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

[Lara F]

You are making an assumption that broadband such as your will become ubiquitous and common where removable media is not longer valid. That is not as true as cloud promoters are stating.

IMO, there is always going to be a market for a removable media not dependent on any cloud. This is cause well, "weather changes and clouds will not always be there" as someone said in a lively debate about this exact subject a few weeks ago in Palo Alto.

No, sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm saying that even though I personally have a great connection that can stream Avatar now, I recognize that's *not* the case for most people and the only way Apple could "destroy" BR would be if they massively subsidized ISP's worldwide.

I don't personally need BR on the Mac but I do think it's ridiculous for Apple not to offer the choice.

 

[kyleh613]

I don't personally need BR on the Mac but I do think it's ridiculous for Apple not to offer the choice.

That is because there are plenty of acceptable alternatives. I don't know why people don't understand this. You can still get blu-ray quality movies on your computer. Most people don't care about the quality when they watch a film on their computer either. Most people don't even realize that blu-ray is a significant jump in quality over DVD, so it hardly matters.

 

[Reddkryten]

The high-end film and TV industry, shooing on Red or whatever.... or even - the Pro-Am market shooting on DSLRs are more than happy to use Apple kit as the basis of their workflow.

The only thing you can not do on Mac OS X is watch Hot Tub Time Machine.

I never thought I would hear myself say this but... The inability to play hot tub time machine is a pretty major problem in the professional world. Ugh, I feel unclean now.

What I mean is, film is a very self referential medium, so you end up talking about other films a lot. Secondly, "talking about music is like dancing about architecture" or more accurately, trying to describe a shot from another film is very difficult. This was a few years ago, I was scouting a location with a director and a DOP, the director started talking about a shot from "The Accidental Tourist" (excellent film btw) but was struggling to describe it exactly, it was almost like a game or charades. The next day he brought in the DVD and the nonsense of the previous day suddenly made sense.
In that situation the inability to play The Accidental Tourist or (ugh) hot tub time machine, was a professional problem. What would happen if the directors only copy was on blu-ray? Some people have claimed that blu-Ray is a format for enthusiasts only, well if that's true then the film industry is made up of enthusiasts, so this problem will be multiplied.

Also, delivery isn't just an issue for wedding videographers, often actors, people proving a location etc have it written in their contract that they will receive a copy of the finished film. I so would not like to try emailing an actor a YouTube URL or handing them an SD card.

 

[Lara F]

That is because there are plenty of acceptable alternatives. I don't know why people don't understand this. You can still get blu-ray quality movies on your computer. Most people don't care about the quality when they watch a film on their computer either. Most people don't even realize that blu-ray is a significant jump in quality over DVD, so it hardly matters.

It's not about needing to replicate BR quality on a laptop - I think everyone would agree that's overkill. It's about being able to take the discs you *already have* from your home theatre with you and pop them in. Simple.

What is wrong with having that be possible??? It'll never be standard, those who want that option will have to pay extra (at a substantial premium no doubt) and that's fine.

 

[transmaster]

Oh Come on

You people act like Apple is the only game in town. By a cheap PC, or better yet a network drive. I don't care much about Blue Ray movies, 99% of what Hollywood-land turns out is crap any way. I am interested in the 25 gigs a single layer capacity each BR disc has for backup storage.

 

[Piggie]

The whole point is, it should not be up to Steve Jobs, or any other Anti BluRay person here to decide what others can and cannot choose to do.

Apple should offer it's customers (important customers) the CHOICE.

If I don't like BluRay why should I tell others they can't have it.

It's like some Apple users saying we should not have Flash, ok, THEY don't like Flash, but perhaps many others do like it.

Personally I'd like to see lots of things banned as I don't like them, but it's not for me to impose my feelings/views onto others.

This I feel is Steve Jobs biggest failing, and if he's worth $1 or A Trillion$ it does not make him right. He is wrong.

You as an individual should do all you can to give your customers the choice.

Ok, I'm not saying stupid things like a iMac than runs on coal with a furnace at the back, but straight forward items that are now off the shelf components which just swap out with current parts.

I'm afraid Apple can only see dollar signs now and not customers.

They are enjoying the golden years right now, but it will bite their ass in the long run as at the moment all we can see is an arrogant person thinking the whole world should change to the way he thinks it should be.

It's sad Apple has lost it's way.

 

[henk53]

That is because there are plenty of acceptable alternatives. I don't know why people don't understand this. You can still get blu-ray quality movies on your computer.

No you can't. That's the whole point. The 720P that you typically download from iTunes (3.5~4.5Mb/s) is typically not in the same league as Blu-ray, which has a minimal bit rate of 20Mb/s and a typical rate that is much higher. For 720P, quality would be okayish if they offered higher bitrates, but they don't. They do charge premium prices, but don't offer premium quality.

Most people don't care about the quality when they watch a film on their computer either.

Okay, so let's go back to playing VHS tapes on a crappy NTSC telly then? If quality doesn't matter, then why even bother with DVDs?

Now please realize that "watching a film on their computer" implies a desktop PC where you work all day in Excel and between breaks you watch a crappy low-rez movie in a window. I'm sorry to break it to you, but that's a bit old fashioned idea. These days computers are first class citizens in the digital living room, hooked up to expensive flatscreens and surround systems. Look up the word HTPC, you might learn something new.

For these people, quality *does* matter. I would love to use a Mac Mini for such a setup, but Apple doesn't let me. Oh well, I still love my Mac but then I just get myself a PS3 for the media center setup, or maybe even a Wintel PC.

Most people don't even realize that blu-ray is a significant jump in quality over DVD, so it hardly matters.

Believe me, they notice when they see it. I tried to impress my mom years ago with DVD, but she wasn't really impressed. I tried again with 720P iTunes material and while she put on a smile for me she still wasn't impressed. Then I showed her Blu-ray and she said: "WOW! That really does look good, almost as if I'm watching through a window".

Above all it are the "tech" guys like you who keep nagging about the fact they don't need it, and that it only has so many pixels, and so many more bits and that the human eye is only able to distinguish so much detail... bla bla bla... But the non-tech people don't care about all that. They look at the screen and it either looks good or it doesn't. Blu-ray looks good, it's as simple as that.

 

[Slim02]

They thought MiniDisc was worth it. They thought BetaMax was worth it.
Basically Sony has backed a ton of formats. About half of them have succeeded (made money for Sony) and half of them have failed (lost money for Sony).

I would argue strongly that the linking of BluRay to PS3 was one of the reasons that PS3 failed in the market. And although Sony "won" the HD optical disk battle, the outcome was a weaker Sony.

I am not anti-Sony. But I wish Sony would innovate by creating genuinely good new products, rather than by once again, trying to create a great new hardware format, and then profit by licensing it.

The format trick started with Pianola Rolls, and will end with Blu Ray.

Nothing will come after this.

C.

Man you have no clue..

The PS3 sold 35 million
The Xbox360 sold 40 million

So I guess the xbox360 failed too then.. AGAIN Blu-ray is not just Sony's Format. IT IS OWN BY MANY COMPANIES ALWAY HAVE BEEN AND ALWAY WILL BE..

Failed - not achieving its end or not lasting; unsuccessful

Well that see here the PS3 been out 4 years and sold 35 million. The PS3 is still growing.. That means the PS3 is successful and doing very good other wise the PS3 would of been off the market years ago not still be sold in stores.. You people need to learn what failed means before you go through it around.. Because it show you have no clue in what you are talking about.


Blu-ray Future possibility = Quad HD ,2160p and Ultra HD... Blu-ray is not going any where.

 

[KnightWRX]

This is you 10 years ago :

DVD was never even intended for computers either. It was the format that movie enthusiasts like myself have been wanting for years, to bring the theater experience into our home. DVD is meant to be watched on a big screen t.v. You should be happy to even be able to put your DVD discs onto your computer to begin with. Most people don't even need to buy DVDs because they aren't able to tell the difference in quality between that and VHS. DVD is really for people who love movies.

Yet here we are...

I rest my case. Your mkv files sacrifice quality, end of story. I pay 20$ for a movie, I don't want to sacrifice. Anything else is a stop gap measure until Apple stops being lazy. And in case you missed it, I never watch DVDs on my Macbook, nor would I use it to watch Blu-ray, I just support people who want the option, because I think the choice should be in the hand of the consumer, not the corporation.

 

[Carniphage]

Man you have no clue..

The PS3 sold 35 million
The Xbox360 sold 40 million

So I guess the xbox360 failed too then..

Yes! You are correct.

Commercially, the 360 has barely broke even.
The PS3 was a disaster that has almost killed Sony.
Look at Sony revenue numbers and see how the Playstation division went from being the largest cash generating part of the company to the largest money losing part.

There was no "winner". Unless you consider Nintendo. Who won by playing a completely different game.

Unit sales of consoles are irrelevant. Profits are not.

C.

 

[Carniphage]

because I think the choice should be in the hand of the consumer, not the corporation.

So all you are really wanting is to force every company to entirely support the technologies of rival companies.

Where exactly would you draw the line?
Microsoft should be legally compelled to support Zune for Macs.
Sony should port all of its PS3 games to iPad.

At what point does this totalitarian state end?
Why not allow each corporation make its own choices, and the market chose whether they got it right or wrong?

Or does that make me some kind of capitalists oppressor?

C.

 

[SactoGuy18]

The whole point is, it should not be up to Steve Jobs, or any other Anti BluRay person here to decide what others can and cannot choose to do.

Apple should offer it's customers (important customers) the CHOICE.

If I don't like BluRay why should I tell others they can't have it.

It's like some Apple users saying we should not have Flash, ok, THEY don't like Flash, but perhaps many others do like it.

Personally I'd like to see lots of things banned as I don't like them, but it's not for me to impose my feelings/views onto others.

This I feel is Steve Jobs biggest failing, and if he's worth $1 or A Trillion$ it does not make him right. He is wrong.

You as an individual should do all you can to give your customers the choice.

Ok, I'm not saying stupid things like a iMac than runs on coal with a furnace at the back, but straight forward items that are now off the shelf components which just swap out with current parts.

I'm afraid Apple can only see dollar signs now and not customers.

They are enjoying the golden years right now, but it will bite their ass in the long run as at the moment all we can see is an arrogant person thinking the whole world should change to the way he thinks it should be.

It's sad Apple has lost it's way.

BRAVO.

I think Jobs' attitude is going to lead to MAJOR trouble because by trying to use Apple to shape the future of media content consumption and delivery to his way, the company now runs the major risk of being charged with violations of antitrust laws such as the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts in the USA but also by being anticompetitive by the European Commission's antitrust division. This whole thing is approaching the point that Microsoft became during the late 1990's, mean they think nothing could persuade them to change their ways.

Let's consider the following:

1) Jobs has stated issues with running Adobe Flash on the iOS platform. How come he does't allow Apple to use some of their best engineers work closely with Adobe Systems to make Flash work specifically with the memory management model of iOS and take full advantage of the A4 chip functionality so Flash works quickly and efficiently on the iPhone and iPad?

2) Jobs doesn't want Blu-ray on the MacBook Pro, iMac and Mac Pro machines. Why? It's obvious that the Apple TV is not that commercially viable a product, and the MacBook Pro, iMac and Mac Pro hardware already meet all the specifications necessary for Blu-ray disc playback and mastering, only needing additions to MacOS X 10.6.4, QuickTime X, and iTunes 9.2 to get full Blu-ray disc support. Strong sales of the Disney/Pixar movies and the recent major hit Avatar proves that there is strong viability for the Blu-ray format, while relatively few people are downloading HD movies through the iTunes Store. And Jobs' views on Blu-ray technology licensing no longer makes sense, especially now that the Blu-ray Disc Association now offers a low-cost "single point" technology licensing model and BDA may even offer even more generous licensing terms to get Blu-ray support on to the Mac platform.

In short, Jobs' single-track zealotry may have worked in the recent past, but Apple is now one of the biggest companies in the USA in terms of market capitalization, and that attitude doesn't work anymore.

 

[Carniphage]

I never thought I would hear myself say this but... The inability to play hot tub time machine is a pretty major problem in the professional world. Ugh, I feel unclean now.

Red,
Your point is reasonable and well made.

Mac Users *should* be legally allowed to watch a copy of Hot Tub Time Machine on BluRay, not least to watch John Cusack's fine performance.

But Mac Users are allowed to buy a BluRay player and watch it. Steve Jobs does not leap out of the bushes and mug them on the way to Blockbuster.

They can even watch the Movie on a Mac, - under virtualisation.
The only real restriction is watching copy protected content under OS X.

Because this whole issue is about Sony DRM - and Apple's refusal to pay Sony's asking price. If Sony charged less, perhaps Apple might support it.

Also, delivery isn't just an issue for wedding videographers, often actors, people proving a location etc have it written in their contract that they will receive a copy of the finished film. I so would not like to try emailing an actor a YouTube URL or handing them an SD card.

For the 10th time....The delivery issue has been solved already.
Delivery is available on the Mac.
There are BluRay burners that are available. Please stop saying that this is not possible. It is!

C.

 

[henk53]

So all you are really wanting is to force every company to entirely support the technologies of rival companies.

Bad analogy...

1. Blu-ray is NOT the technology of a rival company or even companies. It's a video disc standard specially designed so virtually every manufacturer can license it, and tons have done so.

2. Apple joined the blu-ray association a long time ago.

 

[Carniphage]

In short, Jobs' single-track zealotry may have worked in the recent past, but Apple is now one of the biggest companies in the USA in terms of market capitalization, and that attitude doesn't work anymore.

Huh?

Jobs has led Apple from being in a desperate state - to having a bigger market cap than Microsoft. At the same time he has led Pixar from being worth pocket change to being effectively in control of Disney.

Which specific aspect of this history proves that his attitude does not work?

C.

 

[Carniphage]

Bad analogy...

1. Blu-ray is NOT the technology of a rival company or even companies. It's a video disc standard specially designed so virtually every manufacturer can license it, and tons have done so.

Is it Sony's vehicle for copy protection. No more no less. Sony makes their money by licensing this kind of tech. They do not give it away for free.

2. Apple joined the blu-ray association a long time ago.

They joined so they could read the small print.
But never paid to license it.

If their refusal to license were hurting them commercially, they would do so in a heartbeat.

C.

 

[BudgetBaby]

For me, this is like Jaguar suddenly stopping selling cars that use petrol/diesel saying that bio fuels are the future.

Ok, they're the future, but it's a progressive thing. Same as downloadable movies. There are a lot of people that desire/use Blu-ray - account for those people rather than exclude them completely.

 

[partyBoy]

I think Apple should include blu-ray in their products..not everyone is into downloadable content

 

[Carniphage]

I think Jobs' attitude is going to lead to MAJOR trouble because by trying to use Apple to shape the future of media content consumption and delivery to his way, the company now runs the major risk of being charged with violations of antitrust laws such as the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts in the USA but also by being anticompetitive by the European Commission's antitrust division. This whole thing is approaching the point that Microsoft became during the late 1990's, mean they think nothing could persuade them to change their ways.

With Apple's 10% market share, it's going to be somewhat challenging to argue that Apple is abusing its monopoly position.

C.

 

[Carniphage]

I think Apple should include blu-ray in their products..not everyone is into downloadable content

PartyBoy,
If BluRay is important to you, why not buy a Vaio? Which does offer it, instead of Mac which does not.

I bought a Vaio last year.

The screen was really bad. But all those BluRay pixels were under there somewhere.

C.

 

[SactoGuy18]

Huh?

Jobs has led Apple from being in a desperate state - to having a bigger market cap than Microsoft. At the same time he has led Pixar from being worth pocket change to being effectively in control of Disney.

Which specific aspect of this history proves that his attitude does not work?

C.

That would be true, but Apple is now in the "big boys" category of companies where the market cap is only exceeded by the number of companies I can count on one hand.

There is a famous phrase from the Spider-Man comic book: With great power comes great responsibility. Apple now wields tremendous economic clout, and they should be very careful of keeping in good graces with the general consuming public. Apple's attitude on Adobe Flash, writing apps and creating ads for the iOS platform, and Blu-ray technology is the height of arrogance the likes I haven't seen from a technology company since the late 1990's Microsoft--and Apple now runs the risk of running afoul of US and European Commission antitrust laws, which could drag the company down just as fast as it rose in the last decade.

 

[KnightWRX]

So all you are really wanting is to force every company to entirely support the technologies of rival companies.

Again, what Rival company ? You keep saying, I keep proving you wrong yet you keep coming back with it. Suffer from delusions much ?

Sony and Apple are partners. Sony Music label CDs are sold through iTunes. Sony Pictures movies are sold through iTunes. Sony adopted IEEE 1394, Apple's firewire. Apple sells DVD drives, they sell CD playback capable hardware.

They are very much industry partners who share in the standards so all consumers benefit.

This rivalry you speak of exists only in your head.

 

[Reddkryten]

Oh yes, it is possible to burn blu Ray under Mac os using an external drive. My point was more about the necessity for doing so. You said a few posts back that "Wedding photographers, and their ilk, who like to consider themselves "professionals" have clients who are not embarrassed to accept content delivered on BluRay." trust me, there is nothing embarrassing about content being delivered on blu ray.

I agree, denying support for blu ray isn't preventing people from watching blurays however for the past sixish years, whenever I stay in a hotel I use my laptop as a DVD player. Now as more of my film purchases are in blu, my MacBook becomes more and more obsolete.

 

[JediZenMaster]

With Apple's 10% market share, it's going to be somewhat challenging to argue that Apple is abusing its monopoly position.

C.

Exactly and i'm not sure why people think that apple is obligated to support something just because it's something they want. I'm all for giving consumers what they want but just because. You have people demanding Lightpeak , 1TB harddrives in Mac book pro portables, Customized gaming macbook pro portables.

There is a reason why a consumer is a consumer and why they don't run companies.

 

[henk53]

Is it Sony's vehicle for copy protection. No more no less. Sony makes their money by licensing this kind of tech. They do not give it away for free.

You're completely wrong in thinking that blu-ray it somehow Sony's exclusive vehicle. Many companies worked together in creating the blu-ray standard and thus also many companies own patents related to the standard.

Philips, Panasonic, Samsung... they have as much stake in blu-ray as Sony does.

I know Sony has been an easy target to dish on the Internet lately, but unfortunately for you, you picked the wrong example. Make us cry with your memory stick stories and tales of the UMD, tell us how bad and evil Sony was by bringing those products to the market...

But don't make us belief that Blu-ray is exclusively owned by Sony and each and every other company thus must pay royalties only to Sony. The only thing you accomplish is to demonstrate how uninformed you are...

They joined so they could read the small print.
But never paid to license it.

They paid to read the small print? Really? They are on the freaking board of directors! They can be actively participating in adding key features, and frankly they should do just that if they're on the board. But instead of doing that all Steve does is wine about how the Mac is NOT getting blu-ray.

Once again, I love the Mac, have been using them since the mid 80-ties and have converted so many people to the platform Steve should actually give me some shares in return, but this not allowing Blu on the Mac is just ridiculous.