What's up with Apple users' infatuation with Blu-ray?

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by asdfTT123, Oct 23, 2009.

  1. asdfTT123 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    #1
    Hey guys,

    After hanging out on these forums for quite some time I've seen many Mac users support Blu-ray as it's a common topic with upcoming Mac revisions. I'm just curious though, what's the big fuss about it?

    IMO, I don't see Blu-ray as being a HUGE difference over a DVD as you're basically getting audio and video enhancements. The jump from VHS to DVD marked a much larger turn in the industry - fiddling with clunky tapes and having to rewind and FF to resume a movie was no longer an issue. A DVD compared to Blu-ray gives you almost the same movie experience that's about 85% of the way there.

    My main point in this argument is that the future of media distribution will be electronic and on-demand. The future is all about in instant delivery of entertainment -nobody wants to go out of their way to the nearest rental store to check out a Blu-ray and have to drive back several days later to return it. With the increase of bandwidth and the ever-popular Netflix and on-demand entertainment, physical copies of entertainment should be phased out. In the near future we'll undoubtably see full HD-streamed movies to our computers and HDTV.

    Maybe it's just me but I never saw anything promising with Blu-ray or HD-DVD's. I've seen Apple supporters more zealously support Blu-ray technology but most of the PC community (as far as I know of) never really got into it as much. What's everyone elses take on this?
     
  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    If you can't see the huge difference between Blu Ray and DVD, you're either:

    1) Not using an HDTV
    2) Are using an HDTV but have it setup incorrectly
    3) Are using an HDTV and have the Blu Ray player hooked up improperly
    4) Blind
    5) Combination of any of the above

    And I'd rather deal with the hassles of getting a physical Blu Ray disc than watch the 720p compressed crap you download from iTunes.
     
  3. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #3
    Well, I'm a Mac user, but it has nothing to do with my Blu-Ray preferences. I'm also not a Blu-Ray zealot.

    However, have you really seen a DVD vs. a Blu-Ray on decent audio and visual hardware? The difference is truly astounding. The video is six times the resolution and uncompressed. The audio is true digital surround.

    This is not meant to be some big look at me thing, but I watch on a 100" screen in my theater room, and I can assure you that Blu-Ray is far superior to DVD.
     
  4. PCtoMAC? macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    #4
    "IMO, I don't see Blu-ray as being a HUGE difference over a DVD as you're basically getting audio and video enhancements."

    My mom thought the same thing until I showed her the chase scene from the Dark Knight on Blu-Ray on my Panasonic plasma. She now has an HDTV and a Blu-Ray player.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    There's a HUGE difference between DVD and blue-ray. Unlike DVD, you get a much better audio output then the overly compressed sound on DVD

    BR provides 1080p high definition, a far cry from what DVDs can provide.

    As for downloading HD movies instead of BR, I tried that on my PS3 and all I can say is that its Sllooowwww

    I'd rather pop a disk in and watch it, instead of download many gigabytes and even then not get 1080p but something lower.
     
  6. eawmp1 macrumors 601

    eawmp1

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    FL
    #6
    2+ above.

    The "bag of hurt" argument just doesn't cut it. Yes, licensing is a pain, but come on already. Outwardly, it appears Apple had been trying to avoid BluRay because of its push for downloadable content. Physical media will eventually die out, but not soon enough for Apple to ignore this format. Both prerecorded media and storage are good arguments for Apple to "support" BluRay in the OS.
     
  7. rhett7660 macrumors G4

    rhett7660

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Sunny, Southern California
    #7
    Couldn't have said it better.

    Also, to the OP, what makes you think the rest of the world is ready for downloads and streams? You do realize that there are a lot of people still using dial-up. I mean these are probably the same people who needed the digital converter boxes for their TV's.

    Maybe in say 5-10 years we will see broadband as the norm as the price for it comes down and as the need for it grows.
     
  8. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #8
    I don't really care about Blu-ray right now. When I got my MBP, HD-video was hardly a blip on the radar. I won't be getting another mac for at least a year, if ever.

    However, that doesn't mean I don't care. Dell, HP, etc, all offer a $1000 Laptop capable of playing back Blu-ray movies. Why should Apple be exempt from that?

    If they wanna offer a Macbook for $600, without Blu-ray, that's fine. who cares. But in a $1000 machine, let alone a $2000 or $3000 machine, it NEEDS a Blu-ray drive, just like it needs an eSata port.
     
  9. Alrescha macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    #9
    My understanding is that "licensing is a pain" means "modifying your kernel code to include someone else's DRM into the core of your operating system". If it were my OS, I'd call that a bag of hurt too.

    I don't blame Apple bit for trying to avoid this mess.

    A.
     
  10. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #10
    IMHO, for many the improvement with Blu-ray is simply not worth it. DVD is good enough for them.

    Now before you ask, yes I've seen awesome DVD and Blu-ray comparisons. I would be willing to bet that I've seen better than most as I've seen Sony's version using very high end professional set ups.

    Sure Blu-ray very nice. No doubt about it. But is it worth the extra cost? Many would say no at this time.

    Personally, I like the convenience of DL to own and rent. So easy to use and the store is open 24/7.

    BTW, this reminds me of the argument between vinyl and CDs and we know how that went. Convenience over quality weighs heavily for many customers.
     
  11. instaxgirl macrumors 65816

    instaxgirl

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Edinburgh, UK
    #11
    Could be that members of the PC community who want a blu ray equipped PC can buy one if they want it.
     
  12. Tilpots macrumors 601

    Tilpots

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    Carolina Beach, NC
    #12
    About 50% of US households own an HDTV. So many more would say yes, especially after the large investment for the set.
     
  13. Terminal.app macrumors 6502

    Terminal.app

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    #13
    I don't care about BD and don't need it, but Apple should still include it in the next revision of Macs for those who do.
     
  14. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #14
    6) Sit more than a few metres away from your HDTV ;)

    I like Bluray for the storage but even on our 46" Bravia, using a PS3 for Bluray and Sony DVR for DVD playback, there's no difference in quality when sat on the sofa. Colours can look a bit better but it's only when I get up close do I see any real improvement.

    I'd rather have BR in a computer for storage than in my living room. And I'll stay that way until Bluray costs the same as DVD (Sainsbury's earlier today. £9 for a DVD, £21 for BluRay version. Nope!)

    I always thought they used compression, uncompressed audio but not uncompressed video. And 6x the resolution? Considering a DVD is 576p (414,720 pixels) and bluray (2,073,600) at 1080p, isn't that 5x as much, with roughly double the height and width of the resolution.
     
  15. gnomeisland macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    #15
    As some have kind of touched on, I think the big problem is the lack of a blu-ray option. I hate optical media and hardly use it. I would much rather have gotten my 13" MBP sans optical drive with more battery life or an expresscard slot, but since we're still married to optical media why are we still using "super" drives from 2005? (Yes, I understand the basic problems with changing the kernel and licensing)

    If I were in the market to buy the new 27" iMac I would be even more leery because of the lack of a way to natively watch HD video. The new iMacs & Mini's scream lack of Blu-ray. The media/display capabilities far outstrip the quality of DVD or downloadable video.

    Download-to-own or streaming is much better option and much more convenient but for those of us in the western hemisphere who lack the 100+mbps connection, the reality of truly high quality HD video through the net is a ways off.

    Apple may not like Blu-ray but they are not offering a compelling alternative and many of their users (dare I say "core users"?) are the people who author and/or appreciate the quality of Blu-ray movies.
     
  16. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #16
    I didn't think about PAL resolution. I was thinking of NTSC resolution which for DVD is 720x480, thus six times.
     
  17. CodeJingle macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    #17
    OMG, sounds like 'asdfTT123' is Steve Jobs in disguise, toting iTunes movies and AppleTV as the best thing since sliced bread :)

    Besides being able to burn 40GB or more per disc, Blu-Ray is a physical media format that has monopolized as the latest standard, which is great because no one is competing or fighting anymore like they were when HD-DVD was still in the picture as a competitor. Having one format gets consumers the best bang for their buck. And since Blu-Ray standardized itself along with 1080p, it also means less of a headache for the people manufacturing the discs and for the people mastering old movies from film. Lucky enough 1080p is the highest resolution format, so no one will complain that Blu-Ray should standardize with something better.

    Now the seller for me, personally, with HD altogether, is I can *SEE* the imperfections in the camera lens and/or film the digital copy was scanned from. Which is the tipping point to truly immerse myself in the movie, as if I was in a movie theatre. Though granted for 100% CG movies there are no imperfections if the conversion is 100% digital from beginning to end.

    The difference between Blu-Ray and DVD is the same difference between DVD and CD, which in and of itself was extraordinary and finally allowed movies to be produced in digital format of acceptable quality.

    And you know what is better than instant access to any movie ever made? Right of first sale. People REALLY REALLY like to actually own things, especially physical things, own it so much they could legally sell it to someone else with minimal hassle. Which is next to impossible with iTunes / AppleTV.

    And Macs are expensive, you figure an Apple guru wants the best bang for their buck. A Blu-Ray player can play Blu-Ray, DVD, and CD discs.

    Along with 802.11n, LED-Backlit display, sd card slot (finally), quad-core cpu (also-finally), and native 1080p or better resolution, the only thing that could make the new iMac better would be Blu-Ray support (read-only as standard, with read/write as optional).

    I think enough people would agree with me. As long as Blu-Ray doesn't jack up the price, it is something Mac users want more than they don't.

    ... right and if Blu-Ray becomes an option but not standard for macs down the road, people will be happy they could pick it even if they don't. For Steve Jobs, it may be the difference between a possible PC-to-Mac convert making the jump (just knowing BD is out there and supported). Hopefully Blu-Ray support is coming for Mac, and coming soon.

    ... I write code for a living, so I treat my vertical pixel count as very precious. I cry a tear that they lowered the vertical pixel count from 2560x1600 to 2560x1440. It better have been for a good cause, more than just AppleTV.

    ... Also note that it took Apple about 3 more years than any other laptop manufacturer to jump on the 'built-in sd card slot' bandwagon. Apple waited till the SD format was so ingrained in everything that it couldn't escape the SD Card black hole and got sucked in. So by that history maybe it will be another year or two before Blu-Ray comes to Mac? :(
     
  18. Love macrumors 68000

    Love

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    Just southeast of Northwestshire
    #18
    Wow, really? I don't have many BDs but whenever I download even SD shows it's a dream compared to my cable service from Shaw. Yikes.
     
  19. RubbishBBspeed macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    #19
    I got a blu ray player a couple of years back, apart from waiting ages for the content to catch up. The ridiculous price hike and the need to spend at least 5 grand to get the best use from it. I'm still at a loss to sum up blu ray in it's entirety.

    Firstly I don't think 1080p is enough for really high definition and wonder how long it will be before they start pushing 2160p resolution. Some programs are already filming and editing in RED ONE standard which is around 4000 lines as opposed to 1080 and that doesn't even take into account EPIC which is 5 or 6000 lines. (how much a TV to that standard will cost..... who knows) And then there is the aspect of is 16:9 going to be around either philips have already released a 21:9 super widescreen TV. admittedly in 1080p but not yet 3D. haven't even started to consider the knock on effect of that to the industry.

    Then there is TrueHD. a dolby standard which so far from my music insider friends inform me, requires a cinema processor which cost about another $3,000 (Cary cinema 11a) and then the speakers needed to run from that. They state monitors rather than speakers, which again will require calibration.

    In essence it seems, in order to get to the blu ray standard an investment of several thousand is an absolute minimum.

    Is this something which a computer can deliver.... Me thinks not and maybe thats why one this occasion apple have said don't bother..... DVD is good enough.
     
  20. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #20
    If that's the way you look at it, then nothing will ever be good enough because something else will always, and I mean ALWAYS, be around the corner. In a decade, this 4000-line RED camera will probably be what people use to record their kids at the beach. If you are going to delay moving to a new technology because the next one will come in a few years, then you will be on DVD forever. If that's good enough for you, then have fun. I'll be enjoying the better quality for a few years.

    I don't quite get where your several thousand figure is coming from. My Blu-Ray player cost around $300 when I got it. That leaves $4700 for discs. At $20 a disc, that's 235 movies. That's quite a bit more than your average consumer. The average consumer will easily get into the technology and perfectly enjoy it for well under $1000, and it will last them for several years minimum.
     
  21. RubbishBBspeed macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    #21

    I understand where you come from. I have a blu ray player the sony 500 one with the sliding down facia, my point is, that to get the best from blu ray requires a big investment in peripheral technology, most people will never reach the true potential of blu ray because of straight forward lack of investment. Blu ray is designed from day one to replicate true cinema viewing. In that then, normal home layout will never suffice. Dolby trueHD is 7.1 surround, so with 8 sources of sound to calibrate, its going to be difficult to setup a room correctly. Also the blu ray needs a signal processor. this is yet another piece of kit and even the cheap trueHD processors are over a grand. then the speakers themselves plus cabling and then the telly. it all adds up.

    Not to mention the millions of unsold tv and the slow down from the worst credit crisis in history. My point is, to get experience the point of blu ray requires a hefty investment. and people on a large scale haven't been willing to make that. the research from the industry though has still continued and 1TB disk have already been produced. therefore as an industry sector would it not be better to forget about blu ray and go straight to the next generation. (mini-disk, laser disk, betamax..... etc). They've done it before...... would they do it again.

    My reckoning is the next big tech benchmark will be TrueHD, 3D TV to RED ONE definition with 1TB disk. maybe streaming will be an option but I doubt digital rights issues will be sorted by then.
     
  22. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #22
    Well, yes...if you are talking about starting from a bare room and building it into a fully calibrated home media palace, then of course it's going to be a huge investment. I already had the projector, speakers, etc before ever making the switch. I currently run only 5.1 on some pretty standard Bose speakers and run HDMI from the Blu-Ray to the projector, no signal processors or anything (unless you want to count the receiver, which I have to have anyway). I don't get where you get this signal processor thing from? And even going this fairly cheap route, it still blows DVD away. Total cost for me to make the switch? $300 + discs....not $5000. Is it worth it for everyone? Of course not. Is there any real reason NOT to do it? Not for me.

    I do see what you are saying regarding the next generation. But that will be several years down the road I'm sure. And I'd rather not stick only to substandard DVDs until then.
     
  23. apfhex macrumors 68030

    apfhex

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    Northern California
    #23
    I kind of thought the point the OP was making was not about the quality of DVD vs Blu-ray on nice home theater equipment, but the advantage of having it on your Mac. I don't know about you but I don't tend to want to watch feature length films sitting at my desk and don't have surround sound there either. And for the people with Macbooks, are the screens even big enough for there to be a huge leap in quality when watching a movie relaxing on the couch (or wherever you use it)? Unless your face is right up by the screen, I just dunno.
     
  24. RubbishBBspeed macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    #24
    I think you've hit the nail on the head.... Sitting down in front of a computer to watch a film......... not most peoples idea of fun. Although I can see some peoples point, if they have a home setup.... buy the bd film, then there is no chance to watch it on mac if you just want it on in the background and who is going to by both bd and dvd of the same film. But then again, most of the bd's i've recently bought come with a the second dvd disk in them and that one can be transferred to the computer (yet again defunking the requirement for bluray)
     
  25. glocke12 macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #25
    I watch movies on my mbp sometimes, but only when Im laying down in bed and trying to chill, but for that I could really care less about blu-ray.

    I dont really sit in from of my 24" imac and watch shows or movie, so I dont care about bluray there either.

    My macmini OTH serves as my media center, and I am hoping that at sometime in the near future there will be a mini with a blu-ray player.

    However, since blu-ray movies are still in the $30-$40 price range, its doubtful that I wont really care about it until they drop down to a more reasonable $15-$20 price range.
     

Share This Page