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
Apple allocates its billions of cash to vaults and other resources to iOS.
The result can bee seen here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part3&num=1
Steve Jobs' BluRay bashing is an act of desperation, so he can sell the people crap like this:
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/11/next-generation-apple-tv-renamed-itv-utilizes-apps-lacks-1080p/
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/11/next-generation-apple-tv-renamed-itv-utilizes-apps-lacks-1080p/
I wouldn't be too worried. Remember when 10.4 went all the way up to 10.4.11? And how did it take 35 months to get from Leopard to Snow Leopard? Leopard was released in August 2007; Snow Leopard almost exactly two years afterwards. It was more like 24 months, not 35.
My mistake, I checked the wrong dates.
http://guides.macrumors.com/Leopard
:"Leopard began shipping on October 26, 2007 at 6 PM..."
http://guides.macrumors.com/Snow_Leopard
:"...it was released on August 28, 2009..."
So it was only 22 months.
Anyway, Leopard was announced at WWDC 2005 and SL at WWDC 2008.
If these are any indication of release, maybe 10.7 is announced at WWDC 2011 and then released in fall of 2012 or even 2013.
I wonder why Apple won't support Blu-Ray? Also why does Apple take so long to adopt new technologies. They also take for every to get new graphics cards for the mac pro, they're like a generation behind.
i dont know why you are bringing Tiger into this, because IIRC Leopard was released around 10.4.8/10.4.9 - then apple continued to release a few extras for it. this is the same with SL and Leopard, 10.5.7 was out, then 10.5.8 was released whilst SL was on the market. apple will likely do the same for SL + L.
there are a few thousand justifications in this thread why apple won't support BD - why not just read the thread?
i believe its because apple does not want to hurt their market that they have created, you cant have a company competition against its own product.
quite..
remember, iCon...
"wants to make the best product he can for the customers"
and
"skates to where the puck is going not where it has been"
tip: Assume what Jobs says is wrong and you'll likely end up near the truth.
Apple is going to dump optical drives especially in laptops. It's a dying tech. With sd card slots in every Mac the past year to 2 years they've essentially outfitted their entire lineup with a physical media replacement for the optical drive.
720p downloads from iTunes and Amazon are enough to satisfy most customers.
On top of it services like Netflix are growing and customers seems to enjoy the low-cost/on-demand buffet video experience.
Less than 1/3rd of Mac sales are desktop sales anyway. Even less are bigger screen iMacs.
And even then most of those folks would rather sit on the couch and watch BR movies on their big screen TV in the living with others than crowd around their desk watching BR movies on their iMac.
The market isn't there for Apple. They have a product that can satisfy hi-def demand. Market is moving towards downloads. Laptops would benefit more from no-optical drive than from an optical drive.
Last 1080p downloads will come soon enough as internet bandwidth increases, in-home bandwidth increases and computing processing power increases.
On top of they don't have to rewrite the kernel (or whatever they have to do) in order to support BR.
Like it or not, that's most likely the method behind their madness.
Bd will be cheaper storage than sd for at least a decade.
That's what counts when collectors renew their libraries.
Maybe in US, but most of Apple's profits are now coming elsewhere.
I'd like to replace all media boxes in living room with one mac mini and connect that to the big screen. If I can't watch bd with mini, I won't buy it. Apple looses one sale and bd-player manufacturer wins one more.
Apple has to sell a lot of movies to fill the hole for lost bd-mac sales.
I agree with you on optical drives, but the solution they could have used 5 years ago is to have a modular drive like IBM, where you can swap an extra battery are hard drive in for the optical drive, or just a plastic filler for weight. At this point, it's pretty easy just to drop the optical drive and use a USB one, but Apple is late to the no optical drive game...
I'm okay as long as when the new macbook pros come out, they have the best graphics card, and reasonabe SSD prices. As well as anti-glare for the screen. Other than that I should be good.
If you haven't noticed, Apple is moving further away from modularity. You can't even change the battery anymore and almost none have express card.
In recent history, Apple has been more used to take options away than giving more of them.
Riiight. Poor me. I'm stuck with "stupid" 720p whatever shall I do? I know! Watch the movie.
Riiight. Poor me. I'm stuck with "stupid" 720p whatever shall I do? I know! Watch the movie.
it is not the resolution that is the problem, rather the pathetic bitrate that Apple chooses to use. sure, its the best choice given the majority of peoples Internet connections/patience to wait for it to download, the old Apple would have given us "prosumers" the option to have higher bitrates (even for a price).
Please - try this experiment:
Get a typical person. Your wife or girlfriend might be a good choice.
And get them to compare a movie. Avatar or something.
Compare the Blu Ray version with the AppleTV version.
You need to do this at normal viewing distances. Say 10 feet from a decent sized HDTV.
Try it on a few regular people. I think you'd struggle to find a consensus. The iTunes version is good enough. Watching a 46" screen at ten feet, the human eye is only capable of perceiving about a million pixels. 720p is "retina" quality.
There are audiophiles who assert that the compressed audio bit-rates on iTunes is too low, and we should all listen to music on CD or even Vinyl.
Great, fine. I am sure those bits are just great. But the majority of the public does not share this passion. They just want to watch the movie, or listen to the music. They want it cheap, they want it fast. The bit rate on iTunes video means there is no loading time. The movie streams after a minute of buffering.
There is no doubt that BluRay does offer the best commercially available playback experience. But in terms of experience, the difference is too small for typical consumers to care.
C.
(Not saying iTunes is great either. The catalog is currently much too small)
???
if you didnt read my intentions correctly (or i didnt write them good enough, need sleep) - i said that Apple HAS made the correct choice giving said quality of the iTunes store for the majority of users. i agreed with you!
i then added that it would be nice if Apple could add a "prosumer" version for us OCD users
- Status