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

[matticus008]

All nicely reasoned and explained but none of which has anything to do with Apple not offering a simple choice to the consumer.

The reason is the same as discussed earlier--Apple doesn't want to put the necessary DRM path into their OS for the viewing of a single format of no significant benefit for computers. Once that groundwork is there, it simply encourages the studios to use it and push further.

There's a certain amount of content protection that is reasonable, and Blu-ray far exceeds that. If only Microsoft had refused as well.

It's not like PCs are flying off the shelf, with BD-equipped computers selling in the single digits in market share. Almost nobody wants them. Why cave to the studio, take on the need to code and maintain a DRM path of no benefit to consumers, and open the door to future escalation for the sake of a minor benefit for a tiny minority of customers? It's plainly not worth it.

Jobs is just being stubborn and we, his formerly loyal customers are paying the price.

If "paying the price" means a minor inconvenience in exchange for refusal for unjustifiable DRM lockdown and headaches, then I for one am happy to. Anyone saying "Apple should provide the option" has apparently not paid any attention to their relationship with Apple.

Extensive choice is not in the Apple vocabulary. That's guaranteed to annoy everyone at some point or another for some fantasy feature, but it's how Apple works. The choice is the customer's, to buy what meets his or her needs, whether that's from Apple or from someone else. I really don't get where people reach the conclusion that Apple should magically decide to sell any given person's dream lineup of products, as if there aren't plenty of alternatives out there.

 

[jjahshik32]

Right... so it's all about offering a more restrictive service to their customers in order to maximize their own profits. You're OK with that. But again, you're forgetting that not everyone is living your life.

Well if its better for Apple so that they can continue to grow and hopefully take over the PC industry in the future that will eventually lead them to offer better technology (already with the iPhone being affordable) and driving down cost of their future notebooks and macs, then yes.

 

[ianmSC]

Which you'd expect, since those figures aren't normalized for population or economic situation or adoption price.

Blu-ray is one of the cheaper and easier technologies to be released, and has the benefit of being the quintessential necessity for making full use of HDTVs. The other technologies it's often compared to had nothing to piggyback on. What the slides don't show about Blu-ray is the fact that it's much more likely to be a sole device in those households--almost no one is buying BD players to replace all the DVD players in the house and instead choosing just the primary viewing location. That has shown little sign of changing. Even the cheap players are predominantly being bought as first units within a household. This is reinforced by the presence of only one large HDTV in the typical household that would benefit from Blu-ray (and far fewer with the audio equipment to handle it).

That has much more to do with them being more profitable. Retail space is at a premium, and Amazon dominates the distribution channels. Retail stores rely on new releases and impulse buys, and in terms of dollars per square foot, serving fewer customers at higher prices works out in their favor since they can't compete with Amazon on selection.

If he voluntarily chose to put himself into the situation where he could only use it on one device, yes. Otherwise, he could have gone for a bundled DVD or digital copy, or he can bring other entertainment options with him.

Not at all. Most people have one BD player and one TV that can benefit from it. Everywhere else in their life, whether it's a bedroom, den, computer, or portable device, can't view that film. For these casual viewing situations, Blu-ray offers no benefit and people have shown with their purchasing decisions that they're not willing to replace all the gear for the sake of the Blu-ray.

Studios know this isn't going to change, and that's why combo packs have become standard on new releases. Small screens and devices with limited storage mean that a reduced-quality digital copy is necessary and sufficient for casual entertainment.

Why should I have to buy another copy of a movie I already own?! This is insanity! I love Apple products, I have an iPhone 4, an iPad, a MacBook, my family has a 21 inch iMac, for pete's sake we have an Airport Extreme base station. I don't want to have to replace Apple products with PC's just to watch a movie. I also own about 12 Blu-Ray's that I use on two different televisions. Why the heck can't I play them on my computer if I want to? It's not up to you to decide if the quality upgrade of a Blu-Ray over a DVD isn't large enough to justify putting it on a smaller screen. I own the movie on Blu-Ray because it looks better on one platform.

I replaced North by Northwest on DVD with North by Northwest on Blu-Ray (which looks, and sounds, amazing) and traded in the DVD to Amazon to subsidize the $16 cost at Costco. Why can't I watch North by Northwest on my laptop on a plane? Or at a friend's house? Or hell, in a room of my house that (heaven forbid) I don't have a TV in? Because Steve Jobs thinks I should have used the iTunes store?

 

[jjahshik32]

Exactly, it's always been about encouraging additional hardware sales. I am always amused when people bring up iTunes and digital downloads. Apple is the largest music seller and it still represents a very tiny portion of their business, which is providing the most satisfactory customer experience to play all these things (music TV movies apps) on the coolest premium priced hardware your hard working consumer can buy.

Blu-ray should be a no brainer for a high-end company like Apple. Jobs just can't admit he's wrong and we'll suffer for it until he no longer runs Apple.

Cheers,

Music sales might be a tiny portion of their sales but you have to look at the big picture. Not to only look at its revenue based on the sales itself but how the iTunes music library affects the iPod sales. The reason why Apple is actually doing so well is the iPods not the iTunes of music sales, but without the iTunes music availability, the iPods would be less attractive to the mass.

Its kind of a mental strategy of iTunes and iPods that has to coexist. Also even though the iTunes music sales might be a small portion of Apple's total revenue, I bet its profits are huge.

Same cant be said about the bluray players and iTunes. It just affects each other in a negative way.

 

[Speedy2]

If all of "you" didn't care one way or another, there wouldn't be 40+ pages of arguing about whether it should be offered as an option.

Most of the discussion is spurred by people who don't want to accept that they are members of a niche and as a result their needs and wants are ignored by Apple and SJ. Boohoo.

I read a lot about how people are defending the superior quality as if anyone would have doubted that a BluRay movie looks better than a 720p stream. The big question is HOW MUCH better, and that's were the idiocy starts. OF COURSE, the guys with the high end TVs will claim to totally care about the better picture. They couldn't justify the expense otherwise. This is so predictable. However, most people just shrug hearing their rants.

Also people yell and scream how extremely impossible a streaming solution would be because of bandwidth and data caps. As if we were talking about moving the entire DVD+BluRay industry into the web TODAY. Guys, we're talking about the next 5 years MINIMUM if not more. Also, I wonder how many movies people watch every month that they deem a (current!) 250GB limit a problem... Like everything else in the industry, the capacity and bandwidth will continue to grow exponentially. In 5 years we will laugh about today's limits. Just as an example: ever heard of LTE?

And finally, it's not that BluRay will disappear just because SJ doesn't bother to put it into his computers. What a nonsense to assume. As if you could buy less BluRay players and discs because of that. So yeah. If you live in Northern Montana without a decent Internet connection or if you are a frequent traveller with eagle eye vision and a 1080p complex, you will still be able to find bliss. BluRay will not make its exit until most consumers have access to fast Internet. Only a fool would assume differently.

 

[potaco]

Well if its better for Apple so that they can continue to grow and hopefully take over the PC industry in the future that will eventually lead them to offer better technology (already with the iPhone being affordable) and driving down cost of their future notebooks and macs, then yes.

The iPhone being "affordable" is due to AT&T's subsidies. $600 for a phone sounds like a lot more than $200. Apple would not have sold as many iPhones if they were not subsidized. Either way, what's the point of continually waiting for the next device when you could improve the current generations for your customers with another option? I can go buy a Blu-ray drive for my PC and be happy. This is Steve Jobs telling people, "If you own a Mac, you shouldn't care about Blu-ray."

 

[azazel-]

Most of the discussion is spurred by people who don't want to accept that they are members of a niche and as a result their needs and wants are ignored by Apple and SJ. Boohoo.

A member of an already niche group, berating members of an even smaller niche group. I'm sure the space-time continuum will be affected...

Easy solution; don't buy an Apple computer, and chose not to live in that walled garden. Seems the majority have made that decision already. I'm well on my way back that way as well...

 

[Speedy2]

Bingo.

Sweet J#$%S Steve! Just give us a blu ray OPTION! You don't have to make it standard. The option and upgrade the DVD player in OSX to play licensed Blu content!

You won't get the option. Have you not realized that by now? Move on and stop whining. We're living in a free market society. Draw your consequences.

 

[potaco]

Music sales might be a tiny portion of their sales but you have to look at the big picture. Not to only look at its revenue based on the sales itself but how the iTunes music library affects the iPod sales. The reason why Apple is actually doing so well is the iPods not the iTunes of music sales, but without the iTunes music availability, the iPods would be less attractive to the mass.

Its kind of a mental strategy of iTunes and iPods that has to coexist. Also even though the iTunes music sales might be a small portion of Apple's total revenue, I bet its profits are huge.

Same cant be said about the bluray players and iTunes. It just affects each other in a negative way.

People buy iPods to take advantage of the music on the iTunes store. That is iTunes's intended purpose. I would be curious to see how many people purchase Apple products just to buy HD video from iTunes. I can't imagine it would be a very big number.

 

[JediZenMaster]

I'm not sold on blu-ray for the same reason that my Boss isn't. This guy has a hugh mansion and his house looks like something off of Cribs with all of the Plasmas TV's he has and he still uses DVD players.

Because alot of his favorite movies are not released on Blu-ray and a biggie for him is Star Wars. How successful is a format when one of the most successful movies in history was never released on it? I'm sure it will eventually but if george lucas doesn't trust the format enough to release his masterpiece on it then what does that say about it?

And it seems like most new releases on Blu-Ray are still more expensive than their DVD counterparts. I get they come with extras but still in other to have full penetration the prices need to come down.

This thread is filled with a niche audience. Apple can't just sell for only the niche and i think people forget that mac rumors doesn't mirror the whole user base of apple products.

 

[jjahshik32]

The iPhone being "affordable" is due to AT&T's subsidies. $600 for a phone sounds like a lot more than $200. Apple would not have sold as many iPhones if they were not subsidized. Either way, what's the point of continually waiting for the next device when you could improve the current generations for your customers with another option? I can go buy a Blu-ray drive for my PC and be happy. This is Steve Jobs telling people, "If you own a Mac, you shouldn't care about Blu-ray."

Its not Steve Jobs telling you, me or anyone anything, its all in your head man.

With the current situation that Apple is in, Steve made the right choice for Apple simple as that.

 

[panzer06]

The reason is the same as discussed earlier--Apple doesn't want to put the necessary DRM path into their OS for the viewing of a single format of no significant benefit for computers. Once that groundwork is there, it simply encourages the studios to use it and push further.

There's a certain amount of content protection that is reasonable, and Blu-ray far exceeds that. If only Microsoft had refused as well.

It's not like PCs are flying off the shelf, with BD-equipped computers selling in the single digits in market share. Almost nobody wants them. Why cave to the studio, take on the need to code and maintain a DRM path of no benefit to consumers, and open the door to future escalation for the sake of a minor benefit for a tiny minority of customers? It's plainly not worth it.

If "paying the price" means a minor inconvenience in exchange for refusal for unjustifiable DRM lockdown and headaches, then I for one am happy to.

Please tell; me you are not dusting off that tired, long ago discredited DRM argument. Really, the DRM included for the iTunes movies and rentals is worse than anything related to playing a Blu-ray disk. Every Windows PC, and Blu-ray player plays the film or TV series I buy but look at the hoops you have to go through if you want to move your downloaded DRM-protected content. Rentals are even worse! A single system or device and that's it; plus this inane 24 hours viewing period and no CC. I can take a netflix rental on my trip, come back and watch it again and hand it to my wife or daughter to watch before we send it back... all with the captions playing.

I understand what the naysayers are trying to posit, I really do, but there is absolutely no reasonable explanation for Apple not offering a Blu-ray option; at least no explanation that anyone who has invested in Blu-ray technology will EVER accept.

Remember, we who desire the option would be paying for it.

Cheers,

 

[Speedy2]

I totally accept that some people just don't care. I don't accept other people telling me that it shouldn't be an option just because they don't use it. That's a big distinction.

Who said it SHOULDN'T be an option?!? Of course it would be nice as an option. Options are always good if they don't get too confusing. And a BluRay drive wouldn't be confusing one bit. However, you won't get that option from Apple as it seems. You can whine about it as much as you want, but then again you can also bemoan the daily setting of the sun and the existence of night...There's nothing you can do about it. Well, in this case you could actually move to another planet where the sun shines eternally for you.

 

[jjahshik32]

I understand what the naysayers are trying to posit, I really do, but there is absolutely no reasonable explanation for Apple not offering a Blu-ray option; at least no explanation that anyone who has invested in Blu-ray technology will EVER accept.

Remember, we who desire the option would be paying for it.

Cheers,

Except for Apple losing alot of money for introducing bluray players.

 

[CFreymarc]

Get over it, Jobs. We want 1080p streaming, nothing less!

And I want a Lamborghini in my garage and pay the cost of a Volvo for it too!

 

[JediZenMaster]

I'm going to dig my heels into the ground untill Steve Jobs gives me a unicorn. There is a better chance of that than blu-ray

 

[Carniphage]

What are you talking about? Sony DOES make stereos with iPod docks.

It does now.
Sony refused to make any while it persisted in making its own portable audio products. - And then it finally conceded.

Business is war!

C.

 

[azazel-]

Except for Apple losing alot of money for introducing bluray players.

That is what separates people like you from normal customers. Most customers are concerned with what a company and product can do for them, and take their business elsewhere if those needs are not met.

People like you, on the other hand, are more concerned with the well-being and financial stability of a corporate entity and remaining loyal to a symbol, than they are with their own needs being met.

That's goddamn wacky.

 

[mkanet]

More great news for Windows!

I bought my first HTPC and Gaming PC back in 2006 with HD-DVD/Bluray and cablecards hooked up to my 55" LCD HDTV. I've been enjoying hundreds of Netflix bluray discs and Media Center DVR capabilities powering my home theater... all in one powerful stable PC.. certainly better than any standalone bluray/DVD players out right now.

Apple is so far behind in entertainment PCs, no wonder Steve Jobs sounds like he's pretty much abandoned that market and sticking to on-the-road mobile computing.

 

[panzer06]

Music sales might be a tiny portion of their sales but you have to look at the big picture. Not to only look at its revenue based on the sales itself but how the iTunes music library affects the iPod sales. The reason why Apple is actually doing so well is the iPods not the iTunes of music sales, but without the iTunes music availability, the iPods would be less attractive to the mass.

Its kind of a mental strategy of iTunes and iPods that has to coexist. Also even though the iTunes music sales might be a small portion of Apple's total revenue, I bet its profits are huge.

Same cant be said about the bluray players and iTunes. It just affects each other in a negative way.

You just restated my point. iTunes exists to further expensive, highly profitable hardware sales.

To suggest, allowing Blu-ray will negatively impact the sale of cool, expensive hardware is naive. You'd have to remove DVD players to FORCE customers to download another copy of the DVD they already own.

As I stated earlier, there is no reasonable argument that anyone who has invested in Blu-ray will accept from Apple or their apologists as it pertains to failing to offer a BR option for Macs.

Cheers,

 

[LethalWolfe]

Because alot of his favorite movies are not released on Blu-ray and a biggie for him is Star Wars. How successful is a format when one of the most successful movies in history was never released on it? I'm sure it will eventually but if george lucas doesn't trust the format enough to release his masterpiece on it then what does that say about it?

It means absolutely nothing. Star Wars didn't appear on DVD until 2004, seven years after the first DVD went on sale in the US. I'm sure Lucas is remaster Star Wars again for some uber Blu-ray boxed set that will come out eventually.

Lethal

 

[Fender]

Forgive me for not reading the other 1000+ comments, but...

From what Steve Jobs said about the format, I'm guessing Apple is just waiting to kill the built-in optical drive on their computers entirely. We already have the MacBook Air, and now the Mac Mini server which omits them.

Just a thought.

 

[azazel-]

From what Steve Jobs said about the format, I'm guessing Apple is just waiting to kill the built-in optical drive on their computers entirely. We already have the MacBook Air, and now the Mac Mini server which omits them.

Just a thought.

I'm sure that internally the transition is being discussed. Jobs won't be content until all media is routed through Apple-sanctioned channels.

 

[jjahshik32]

That is what separates people like you from normal customers. Most customers are concerned with what a company and product can do for them, and take their business elsewhere if those needs are not met.

People like you, on the other hand, are more concerned with the well-being and financial stability of a corporate entity and remaining loyal to a symbol, than they are with their own needs being met.

That's goddamn wacky.

Well people like you dont look at the big picture and are not realistic. I'm a realist and look at all the angles of what a company does to improve overall. If they are having great revenues, I know that in the big picture that it will give them bigger room to continue to innovate. And instead people like you are always I want, I want, I want just because Steve is stubborn.

I can tell not once have you thought about what Apple's situation is on introducing bluray as an option. I'm sure Steve knows a whole lot more with many experts with figures on his side on what to do and what not to do. I dont question his motives as of now because he's the guy who dug Apple out from almost going out of business to what it is today.

I noticed that whatever decisions anyone makes from any company, there will always be a section of people complaining.

 

[Carniphage]

Right... so it's all about offering a more restrictive service to their customers in order to maximize their own profits. You're OK with that. But again, you're forgetting that not everyone is living your life.

Every company plays this game.

Sony's PS3 will only play Sony licensed content. You are not allowed to put any game into it, unless the publisher has paid the Sony tax for the privilege.

Is that restricting users too?

Yes, but it is also the business model that Sony uses to monetize their investment in that platform. Sony are entitled to do that.

Apple's position is the BluRay is the SACD of video. Apple is entitled to not support it.

If Apple believe this decision is costing them money, the decision will be reversed. But there does not seem to be much evidence of that.

C.