screen you watch it on, and isn't that defeating the whole point of digital convergence and convenience?
- If Macs are not meant to be used to enjoy movies, why do they play DVDs, why do they have remote controls, and how do you explain Front Row?
- How can you dismiss the potential home theater pc applications of a Mac when Apple itself pretends to play in that space? And how can it be taken seriously in this space without supporting Blu-Ray/HDMI/mutlichannel audio?

More to follow in an upcoming post.

 

[gtiintrepid]

no blu-ray disc please. waste money and useless. who watch HD on laptop?

 

[iEdd]

There is more to Blu-ray than videos.

 

[MacNewsFix]

There is more to Blu-ray than videos.

You mean as a storage solution?

 

[iEdd]

Yes. Apple pro apps should be delivered on BD, not several DVDs, for example.

 

[MacNewsFix]

Yes. Apple pro apps should be delivered on BD, not several DVDs, for example.

You beat me to the punch. I'm typing up a response to Janstett and make mention of it as one of the few benefits from a storage aspect.

However, you would then have to assume that all pros are currently using Blu-Ray drives (they're not), and I don't think BD drives are quite yet as ubiquitous as you might think. Plus, do you know of a lot of pro apps that come on Blu-Ray disks right now?

More to follow.

 

[LethalWolfe]

And how does Microsoft feel about Blu-Ray?

From Crunchgear:

"Actually Blu-ray is going to be passed by as a format."
-Stephen McGill, Microsoft UK

Shocker. MS is discounting the format that beat them in the marketplace. If HD-DVD had won I wonder if MS would have the same opinion about optical media?

From the rest of the article,

McGill is nearly right although his statement is little overworked. Blu-ray is already an accepted format. The discs and players are selling fine and will probably increase in sales for the next few years. Blu-ray will probably even outlast the Xbox 360. But products like the new Roku, updated Apple TV, and Boxee Box will quickly introduce new demographics to the world of streaming videos. This is the future. Streaming still has a long ways to go, but will eventually kill physical media dead.

Lethal

 

[MacNewsFix]

Shocker. MS is discounting the format that beat them in the marketplace. If HD-DVD had won I wonder if MS would have the same opinion about optical media?

Absolutely. I don't doubt some of their sentiment is from a business aspect, especially considering the Xbox is the number 2 source of download rentals after iTunes.

However, as Microsoft also sits on the AACS LA, I'm guessing they also stand to benefit if Blu-Ray takes off. Let's also not forget about them expending resources implementing Blu-Ray support in Windows and the fact it is a selling point in differentiating PCs from Macs.

From the rest of the article,

Quote:
McGill is nearly right although his statement is little overworked. Blu-ray is already an accepted format. The discs and players are selling fine and will probably increase in sales for the next few years. Blu-ray will probably even outlast the Xbox 360. But products like the new Roku, updated Apple TV, and Boxee Box will quickly introduce new demographics to the world of streaming videos. This is the future. Streaming still has a long ways to go, but will eventually kill physical media dead.


Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Blu-Ray. About the most positive thing in the quote is that Blu-Ray will outlive a six year old gaming console. Ouch!

 

[LethalWolfe]

Absolutely. I don't doubt some of their sentiment is from a business aspect, especially considering the Xbox is the number 2 source of download rentals after iTunes.

However, as Microsoft also sits on the AACS LA, I'm guessing they also stand to benefit if Blu-Ray takes off. Let's also not forget about them expending resources implementing Blu-Ray support in Windows and the fact it is a selling point in differentiating PCs from Macs.

The Xbox guys, which McGill is one of, will never admit that the PS3 has any advantage by having Blu-ray. Meanwhile, the Windows guys will flaunt any advantage they can over Apple. Each division is out to push it's respective product as best they can even if that means MS as a whole doesn't present a unified position.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Blu-Ray. About the most positive thing in the quote is that Blu-Ray will outlive a six year old gaming console. Ouch!

I think it's a fair assessment of the situation and isn't unduly positive or negative for either delivery method. Blu-ray is an established format (selling over 25 million players in 2010 alone) and is being adopted quicker than DVD (although I don't think Blu-ray will reach DVD's level of adoption overall). Streaming is no where close to replacing physical media today although at some yet to be determined time in the future it most likely will. If you want to get the most out of a home entertainment system today you need Blu-ray. If you want to get the most out of your home entertainment system in 5-10yrs you'll probably have a choice between streaming or Blu-ray.


Lethal

 

[ozred]

Apple as a gadget company is too busy to care.

 

[xbjllb]

I have a feeling that the people at Apple wallpaper their offices with money.

Yep, just like they did at Bear-Stearns. Just like they did at Enron. And a whole slew of companies that were astonishingly overnight no longer with us despite being capitalized to the point that makes Apple look like Wham-O.

no blu-ray disc please. waste money and useless. who watch HD on laptop?

People who speak English?

MY clients. And my potential clients. And the potential clients of, I don't know, maybe MILLIONS of businesses worldwide? When away from their big screens.

Apple as a gadget company is too busy to care.

Agreed. To their eventual downfall no matter how high they're flying on a BUBBLE now.

 

[mpaul]

Unless ISP providers starts to offer high-bandwidth plans at reasonable prices, or Apple/another company starts to offer HD movies rent/download services, here in Italy, i will continue to buy Blu-Ray.
It's the only "premium" option i can have for the moment.....end of the story.

 

[DoFoT9]

THE NEW MACBOOK PROS HAVE BLURAY!

just kidding. if only? :heh:

 

[linux2mac]

Looking at that link, is that all they cost? $1000 or so?

The way you kept mentioning it by name, I thought these must've been $10k screens. Maybe they do cost that much in Australia.

Although the prices have come down since I bought my screen, that is still a lot for a fixed screen when you can buy a 50" plasma for about the same price. Don't forget about adding projector of your choice which can range from about $1200 to $15,000 (http://www.projectorcentral.com/home-theater-projectors.htm).

However the combination of screen plus projector compares favorably in price for a display in excess of 85" as opposed to the $30,000 price tag of Panasonic's 85" plasma.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...=370500&catGroupId=14624&surfModel=TH-85PF12U

Then again you could take it up a notch to Panasonic's 152" plasma. Now that is what I call a "HUGE" screen. LOL

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/09/panasonics-152-inch-4k-resolution-3d-plasma-ships-this-fall/

 

[-hh]

Honestly? Zero. Before you get upset, please read on.

P.S. I think you are being a bit too conservative in your assessment of Apple's costs incurred by adding BD as an option. Besides licensing fees, you would also need to create an extra path in production; every time you do so, production costs go up. The demand has to outweigh the costs, and I don't see the demand.

Thanks for the response (and I'm not upset). You're absolutely correct in that I was conservative in my assessment of Apple's costs to impliment: I assumed that they would be absolutely ZERO, which would be an utterly best-case financial scenario. Which brings us to the next response:

Glad to see that Apple are so afraid of the obvious, they have their ACCOUNTANTS weighing in on the issue.

Sorry, but this point was actually directly addressed; perhaps you missed it.

Specifically, when we look at this from a "Numbers Only" perspective, the BD initiative does not justify itself financially. As such, some other justification must be found. Yes, this literally means a non-financial based justification is needed.

Insofar as what this justification is, feel free to articulate it and develop a good case.

A fair warning though: generic claims of "Doom!" lack details, which make them not particularly convincing, let alone compelling.

I'm a creative. I know what attracted me to Mac in the first place. I also know why I'll be leaving the platform soon if things don't turn around. I also know that I'll be following hundreds of thousands who have already left, and many more hundreds of thousands will be following me.

Okay, you're threatening to leave, but ...to where will you go?

Are you trying to actually suggest that Microsoft is more creative than Apple? Yes, MS happens to have the BD feature today, but when the next big thing comes along, who will be the leader then?

It is fine to try to effect change by threating to leave as a customer, but such threats can't be an empty bluff. Nothing personal, but business is business...and while the engine of business is powered by creativity, that engine is kept running by financial basics.

You're really putting too much weight into these figures to prove the sun revolves around the Earth. It's too easy to poke holes in your numbers ...

But of course. The point was to simply throw a simple set of numbers out there to illustrate that the financials don't scream that this is a huge, profitable business opportunity that's being overlooked. Parametrically, it looks to me to have fallen a couple of orders of magnitude sort of being "compelling".

Given that there are no less than three companies producing Blu-Ray playback software on the PC, the market would appear to be lucrative and substantial.

Perhaps so, but the answer on if it is indeed profitable (let alone lucratively ans substantially so) ultimately lies within those companys' financial reports.


-hh

 

[Nermal]

So... does the 10.7 beta have Blu-ray support?

 

[iEdd]

Then again you could take it up a notch to Panasonic's 152" plasma. Now that is what I call a "HUGE" screen. LOL

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/09/panasonics-152-inch-4k-resolution-3d-plasma-ships-this-fall/

LOL indeed. You'd have to have a mansion and a Ferrari before shelling out on one of those though (remembering it will be out of date in 5 years).

 

[amtrucker22]

THE NEW MACBOOK PROS HAVE BLURAY!

just kidding. if only? :heh:

hahaha! Made me do a double take

 

[iEdd]

"So now we have ThunderBolt. You can push content at 10Gbps. It's amazing. Imagine pushing your 1080p Blu-ray and full 7.1 audio content to your projector or plasma TV."

"Sweet. Really?"

"Psyke! Enjoy 720p iTunes content at Blu-ray prices. In stereo. Sucka."

 

[MacNewsFix]

As promised.

Remember, I am not arguing against Blu-Ray but instead trying to possibly shine some light on why Apple has not rushed to embrace the medium.

-Can you not apply the same logic to DVD playback?

Yes and no. Yes, in that DVD playback outside of the living room setting is also beset with compromises and inconvenient compared to toting around a digital copy (especially on a SSD equipped microlaptop or Flash HD equipped tablet). No, in that most digital copies I will watch will likely be 720p and, therefore, exceed the quality provided by a 480p DVD.

- Shouldn't all video be seen on the best screen in the house? Why just Blu-Ray?

Two factors are at play here: quality and convenience. To get the maximum benefit of Blu-Ray, namely sound and video clarity, you need a particular environment and equipment. I can have a video image more sharp than 1080p, but it does me no good if the screen is too far away or too small to take advantage of said clarity. The same is true for audio: unless your laptop has surround sound, how do you enjoy the 7.1 audio coming through your headphones? Every time you shrink the screen or dumb down the audio, you lose much of the benefit Blu-Ray provides. If you're already making a lot of sacrifices, why not at least go digital and at least save yourself some of the frustration of dealing with physical media including extra heft, increased fragility, increased energy draw, and the other caveats associated with spinning media? It might not be 1080p, but it will still be better than DVD, in essence a "sweet spot."

- If Macs are not meant to be used to enjoy movies, why do they play DVDs, why do they have remote controls, and how do you explain Front Row?

Skip down a bit past my answer to your next question.

- How can you dismiss the potential home theater pc applications of a Mac when Apple itself pretends to play in that space? And how can it be taken seriously in this space without supporting Blu-Ray/HDMI/mutlichannel audio?

I don't dismiss the potential, in fact, I have a Mac mini hooked up to my HD television feeding it my digitized film library through Plex, watching HD podcasts, iTunes and Amazon movie rentals, and surfing the net using Kylo (waaaaaay better than GoogleTV). The Mac mini does support HDMI and multichannel audio; I'm using both. As for Blu-Ray, it would be nice for those few people that want it, but I am not about to rake Apple across the coals when, from everything I read (again, see below) indicates the demand is not quite there. If Apple ever does decide to support Blu-Ray, fantastic, but for now I use my PS3 for those few times I would like to enjoy a Blu-Ray. I also think Apple has not been tightlipped in their criticisms of Blu-Ray and they are deciding to go the disruptive route and not support Blu-Ray like they don't support Flash on their iOS devices. If there was a mountain of money to be made by supporting Blu-Ray, why would Apple not be cashing in on it? The truth is, at least right now, the benefit just isn't there, and Apple is taking a stand right now and not supporting Blu-Ray. As we've seen, it is easier to deny someone something than to offer it and then take it away (ex. matte screens, Firewire).


I think there needs to be some perspective shared. Please indulge me and read on.

First Mac to offer a DVD drive as an option: "Sawtooth" Power Mac (launched second half of 1999).
Sales of DVDs in 1999: Approximately 100 million and roughly 16% of home theater systems with a DVD player.

First Mac to have a DVD drive as default: "Mystic" Power Mac (launched July 19, 2000).
Sales of DVDs in 2000: Approximately 227 million and roughly 32% of home theater systems with a DVD player.

Sales of Blu-Ray movies in 2010: Approximately 76 million and roughly 17% of home theater systems (~20 million homes) with a Blu-Ray player.

One would think that, given Apple's historical record with DVD adoption, 2011 may be the year that Apple jumps on the Blu-Ray wagon. However, then there are these sobering stats:

Sales of DVD drives in 2000: Approximately 46 million.

Sales of PCs in 2000: Approximately 132 million.

So roughly 35% of all computers sold in 2000 contained a DVD drive when Apple embraced the format.

What about today?

Percentage of Blu-Ray drives in computers in 2009: 3.65%

Projected percentage of Blu-Ray drives in computers in 2013: 16.3%

Expected to be the zenith year for Blu-Ray shipments before download services start to gain considerable traction and begin cutting into physical media? 2013 to 2014

So how does one explain the disparity between DVD's track-record and that of its expected replacement? One could infer that, while Blu-Ray does have some traction in home theater systems, the same cannot be said for Blu-Ray on the computer. Why? A possible explanation is that, like the CD replacing floppy, the DVD offered software developers and computer manufacturers a larger storage medium for sending applications and operating system install disks. Forward to the present day, and a computer OS and applications have, for the most part, stayed within or close to the confines of the 8 GB offered by a DVD. In other words, there is no major need for the 25 to 50 GB of a Blu-Ray for software delivery with the few exceptions of some professional media applications, something that can obtained by purchasing an aftermarket BD drive, once more (any?) applications start being sold on Blu-Ray.

To compound the extraneous need for Blu-Ray as a means to obtain software, the world was primarily using a 56kbps modem back in 2000. Today, almost 90% can have access to broadband in the U.S. (and 50% the global population by 2015). My sympathies to those living in countries with draconian bandwidth caps and no options for broadband. However, that demographic's needs will not necessarily be enough to catapult Blu-Ray to anywhere near the heights of DVD popularity or popular enough for computer makers to provide it as an option. While some manufacturers already do, they live in a much more competitive field in some regards and sell in such high volumes compared to Apple. In other words, while Apple competes with the HP and Dells of the world, the HP and Dell compete with each other more (sub $1000 market) and need to match each other and differentiate themselves from one another more.

Also, let's not forget that some of the great appeal of DVD that spurred its growth was the improvements over the previous standard, VHS; the number of important improvements over DVD by Blu-Ray require certain conditions to be met to utilize them, something the DVD did not have to contend with when competing with VHS. Blu-Ray also has much more competition than the DVD faced.

Finally, if Blu-Ray is projected to top off sometime in the next two or three years, why would Apple want to put its stamp of approval on a format they don't see with especially long legs and contrarian to the direction they see the world moving (ie lightweight, drive-less devices)? One could point to USB3 as something else with which they are taking a wait-and-see approach instead of a "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" path. Such business practice is in contradiction to their philosophy for simplicity and being a guiding force with technology (as much as one company can).

The new MacBooks unveiled today, and sadly Blu-Ray is not an option. Perhaps the next version will come when there is a very different environment and Apple feels they have a more compelling reason to offer it.

-MacNewsFix

References (if I failed to list any, please let me know):

http://formatwarcentral.com/2009/08/31/pc-blu-ray-players-not-taking-over/

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/optical_drive_makers_sing_blu-ray_blues

http://technology.greenpromote.biz/blu-ray-disc-drive-penetration-will-not-see-giant-boost/

http://www.digitimes.com/Reports/Report.asp?datepublish=2010/10/21&pages=PD&seq=204

http://www.pcworld.com/article/170972/bluray_drives_in_pcs_fuggetaboutit.html

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20025223-1.html

http://books.google.com/books?id=ik...Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=DVDs sold in 1999&f=false

http://www.myce.com/news/blu-ray-adoption-tops-17-24-million-players-to-be-sold-in-2010-34973/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...cline-likely-die-internet-Digiboxes-over.html

http://www.itproportal.com/2009/08/26/pcs-still-not-shipping-blu-ray-drives/

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/op-ed_optical_media_not_dead_yet.php

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-O3NhbslyrlG/learn/learningcenter/home/tv_faq.html

http://askville.amazon.com/SimilarQuestions.do?req=computers+sold+2000

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/02/fcc-broadband-report/

http://www.newmediatrendwatch.com/world-overview/102-broadband-access

http://www.pewinternet.org/Media-Mentions/2011/Internet-service-map.aspx

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/02/online-movie-downloads.html

http://www.pcworld.com/article/219781/hulu_steps_on_netflixs_toes_starts_streaming_movies.html

http://articles.mcall.com/2011-02-2...krupt-movie-rental-chain-netflix-video-stores

http://www.allformp3.com/dvd-faqs/19.htm

http://www.centris.com/Docs/WP/Blu-Ray.pdf

http://www.allformp3.com/dvd-faqs/19.htm

 

[MacNewsFix]

"So now we have ThunderBolt. You can push content at 10Gbps. It's amazing. Imagine pushing your 1080p Blu-ray and full 7.1 audio content to your projector or plasma TV."

"Sweet. Really?"

"Psyke! Enjoy 720p iTunes content at Blu-ray prices. In stereo. Sucka."

Not quite, at least in the U.S.

I'm looking at Unstoppable (2010) that just hit the iTunes store. It is $14.99 and comes with 5.1 surround sound and extra features. The same movie on
Blu-Ray retails on Amazon for $19.99, but that doesn't include shipping (Then there is the wait time for it to arrive, too.).

...or....

If you go to Amazon, you can pick up a cheap, portable Blu-Ray drive for $100 (about what HP charges as an option to install in your laptop). Hook it to your Mac and rip it with the following open source software. Now you don't need to tote around a disk and get the Blu-Ray quality, and you can play it on a MacBook Air, iPad, etc.

http://www.tested.com/news/how-to-rip-a-blu-ray-movie-with-just-one-click/54/

http://www.amazon.com/Blu-Ray-Player-Laptop-External-Burner/dp/B001UDTTJE
for Blu-Ray

 

[blairh]

Not quite, at least in the U.S.

I'm looking at Unstoppable (2010) that just hit the iTunes store. It is $14.99 and comes with 5.1 surround sound and extra features. The same movie on
Blu-Ray retails on Amazon for $19.99, but that doesn't include shipping (Then there is the wait time for it to arrive, too.).

...or....

If you go to Amazon, you can pick up a cheap, portable Blu-Ray drive for $100 (about what HP charges as an option to install in your laptop). Hook it to your Mac and rip it with the following open source software. Now you don't need to tote around a disk and get the Blu-Ray quality, and you can play it on a MacBook Air, iPad, etc.

http://www.tested.com/news/how-to-rip-a-blu-ray-movie-with-just-one-click/54/

http://www.amazon.com/Blu-Ray-Player-Laptop-External-Burner/dp/B001UDTTJE
for Blu-Ray

You are comparing an SD digital download movie vs. a Blu-ray. Not exactly fair. The HD version of Unstoppable on iTunes will most likely be $19.99 when it becomes available. So the question becomes do you want to get an external BD drive and do a little work or not.

My biggest gripe is the DRM found within the iTunes movie purchases. I know there is software to strip it from SD purchases, but there isn't for HD movies. From what I understand I can play my iTunes movie purchases on a total of 5 different computers, and no more. So how exactly can I purchase a movie from iTunes with peace of mind knowing that most likely at some point I won't be able to play my purchased movie at some point?