Where can I download free legal Blu-Ray isos on iTunes?
I didn't know iTunes gave away free movies, last I looked it was $20 for poorly compressed 720p.
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
Where can I download free legal Blu-Ray isos on iTunes?
I didn't know iTunes gave away free movies, last I looked it was $20 for poorly compressed 720p.
But but but Apple says it's HD content. Surely it must be the BEST quality. It's Apple! (BIG EYEROLL)
Many != All, like you implied in your original post.
How do you get from liking "good enough" quality to hate good quality? Just because they find streaming media good enough quality for their viewing needs doesn't mean they hate good quality just because they hate BluRay. Just like many people find MP3s and AACs good enough, it doesn't mean they hate concerts or CDs. Oddly enough, I can put streaming quality media onto a BluRay, now what? They hate OK quality now too?
Its OK, you can keep on acting like your logic and memory is flawless.
Posters in this thread who loathe BluRay is clearly the set of all people who hate quality. Clearly.
Last edited:
I have said MANY since my original post. So you're the one trying to make a straw man argument by turning that into "All."
And that's exactly what you're doing. Creating a long list of straw man arguments.
And it doesn't matter how many juvenile images you post in your effort to look "clever"
At least Steve understands what drives people:
Thinking about it, i cannot find any fault in this statement. It's definitely true for me.
Also optical drives are beginning to quickly disappear from all Apple devices in general. It's no longer that Blu-Ray drives are not being adopted, but that all optical formats are being dropped. I suspect the optical drive in the MBP's will be next on the chopping block in their next iteration.
There are external blu-ray options for people who really want it.
So then the only real argument here is that you want Steve to make an overpriced white-boxed Apple-branded external blu-ray drive that no one but audiophile apple fanboys are going to buy.
It's not going to happen. I know Steve has a history of saying he's not going to do something and then does it next month, but i don't see this happening. Buy a generic aftermarket external blu-ray player if you really want one.
Thinking about it, i cannot find any fault in this statement. It's definitely true for me.
Also optical drives are beginning to quickly disappear from all Apple devices in general. It's no longer that Blu-Ray drives are not being adopted, but that all optical formats are being dropped. I suspect the optical drive in the MBP's will be next on the chopping block in their next iteration.
There are external blu-ray options for people who really want it.
So then the only real argument here is that you want Steve to make an overpriced white-boxed Apple-branded external blu-ray drive that no one but audiophile apple fanboys are going to buy.
It's not going to happen. I know Steve has a history of saying he's not going to do something and then does it next month, but i don't see this happening. Buy a generic aftermarket external blu-ray player if you really want one.
That is correct. I enjoy and watch BD's on my dedicated BD player but streaming makes up 75% of my viewing. I have two BD's from Netflix that have been sitting unopened for two weeks now. Having a built in optical on my Macs is just useless to me.
On that note all I can say is "Ding dong" as in:
"Ding dong, the disc is dead"
http://gigaom.com/apple/2011-mac-mi...m_campaign=Feed:+TheAppleBlog+(GigaOM:+Apple)
I recently bought the UK Blu-ray releases of Summer Wars and The Girl Who Leapt Through Time for about £7.50 (for both films, not each!) on amazon.co.uk. Even if I'd wanted to buy them on iTunes, and believed that 'discs were dead', iTunes UK is only selling the standard def versions and for about £10 each. In fact they would have cost barely anything less to rent in standard def on iTunes than to buy on Blu-ray.
And sure, that's probably all the studios fault not Apple's, but it is Apple's fault that they won't support blu-ray movie playback.
Repeating the 'discs are dead' nonsense doesn't make it true yet, sorry. For me it's simple - the last time I looked:
iTunes UK HD movies: 977
Amazon UK Blu-ray results: approx. 15,000
How about my favourite movies like LOTR, Star Wars, Studio Ghibli? You know, just some of the biggest films ever... Well, LOTR is on BD (both versions) the Star Wars saga is out in September with the Clone Wars series out already, and there's a decent release schedule of Ghibli films.
On iTunes? Not a sausage. Well to be fair, they have the Clone Wars movie, but not in HD. And you've been able to get the Blu-ray cheaper than iTunes have it for in standard def, again.
When it comes to HD movies, Apple/iTunes have less than zero credibility with me until they have my favourite films on there at prices that beat Blu-ray. That's before I even consider quality. Which I would.
Discs are very much alive.
This point has been made several times, but again... the issue for most people who want Blu-ray on the mac is not just about the hardware, if at all, it's about having Apple support movie playback so we don't have to rely on hacky dubious software to try and play discs in OS X.
And sure, that's probably all the studios fault not Apple's, but it is Apple's fault that they won't support blu-ray movie playback.
Repeating the 'discs are dead' nonsense doesn't make it true yet, sorry. For me it's simple - the last time I looked:
iTunes UK HD movies: 977
Amazon UK Blu-ray results: approx. 15,000
How about my favourite movies like LOTR, Star Wars, Studio Ghibli? You know, just some of the biggest films ever... Well, LOTR is on BD (both versions) the Star Wars saga is out in September with the Clone Wars series out already, and there's a decent release schedule of Ghibli films.
On iTunes? Not a sausage. Well to be fair, they have the Clone Wars movie, but not in HD. And you've been able to get the Blu-ray cheaper than iTunes have it for in standard def, again.
When it comes to HD movies, Apple/iTunes have less than zero credibility with me until they have my favourite films on there at prices that beat Blu-ray. That's before I even consider quality. Which I would.
Discs are very much alive.
This point has been made several times, but again... the issue for most people who want Blu-ray on the mac is not just about the hardware, if at all, it's about having Apple support movie playback so we don't have to rely on hacky dubious software to try and play discs in OS X.
Your question was:
janstett said:
Right now, I can redownload my music, apps, books from iTunes for free, which are the only things I buy on iTunes with the exception of a few television episodes. It just so happens that they've begun testing the free redownloading (for lack of a better word) video starting with TV shows. Full length movies are undoubtedly to follow, especially if rumors of Apple-branded televisions are true. Besides, if someone were to steal my computer or I purchase a new one, I know they would allow me to download them for free. However, I'd prefer they keep them on their servers for free as opposed to me having to rely on my local storage.
In answer to your newest question, there are no Blu-Ray isos on iTunes. Sorry. That's the price you pay (plus cost of picking up a Blu-Ray drive and time to rip and tag info, though software for ripping to mkv are freely available) for wanting to digitze your Blu-Ray collection. It's too bad that most of the digital copies included with Blu-Rays are 720p.
As for your comment regarding iTunes movies as "poorly compressed 720p," they seem good enough to me on a 58" plasma sitting at 13 feet distance to downgrade my Netflix membership to streaming and DVD only. Repeated Blu-Rays showing up cracked (I thought they were supposed to be more sturdy) sealed the deal. If I wish to watch a movie, I check if it is available on Amazon Instant (free with my Prime membership) or Netflix Instant. In the event it is not, I look for it on iTunes to rent. If I want it in the best 1080p streaming quality (Netflix has some 1080p movies), I turn to Vudu. I'm finding less and less reason to rent physical disks as Netflix Instant catalog improves. Soon I'll be able to cut out Vudu when Apple releases 1080p streaming, as I have a +10 Mbps connection (22 Mbps, to be exact).
Right now, things are so murky with DRM in video that I have dramatically reduced my buying of movies. Online options are better than DVD quality, and I am not convinced Blu-Ray is the way to go (stopped after buying 3 BDs). Not having to drive to Blockbuster or a Redbox box saves me gas, time, aggravation, and reduces my carbon footprint.
As always, you do what you want. No judgments here. Present company excluded, some with thin skin in this thread think I have the objective of driving their production company/home entertainment equipment business into bankruptcy and that the pro-Blu-Ray camp have some kind of exclusive claim to this thread. Both assumptions are wrong.
Amen.
Last edited:
Apple are blatantly trying to get the same stranglehold on the film distribution business that they have on music sales. iTunes caught the music business unawares and ultimately most music companies were relieved to have a credible, legitimate outlet which would bring in revenue at a time when they needed an exit strategy from the Napster era.
Of course, when that honeymoon ended, many of those same companies realised that they were handcuffed to Apple since iTunes is such a hugely successful business model. What started to happen? Apple began to dictate the terms of business and the music companies begrudgingly danced to their tune because Apple were the biggest game in town.
The movie industry on the other hand has seen all of this coming and personally, I believe doesn't want to fall into the same trap of over-reliance on Apple. They'd rather have control over their own sales channels through numerous partnerships such as Amazon, where they can strike favorable deals and control price & distribution more.
Meanwhile Apple drags its customers into the struggle by denying them the capability to take advantage of the best quality film watching experience, whilst pushing their own solution which they claim to be better and which coincidentally they also get a slice of profits from.....Hmmm, sounds familiar.
Personally, I'm not sure Apple will win this battle so easily. Blu Ray's big Unique Selling Point is it's quality and Apple can't compete because (a) the internet connection speed isn't there unless you're in South Korea and (b) The data limitations many service providers slap on their customers.
I would settle for a compromise of HD content of reasonable quality and with no DRM. If I buy a movie that I consider a classic, I want to know that I'll be able to watch it in 10 to 15 years time on whatever we're watching movies on in the future, whoever makes it.
Of course, when that honeymoon ended, many of those same companies realised that they were handcuffed to Apple since iTunes is such a hugely successful business model. What started to happen? Apple began to dictate the terms of business and the music companies begrudgingly danced to their tune because Apple were the biggest game in town.
The movie industry on the other hand has seen all of this coming and personally, I believe doesn't want to fall into the same trap of over-reliance on Apple. They'd rather have control over their own sales channels through numerous partnerships such as Amazon, where they can strike favorable deals and control price & distribution more.
Meanwhile Apple drags its customers into the struggle by denying them the capability to take advantage of the best quality film watching experience, whilst pushing their own solution which they claim to be better and which coincidentally they also get a slice of profits from.....Hmmm, sounds familiar.
Personally, I'm not sure Apple will win this battle so easily. Blu Ray's big Unique Selling Point is it's quality and Apple can't compete because (a) the internet connection speed isn't there unless you're in South Korea and (b) The data limitations many service providers slap on their customers.
I would settle for a compromise of HD content of reasonable quality and with no DRM. If I buy a movie that I consider a classic, I want to know that I'll be able to watch it in 10 to 15 years time on whatever we're watching movies on in the future, whoever makes it.
HOLY LOL CATZ! That didn't take long. It seems like only yesterday I was talking about this possibility. iTunes Replay rumor redux: now with TV, movie re-downloads
Apples Already Got The Deals In Place To Launch Their Own Netflix Competitor
Apple to Launch iTunes Replay With Movie Streaming In Coming Weeks
iTunes Replay rumor redux: now with TV, movie re-downloads
Apples Already Got The Deals In Place To Launch Their Own Netflix Competitor
Apple to Launch iTunes Replay With Movie Streaming In Coming Weeks
Like I said in above posts, "Ding dong!"
My discs still work perfectly, though. Additionally, Blu-ray is still thriving. The reports of Blu-ray's death have been greatly exaggerated, said Mr. Clemens.
Roffle
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=6632
Last edited:
do macs have the ability to read blu-ray? or is the only problem that apple doesn't include blu-ray drives?
I'm not really switched on considering i only play blu-ray on my ps3.
if they deny consumers the ability to play blu-ray, how is that fair? and what is stopping them from giving people that ability?
I'm not really switched on considering i only play blu-ray on my ps3.
if they deny consumers the ability to play blu-ray, how is that fair? and what is stopping them from giving people that ability?
Macs don't come with Blu Ray drives.
You can plug in an external or fit an internal drive but it can't be used for official Blu Ray playback due to all the DRM that Blu Ray playback devices must legally comply with.....This is Steve's official reason for Macs not supporting the format.
And no, it's not fair.
my home movies deserve high quality discs steve!! you wouldn't lend your friend you ipad for the night to watch a movie wouldya stevie??? my external burner looks so un-mac-like.... just put it in!!
**oh yeah and btw... IF YOU AREN'T GOING TO GIVE US BLU RAY-- AT LEAST MAKE THE WRITE SPEED FOR THE CD BURNER FASTER!!! what the hell????
**oh yeah and btw... IF YOU AREN'T GOING TO GIVE US BLU RAY-- AT LEAST MAKE THE WRITE SPEED FOR THE CD BURNER FASTER!!! what the hell????
Actually, I think Apple installs the slowest and crappiest drives available, to convince their customers that optical media is indeed a bag of hurt...
The Mac superdrives are so bad and slow, I didnt't even bother with the warranty when mine in the Mac Pro died after two years of only moderate use.
I preferred to pay for a better Samsung and replaced it myself, than getting another Sony NEC turkey for free.
And don't let me start on that proprietary external drive that works ONLY with Airs and Minis. Another Apple con game, because every ordinary USB 2.0 drive works with both Mac models just fine.
Yes, that's the big issue here. And aside from that, there are licensing fees that would have to be paid if Apple wants to offically support the format, which is a very big hurdle to overcome. You see, Apple is very strapped for cash right now, and they just can't afford to do anything that involves fees of any sort...
Yes, that's the big issue here. And aside from that, there are licensing fees that would have to be paid if Apple wants to offically support the format, which is a very big hurdle to overcome. You see, Apple is very strapped for cash right now, and they just can't afford to do anything that involves fees of any sort...
LOL
BTW, note that Microsoft does not ship BD support with Windows, so that they don't need to add the "BD tax" to every Windows license. Microsoft does include the OS support required by the DRM, though.
The "BD tax" is included in the price of BD player software. (WinDVD with BD is $39.99, BD drives with software $60).
Disagree. See, the core DRM is the big "hurt" issue, not the basic data decoding. Meanwhile, the AACS LA still tries to claim that AACS might be used by something besides BD (for instance, it still must be at OS level), but it never, ever, ever will be.
Ever. (I think we can safely ignore HD-DVD)
Because its a "bag of hurt". The Analog Sunset *bs* pretty much put the kibosh on anyone ever using it again. Sony wins/loses again. What round of annoying DRM was that? 4? You may note that they gave up on the SACD proprietary-ness, and it is actually able to be transmitted via the current "normal" digital standard, HDMI.
Not that I agree with SJ keeping it out of OSX.
First, I find it very nice that we once in a while have very intelligent discussion in this thread after all the posts and years.
1. Write-once
Very important for archival to remove the human error of accidentally erasing data.
2. Universal standard
Every gadget on the planet that has dvd- or bd-drive, can playback dvd-video.
There's no file format for video, that will work as universally as dvd.
It doesn't matter if the file is in usb-stick or online.
Dvd has worked fine for past 15 years, but if you want high definition blu-ray will be the next universal standard.
Looks like there won't be any universal file format to compete.
Patent issues with html5-video are not going away soon.
And there's a difference with BD in the history of different medias and their use with macs.
BD is the first media that you can't use for it's main usage with Mac and its OsX.
Think about if Apple had introduced cd-drives without possibility to playback audio-cd's or dvd-rive without possibility to playback dvd-movies.
Everybody would have been laughing at Apple.
But, now they have excellent PR strategy and all what's happeming (or does not happen) can be thought as "being in the future already" or at least "not old fashioned".
People are comparing this to the situatuin when Apple ditched floppy from iMac.
But the situation is totally different, because Apple hasn't even adopted the current optical technology. This would be the same if Apple would have not offered optical drive and still ditched the floppy.
And people who now praise the decision back then, probably wasn't tying to use those original iMacs. There was no way to save your data on anything you could carry with you. Everybody had to buy external floppy drives, zip drives or cd-r drives. And because there wasn't any real "de facto" choise of media, people who were dealing data from/to multiple sources/destinations, had to have many different drives. I really don't understand what was so nice and convenient in that?
And that Guardian article tells pretty good where we stand right now: "Physical discs accounted for 96.5% of all sales in 2010."
Same thing goes for electronical newspapers and magazines at least here in Finland.
They are targeted for people who don't care about price or quality or archival or multiple playback devices or lifespan of the content, they just want it now for once and easily.
There can be also some consern from content owners that they don't control the price for digital distribution as much as physical and therefore their revenues will decline.
Anyway this "immaterial future" doesn't sound so nice in either of the case; either physical copies are (at least still) cheaper to produce (eg. cost for bandwidth is usually faded with people who has consumer grade bulk connections, but for business like Apple, it's going to cost huge amounts when they really need to stream terabits per second of movies to millions of customers), or either digital distribution has radically bigger profits, which isn't good for consumers.
Controversily content owners seem to still like physical distribution. This might be because they want to have as many baskets to put their eggs in as possible or they are just waiting the costs of digital distribution to go down.
At the time consuming the home movies seems to be in pretty strange stage, when you still can have traditional cable reception, but iptv systems might not let you to do even time shifting and consuming is heavily criplled by multiple "security" systems. For example CI+ and conax pairing restricts what receiver to use and many STB's don't let you record other channel when watching the other if either of channels is scrambed, because the stream has to go through CI+ block and that can be hardwired only to recording tuner.
So, at the same time operators are trying to push consumers to VoD, all the problems and ristrictions with traditional and new distribution systems are pushing the consumers to go and buy or rent physical copies.
Reliability of optical media does not differ as much as hdd, go ask from any national archive how much they archive to hdd's compared to optical disks.
And every modern western country has legislation that when you buy legal (physical) copy of (art)work, you have also right to resell it. Digital downloads and software can (and usually) have different rules.
Former means big and long investments and the latter only nice looking logo on the stick...
I find lack of BD just one of those many signs that Apple doesn't want to offer state-of-the-art anymore. Same thing with usb3, esata, 10G ethernet, non-crippled displayport, good expandability, reasonable desktop, sane memory design in MP, etc.
I have invested time, money and expertise to use Apple's hardware and software to do my profession, so obviously this is bigger problem to me than average Apple's customer. And maybe I'm over reacting the problem, but at the same time, the message that pros should just move on and leave Apple to consumer toys, is so loud and clear, that I really can't guess how it could be more lauder & clearer.
What is surprising to me, that still someone thinks that OPTIONAL bd-drive in macintosh computers would somehow rise the cost of macintosh that does not have bd-drive.
They would have to add some code to kernel to have proper "secure path" for video and rewrite the dvd-player software to bd-player, but those are just pennies in the ocean.
If you look at Apple's history and present about pricing BTO additions they usually charge a lot more than if you buy same things from regular stores. Considering that because they buy huge bulk orders, Apple gets these much cheaper than retail stores, so they make big profits on these. Just because those who can spend the money, enjoy the convenience. Why this would be any different with bd-drives?
We are pretty long away from the moment where all Apple's customers get same level of service. And this is the most important thing, why Apple should offer more options, when "your mileage might vary".
Most of global Mac users can't have Netflix or Vudu or 22Mbps connection.
Sadly Steve-O has nothing to offer to us, but luckily I can get my bd's from video store or play.com without increasing my carbon footprint, but I'll have to increase my carbon footprint by buying separate bd-players and if I want to use OsX, I have to buy macs more often since they have shortened lifespan because they have so little expandability and all-in-ones are hard to repair.
When you look usb-sticks as replacement of optical discs, there's two very important aspects in addion to price:
1. Write-once
Very important for archival to remove the human error of accidentally erasing data.
2. Universal standard
Every gadget on the planet that has dvd- or bd-drive, can playback dvd-video.
There's no file format for video, that will work as universally as dvd.
It doesn't matter if the file is in usb-stick or online.
Dvd has worked fine for past 15 years, but if you want high definition blu-ray will be the next universal standard.
Looks like there won't be any universal file format to compete.
Patent issues with html5-video are not going away soon.
And there's a difference with BD in the history of different medias and their use with macs.
BD is the first media that you can't use for it's main usage with Mac and its OsX.
Think about if Apple had introduced cd-drives without possibility to playback audio-cd's or dvd-rive without possibility to playback dvd-movies.
Everybody would have been laughing at Apple.
But, now they have excellent PR strategy and all what's happeming (or does not happen) can be thought as "being in the future already" or at least "not old fashioned".
People are comparing this to the situatuin when Apple ditched floppy from iMac.
But the situation is totally different, because Apple hasn't even adopted the current optical technology. This would be the same if Apple would have not offered optical drive and still ditched the floppy.
And people who now praise the decision back then, probably wasn't tying to use those original iMacs. There was no way to save your data on anything you could carry with you. Everybody had to buy external floppy drives, zip drives or cd-r drives. And because there wasn't any real "de facto" choise of media, people who were dealing data from/to multiple sources/destinations, had to have many different drives. I really don't understand what was so nice and convenient in that?
And that Guardian article tells pretty good where we stand right now: "Physical discs accounted for 96.5% of all sales in 2010."
This is a very good question and pretty much proves that actual cost of a service/product has nothing to do with it's price.
Same thing goes for electronical newspapers and magazines at least here in Finland.
They are targeted for people who don't care about price or quality or archival or multiple playback devices or lifespan of the content, they just want it now for once and easily.
There can be also some consern from content owners that they don't control the price for digital distribution as much as physical and therefore their revenues will decline.
Anyway this "immaterial future" doesn't sound so nice in either of the case; either physical copies are (at least still) cheaper to produce (eg. cost for bandwidth is usually faded with people who has consumer grade bulk connections, but for business like Apple, it's going to cost huge amounts when they really need to stream terabits per second of movies to millions of customers), or either digital distribution has radically bigger profits, which isn't good for consumers.
Controversily content owners seem to still like physical distribution. This might be because they want to have as many baskets to put their eggs in as possible or they are just waiting the costs of digital distribution to go down.
At the time consuming the home movies seems to be in pretty strange stage, when you still can have traditional cable reception, but iptv systems might not let you to do even time shifting and consuming is heavily criplled by multiple "security" systems. For example CI+ and conax pairing restricts what receiver to use and many STB's don't let you record other channel when watching the other if either of channels is scrambed, because the stream has to go through CI+ block and that can be hardwired only to recording tuner.
So, at the same time operators are trying to push consumers to VoD, all the problems and ristrictions with traditional and new distribution systems are pushing the consumers to go and buy or rent physical copies.
Think about if Average Joe had decided to be "the early adaptor" of digital content. He stopped buying physical content many years ago and in few years he has his 1TB hdd full. Then suddenly that hdd brakes down and he goes and buys new one. How long will it take from him to download 1TB of that already paid content with his 1Mbitps internet connection?
Actually, at present time, saying no to physical media, is saying no to quality. This may of course change in the future, but there is no high quality streaming/downloading service available. And when there is, most of the planet will not have it.
Reliability of optical media does not differ as much as hdd, go ask from any national archive how much they archive to hdd's compared to optical disks.
And every modern western country has legislation that when you buy legal (physical) copy of (art)work, you have also right to resell it. Digital downloads and software can (and usually) have different rules.
Comparing SaaS industry to selling $1 usb stick for $40 is not very simple.
Former means big and long investments and the latter only nice looking logo on the stick...
I find lack of BD just one of those many signs that Apple doesn't want to offer state-of-the-art anymore. Same thing with usb3, esata, 10G ethernet, non-crippled displayport, good expandability, reasonable desktop, sane memory design in MP, etc.
I have invested time, money and expertise to use Apple's hardware and software to do my profession, so obviously this is bigger problem to me than average Apple's customer. And maybe I'm over reacting the problem, but at the same time, the message that pros should just move on and leave Apple to consumer toys, is so loud and clear, that I really can't guess how it could be more lauder & clearer.
What is surprising to me, that still someone thinks that OPTIONAL bd-drive in macintosh computers would somehow rise the cost of macintosh that does not have bd-drive.
They would have to add some code to kernel to have proper "secure path" for video and rewrite the dvd-player software to bd-player, but those are just pennies in the ocean.
If you look at Apple's history and present about pricing BTO additions they usually charge a lot more than if you buy same things from regular stores. Considering that because they buy huge bulk orders, Apple gets these much cheaper than retail stores, so they make big profits on these. Just because those who can spend the money, enjoy the convenience. Why this would be any different with bd-drives?
The right question here would be: If Lion would be available cheaper in dvd media, would you buy that instead?
If you like good quality, how you can hate bd, when it's the only distribution media with good quality?
This is especially sad, when Steve does not offer any option for most of the countries he sells his products. People seem to forget that most of the countries where Macs are sold, does not even have Apple Stores.
We are pretty long away from the moment where all Apple's customers get same level of service. And this is the most important thing, why Apple should offer more options, when "your mileage might vary".
Surprisingly some of us watch movies closer than 13' from display and then overcompressed 720p isn't enough.
Most of global Mac users can't have Netflix or Vudu or 22Mbps connection.
Sadly Steve-O has nothing to offer to us, but luckily I can get my bd's from video store or play.com without increasing my carbon footprint, but I'll have to increase my carbon footprint by buying separate bd-players and if I want to use OsX, I have to buy macs more often since they have shortened lifespan because they have so little expandability and all-in-ones are hard to repair.
Last edited:
Looking at a half-dozen or so links on AACS, I could see royalty fees for content producers - but not for OS implementations of protected channels.
I don't believe that Microsoft includes AACS in Windows - they provide the OS-level implementation of protected media path required by AACS, but not AACS itself.
It will be interesting to see how the DRM aspect of this issue effects the outcome as time goes by. I can't be the only one who refused to buy music from Apple until they offered it DRM free and at higher quality. At that point I stopped buying CD's and ripping them.
My movie habits have followed suit: I will buy most movies on DVD because I know I'll be able to watch them one way or another in 10 years time. Classic movies, I'll buy the Blu Ray version. The ideal though is Blu Rays that come with a DVD copy.
If DRM on movies isn't circumvented, it largely helps to ensure that your copy of that title dies with the format it is distributed in. Charity shops in the UK are stuffed to the gills with VHS tapes nobody wants cluttering up their homes anymore and in that sense, I think digital downloads have so much to offer....Anybody remember those CD towers that used to take up space in the living room that someone would always knock flying when slightly drunk? Personally I like the clutter free nature of digital copies, but they have to be DRM free.
The issue of piracy will always be there, and I think ultimately people have to be trusted to do the right thing. Of course some won't but DRM makes no difference to those sorts of people anyway.
My movie habits have followed suit: I will buy most movies on DVD because I know I'll be able to watch them one way or another in 10 years time. Classic movies, I'll buy the Blu Ray version. The ideal though is Blu Rays that come with a DVD copy.
If DRM on movies isn't circumvented, it largely helps to ensure that your copy of that title dies with the format it is distributed in. Charity shops in the UK are stuffed to the gills with VHS tapes nobody wants cluttering up their homes anymore and in that sense, I think digital downloads have so much to offer....Anybody remember those CD towers that used to take up space in the living room that someone would always knock flying when slightly drunk? Personally I like the clutter free nature of digital copies, but they have to be DRM free.
The issue of piracy will always be there, and I think ultimately people have to be trusted to do the right thing. Of course some won't but DRM makes no difference to those sorts of people anyway.
- Status