Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
No I really do want to give people a hard copy. You younger folk might love hitting the net and finding all your memories that way but there are still quite a few of us and older that like to have a collection of discs and walk into a room and pop one in. Just one machine to worry about: the player. No need to worry about internet connection or finding the right file or bandwidth issues, etc. Find the disc with the bride and groom on it and bam! instant wedding memories.


Again you don't want a physical copy. You just want an easy way to play your files. That's the real issue.

And most likely I am older than you are. ;)
 
Which is better: physical discs or digital purchases?

There is no correct answer. You may think there is but that is your opinion!

If you are upset that others do not share your opinion because you believe your needs are the same as everyone else, then you need more time in therapy than on-line on message boards.
 
You're right. It's Apple's choice to determine what to put into their products.

Your choice whether to buy them or not.

Don't see where choice is being denied.

That's like saying Toyota chooses not to put airbags in their automobiles. It's your choice whether to buy them or not.
 
You're right. It's Apple's choice to determine what to put into their products.

Your choice whether to buy them or not.

Don't see where choice is being denied.

There is no choice. There are only 2 consumer platforms and one of them is garbage.
 
Of course it is Sony.
Why do you think Sony make the PS3 as a vehicle for BluRay.

It's not owned by Sony. Sony is only part of the Blu-ray equation. The rights are held by the Blu-ray Consortium, which is an industry consortium made up of many industry players. Same as with the MPEG-LA of which Apple is part for H.264.

You do not pay Sony for rights to Blu-ray, but Sony gets part of the money. Just like you don't pay Apple for H.264, but Apple gets money for it.

Seriously, you're just arguing in bad faith.
 
DVD drives are old technology, and add a bunch of weight to laptops. It would make sense to have a Blu-ray drive standard on iMac's, Mac Mini's, and Mac Pro's, but Macbook's don't need a DVD drive. I would prefer a cheap (non-standard) external Blu-ray drive that can attach to Macbook's via USB 3.0. (USB 3.0 is what Mac's need)

What baffles me is that Jobs is talking about psysical media not being he future, while still shipping almost every Mac - laptop and desktop - with old DVD drives.

Now, what makes sense is (1) either decide that you're gonna have a disc drive and then make it support the newest technologies like Blu-Ray, or (2) not have a disc drive.

Steve's argument would only made sense if Macs weren's shipping with disc drives at all. Hell, even I, somewhat of a Blu-Ray fan, would understand that. You don't want to add weight and more parts. BUT THEY ALREADY HAVE DVD DRIVES! Who wouldn't want it to support the newest formats? It baffles me that some fanbois are actually agreeing with this.

Steve did something very clever, which was to make this into a debate of Blu-Ray versus internet streaming and then looking into the future, in which Blu-Ray will of course lose -- making Apple's decision seem defendable and even modern, while in reality they're just lagging behind.

But this is not about internet streaming vs Blu-Ray. It's about having DVD/CD or Blu-Ray/DVD/CD, because either the disc drive will stay, or it won't. And while it stays - no matter how long - I'll take the one that supports new and old formats instead of just old, thank you.
 
Not too surprising. He's never hinted at adding it. Doesn't bother me though. I've never owned a Blu-ray player. I just download movies. I'm ok with having less discs laying around.

But I know I'm in the minority . . .

I do hear your point, but until you view a movie in Blu-Ray, you just won't believe it. I rent the movies I want,in BluRay from Netflix. I won't ,and have never, bought a movie in iTunes . The quality in downloaded movies simply cannot compare. I have rentals in my Netflix App on my iPad, I do view them, but I get them free, comes with my rental subscription, they do not compare in any way,shape or form to a movie in Blu-Ray:cool:
 
Because, fortunately, or unfortunately, BluRay won the battle. Maybe HD-DVD was better.

It was a long and bloody battle. Expensive it was with many casualties.
Sony won. But all they won was a small island with a few goats.

The age of hardware formats is coming to an end. It started with Wax Cylinders, transitioned through 8-track and MiniDisc and ends with BluRay.

It's a great format for collectors. But those of us without Asperger's prefer our content in more accessible forms.

C.
 
How are PS3's sales compared to Wii and xbox?

Is the blu ray feature a difference maker in that market?
 
You're right. It's Apple's choice to determine what to put into their products.

Your choice whether to buy them or not.

Don't see where choice is being denied.

The choice to continue to be a Mac OS user, while also being able to utilize the BluRay playback or burning technology is the choice being denied.

It is POOR business sense for Apple to limit the appeal of Mac OS, and Apple computer hardware, by denying compatibility, even from a third-party stand-point, of an industry accepted standard.

I can rent Blu-Ray discs down the street. I can buy BluRay discs at retail stores, or online and have them shipped to me for rental or purchase.

I cannot use those industry-accepted format discs in my Apple computer, not a laptop, not a Mac Mini HTPC, which is one of the common uses of a Mac Mini. I could not burn an archive copy of my data onto a stable, secure high-capacity optical disc archive, if I want to.

It is a choice for Apple to deny that... but it is a significantly short-sighted, and poor choice that limits Apple's appeal. Apple hasn't previously been able to afford to limit their appeal. It may return to that again, if Apple continues to push a bad position, arrogantly.
 
He has.. Kinda

As a Mac Pro user, I am just grateful that he remembered that his company makes computers. Now if only I could see some evidence that he remembers that they make professional computers....

The Last update to Final Cut included the ability to burn Video BluRay DVD's ala Compressor. What we may get this time is DVD Studio Pro begin able to do it. I would say he hasn't forgotten it but it doesn't mean he's going to support it on the consumer level. The ability to play a BluRay DVD on my computer would personally be great though. It's not just about 1080 dpi, but it's about the convenience of begin able to play any format. BluRay Discs will be around for some time.
 
It was a long and bloody battle. Expensive it was with many casualties.
Sony won. But all they won was a small island with a few goats.

The age of hardware formats is coming to an end. It started with Wax Cylinders, transitioned through 8-track and MiniDisc and ends with BluRay.

It's a great format for collectors. But those of us without Asperger's prefer our content in more accessible forms.

C.

Call us when it's actually ended though. We still have a few good years left. Until then, enjoy your wait for downloads to catch up to the quality we had 5 years ago.

And enjoy your ISP fees for download caps being busted. Oh and enjoy redownloading movies because of hard drive failures, or having to run 220v to spin up your massive entreprise grade disk arrays.

How are PS3's sales compared to Wii and xbox?

Is the blu ray feature a difference maker in that market?

PS3 is on par with Xbox360 actually. Looking at units shipped, it's only behind because it has 1 less year on market. Year to year, the numbers are pretty much the same.

And that market is video game consoles. People buy those to game, not to watch movies. With 100$ blu-ray players on the market supporting the latest profile, why would someone go for a PS3 ? What was true 4 years ago isn't so much today. The PS3 is not the best and cheapest blu-ray player anymore.
 
It's not owned by Sony. Sony is only part of the Blu-ray equation. The rights are held by the Blu-ray Consortium, which is an industry consortium made up of many industry players. Same as with the MPEG-LA of which Apple is part for H.264.

You do not pay Sony for rights to Blu-ray, but Sony gets part of the money. Just like you don't pay Apple for H.264, but Apple gets money for it.

Seriously, you're just arguing in bad faith.

Sony is by far the main force behind the BluRay consortium.

I am not arguing for one over the other, just pointing out there is a battle being waged here.

Apple and Sony are rivals in this space. So why should Apple support Sony's business model? Should Apple start making Apps for Android now?

C.
 
I do hear your point, but until you view a movie in Blu-Ray, you just won't believe it. I rent the movies I want,in BluRay from Netflix. I won't ,and have never, bought a movie in iTunes . The quality in downloaded movies simply cannot compare. I have rentals in my Netflix App on my iPad, I do view them, but I get them free, comes with my rental subscription, they do not compare in any way,shape or form to a movie in Blu-Ray:cool:

If you never bought a movie from iTunes than how can you say the quality in downloaded movies simply does not compare?

Absurd. Most people cannot physically make out 1080p on their TV screens anyway given their screen size and viewing distance.

They have plenty of room to increase the quality of downloaded movies as you go on.

At the same time, obviously utmost picture quality doesn't trump all. Convenience and price are important considerations and if attached to good enough picture quality will trump the best picture quality.

Besides if you want to watch BRs on your big screen then Apple is not stopping you from doing so. So fail to see how this is relevant to Macs.
 
Not very sensible if you want your content to be accessible. Having to go to the cupboard to find a specific file seems massively inconvenient.

C, you're obviously behind the times, who walks anymore? Try one of these, http://www.segway.com/ it will make getting of the couch a breeze and you don't even have to use your outdated limbs.

i can only dream of a day when the use of my legs will be completely obsolete.
 
I admit that I haven't read every single page of this thread, but after browsing through the first 10 pages or so I'm amazed by how many people don't really understand the difference between resolution and compression/bitrate.

I see people routinely saying that I download 1080p all the time! Great - I can guarantee you that the 1080p crap you are streaming is no where near the quality of 1080p blu-ray. I can create a 1080p video and encode it at a super-low bitrate and it will look like garbage, worse than SD/DVD. It's not resolution, it's bit-rate, and there's no way around it - the compression/bit-rate of streamed HD is garbage compared to what you'll find on a blu-ray disc. I don't care if you have a crappy tv or you only watch on your iphone so you don't mind the lesser quailty, but there are plenty of us that own hardware capable of taking full advantage of superior quality video that do care.

Also, you are delusional if you think that widespread streaming of HD movies will be hitting the mainstream in the next 5 years. AT&T just implemented cellular data caps, Verizon has said they are interested in doing the same, and many home ISPs already have data caps. The trend in industry is moving towards additional data caps which is the opposite of what Apple/others would need for HD streaming to replace physical media.
 
It's a great format for collectors. But those of us without Asperger's prefer our content in more accessible forms.

It's also a great format for those of use that live in parts of the world where streaming services are not as widely available as in the US. Yes, there's downloading, but then I can't get Blu-Ray quality, and even if I could, I simply won't download 60 gig files.
 
Call us when it's actually ended though. We still have a few good years left. Until then, enjoy your wait for downloads to catch up to the quality we had 5 years ago.

And enjoy your ISP fees for download caps being busted. Oh and enjoy redownloading movies because of hard drive failures, or having to run 220v to spin up your massive entreprise grade disk arrays.

I have me a nice fat Drobo with a few hundred movies at 720p.
I know 1080p is supposed to be better. But when I sit at 12 feet from my TV I actually can't tell the difference.

To play a movie. I just press play.

I don't have to go to the shelf. I don't have to remove the cylinder/disk thing from a sleeve. I don't have to navigate those dumb menus. Or watch those dumb anti-piracy ads. I don't have to put it away again afterwards. And if a drive fails. I can just replace it.

In the future, I predict all sensible people will prefer their content in this form.

C.
 
Call us when it's actually ended though. We still have a few good years left. Until then, enjoy your wait for downloads to catch up to the quality we had 5 years ago.

And enjoy your ISP fees for download caps being busted. Oh and enjoy redownloading movies because of hard drive failures, or having to run 220v to spin up your massive entreprise grade disk arrays.

haha, +1 for blu ray
 
The choice to continue to be a Mac OS user, while also being able to utilize the BluRay playback or burning technology is the choice being denied.

It is POOR business sense for Apple to limit the appeal of Mac OS, and Apple computer hardware, by denying compatibility, even from a third-party stand-point, of an industry accepted standard.

I can rent Blu-Ray discs down the street. I can buy BluRay discs at retail stores, or online and have them shipped to me for rental or purchase.

I cannot use those industry-accepted format discs in my Apple computer, not a laptop, not a Mac Mini HTPC, which is one of the common uses of a Mac Mini. I could not burn an archive copy of my data onto a stable, secure high-capacity optical disc archive, if I want to.

It is a choice for Apple to deny that... but it is a significantly short-sighted, and poor choice that limits Apple's appeal. Apple hasn't previously been able to afford to limit their appeal. It may return to that again, if Apple continues to push a bad position, arrogantly.

I see. YOur arrogant enough to think you should be able to select any feature whatsoever for inclusion on your Mac just because you want it otherwise you are being denied choice.

Well I guess you must be pretty darn angry every hour of every day because no product gives you everything you want.

That's why you have to make choices in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.