or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's iTunes 9 rumored to have Blu-ray, social media support
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iTunes 9 rumored to have Blu-ray, social media support - Page 4

post #121 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

I agree that BD is way too expensive. I'm not sure where you shop but i got my panasonic BD player for $299 at best buy, which is pretty average. Now i'm not saying that isn't a rip-off either, but that's what DVD players cost after being on the market for 2 years. And yes, BD movies are crazy expenisve. If they really want to compete with Digital and DVD sales, they need to make the movies close enough in price to make worth it.

I, for one, only buy movies for the special features. If i like a movie enough, i will buy it, but really only for the special stuff. Like LOTR. now you can't get the 8+ hours of bonus content from those extended editions on iTunes can you? Thought so. Plus, Netflix is just such a better deal than iTunes movie rentals. I can watch as many DVD/BD movies as i like and instant download for $18 a month. I'd like to say that iTunes single use rentals are just as cheap but they are far off the mark.

Now, look at what it costs to buy a HD movie on iTunes...$19.99. I just bought the Extended Edition of "Watchmen" with the digital copy and all bonus features for $19.99 at Best Buy. Prices are coming down and you get so much more with physical media still.

I agree the last 3 itunes rentals I found on netflix same week . The DL thing is great for instant watchu\\ing at work.but from now on i iwll wait a few extras days for netflix.

I will buy the LoTR next mega mega release extended comes out .

WAS THE WATCHMAN THAT GOOD ???I will get it then .
Does only best buy have the bonus extra's ??

update B R WON THE WAR !!!!

I only buy discs when its action block buster type . But DIGITAL and disc sounds great .
Good will hunting or dinner with Andre is a joke on blu ray . Thats , my point about Bluray .

RIGHT now i get movies from discs bought from stores
bootlegs
Itunes
netflix
roku
reg dvr tv
HULU
and all the abc cbs type sites
AND Amazon just sent me 50 Amazon dollars to spend in their movie dept. connected to roku or online

I would love one stop shopping

Thanks guys

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #122 of 249
Most people seem to be focusing on Blu-Ray for the video support, but I think a very important point for including Blu-Ray is the raw storage size.

Apple was an early adopter of DVD players across the entire Mac line compared to PC makers, which meant Apple developers could very early switch to DVD exclusive distributions and not have to offer a second multiple CD version of everything. That reduces cost and complexity.

We are now reaching the point were the storage space of DVDs for applications is at it's limit. Quite a few games, for example, are already needing 2 dual layer DVDs. Adobe Creative Suite and even Apple's Final Cut Studio and Logic Studio are also needing multiple discs. The Internet may be improving, but with all the talk of ISPs wanting throttling and bandwidth caps, having to download 20GB+ of data isn't going to be the most convenient. In Canada, for example, even a 60GB bandwidth cap is generous making downloading a Blu-Ray sized 50GB a virtual death sentence for the month, pardon the pun. John Carmack's RAGE has terabytes of raw textures that he's going to try to shrink to 2 DL DVDs for XBox 360 and PC/Mac, since it wouldn't be convenient to be swapping more. He's said he's open to making a better 50GB+ version for computer users if there was interest.

The faster Apple adopts cross-board Blu-Ray drive support, the faster Mac developers can switch to Blu-Ray distribution instead of multiple DVD distribution. Digital downloads may be the future, but physical media still looks to be the mainstream for the next 5-10 years. And with price being the consumer/media focus these days, the addition of Blu-Ray drives will most likely be done without increase end-user model price with Apple absorbing the cost in their already large profit margin. It's hard to see the reason to complain about getting Blu-Ray support if you won't have to pay extra for it.
post #123 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't agree with this. First of all, no one can argue that B-R isn't a much higher quality than DVD. Not only is it sharper, but the color is better as well. On a good Tv this is pretty obvious.

That is actually is what I said was the major advantage of BR.

Quote:
And honestly, I couldn't care less about the DRM. That's not a real issue. All downloadable movies, Tv shows, and videos are already DRM heavy. If the ability to use DRM for B-R is implemented, it would only affect B-R playback. And what DVD isn't full of DRM? The OS already needs to recognize that, so don't kid yourself about DRM.

Apple does care and has expressed resistance to adopting BR DRM. But it sounds like the BR group is working to resolve those issues.


Quote:
I doubt we'll see that for a long time, if ever. I can't see any advantage to that at this point. In order to hold a movie at the quality level of a B-R movie, the stick will need to be 25 GB at least. Until those sticks, with packaging, drop to $1 apiece, about what it costs to do a DVD with artwork and jewel case, it won't be competitive. And the cost of producing B-R movies is dropping rapidly with the construction of new plants in China and elsewhere. It will be at that level in another couple of years at the latest.

You don't see any advantage to using SD cards? They are smaller and faster than optical discs. You don't need to buy a stand alone player the use them.

Yes I know 32GB SD cards are not price competitive today. That is why I said its only a matter of time. The prices will come down. I remember when a 2GB USB flash drive was $40. Now they are given away as key chain promotional items. At the same time their is little business incentive for electronics manufacturers to use flash storage. They prefer to keep us locked into the current player/physical media business.

In all you are saying the prices of Blu-ray are quickly dropping while the prices of solid state storage will take years to drop. Isn't that going out of your way to stack the deck.

Quote:
It will also take a good 8 years or so for downloading to be practical for most people. At least a 10Mb/s connection will be required, and that's a minimum. 50 Mb/s is more practical. If we want to see a movie on our increasingly larger sets, we're going to need less compression as time goes by. how long would it take you to download a full quality B-R movie? What about the extras that they give, and people like?

Spontaneity goes out the door with downloads unless the speed is good enough, or you also have the bandwidth for streaming. When will Apple. or others stream a full quality 1080p with 5 channel sound over the internet?

Broadband use among active internet users is at 94.7%, broadband penetration over all in the US is at 63%. So at least 63% of households should have a 10Mb/s connection.

That's the straw man that most BR advocates throw into the argument. Most people don't want/need Blu-ray quality video. Their is little need or demand to stream/download Blu-ray quality video.
post #124 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

First of all, B-R has not "lost". It's growing faster than DVD did at the same time after its introduction. It hasn't been very long since Toshiba gave up the ghost with HD-DVD. That's the actual beginning of the format. In fact, Toshiba finally admitted that they will be making B-D themselves, after first saying that they wouldn't. Too much money being left on the table they've said.

In addition, we're in the middle of the worst recession around the entire world since the Great Depression of the 1930's. Bringing out a new format during that time is very difficult.

You can now get B-R players for $250, and by the holiday, it's expected we'll see them for $200, possibly less. Movies on the format have dropped considerably in price as well.

Downloaded HD movies look terrible when compared to the same movie on B-R. That's very easy to see.

So b r won over hd ?
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #125 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

I for one think physical media will be around for a very long time. BD, DVD, chips, whatever. there will be physical media. you just can't get past the fact that:

I agree, I have not said that physical media will die anytime soon. At the same time it will never again see the growth it had ten years ago.

Quote:
1. maybe less than 1% of users actually back up their stuff on a secondary hard disc; or even own a 2nd hard drive.
2. people don't want to re-purchase what they already have digitally. Hopefully Apple is working on this.
3. hard drives last up to 5-7 years on most normal computers. so once that crashes, you're screwed. Optical Discs from the factory (meaning the movie quality ones) typically can last up to 100 years.
4. transferring of digital licenses is a pain, from what i've read, i've never had a problem transferring music from one computer to another but we'll see.
5. No additional features or content on digital. Physical copies have way more special features. No commentaries on digital copies.
6. BD is coming down (see my post about "Watchmen" extended copy for $19.99 at Best Buy, vs. the iTunes copy standard HD version for the same price.)

To me, Digital Downloads will be the new rental service, but not the be-all, end-all of home entertainment. It's just a large piece of the Home Theater Puzzle.

Again you are only looking at this from the stand point of owning media. A large percentage of the market are perfectly happy to rent, watch cable, or video on demand.
post #126 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Broadband use among active internet users is at 94.7%, broadband penetration over all in the US is at 63%. So at least 63% of households should have a 10Mb/s connection.

I think it's highly unlikely that every broadband user will automatically have a 10Mb/s connection. Especially when a 128kb/s connection is already advertised as broadband since it's faster than dial-up.
post #127 of 249
Still it has to compete with a growing list of options where you don't have to buy a stand alone player at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We're already seeing sales of B-R players drop below $200. I just got this e-mail from J&R. By Christmas, when player prices are expected to drop to $200 as the regular price, we'll see even lower sale pricing. And after that, it will move even lower.

http://www.jr.com/sharp/pe/SHA_BDHP2...dSale.08072009
post #128 of 249
OK yes I was wrong about that one. But I've never seen anyone whose had broadband and was not able to stream video. 10 Mb/s are not required. If Mel is talking about downloading and watching Blu-ray quality in real time then, yes it will take a lot more than what we have now. But that's not really an issue, as few people expect Blu-ray quality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post

I think it's highly unlikely that every broadband user will automatically have a 10Mb/s connection. Especially when a 128kb/s connection is already advertised as broadband since it's faster than dial-up.
post #129 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

That is actually is what I said was the major advantage of BR.

I didn't get that. It seemed as though you were saying that the difference wasn't that great when compared to the earlier advances.

Quote:
Apple does care and has expressed resistance to adopting BR DRM. But it sounds like the BR group is working to resolve those issues.

I think Apple has been using it as an excuse. None of the player manufacturers seem to have a problem. None of the other computer manufacturers who provide B-R with their their towers or portables seem to be having a problem with it.

I just think that Apple has been holding off as long as possible because they think it doesn't coincide with their business interests, which are downloads, though I think they're wrong.

I know that Apple is trying to sell the aTv, and according to one analyst, they've sold about 6.6 million, which to me, would bring it out of the hobby section of the store.

But at what cost to computer sales? Apple would have to sell 11 aTv's to one computer in order to equal their average MSRP. I doubt that will ever happen.

And if they make no more profit on a percentage basis selling or renting movies or Tv shows than they're expected to be making on music sales, that's not worth it either.

Quote:
You don't see any advantage to using SD cards? They are smaller and faster than optical discs. You don't need to buy a stand alone player the use them.

Yes I know 32GB SD cards are not price competitive today. That is why I said its only a matter of time. The prices will come down. I remember when a 2GB USB flash drive was $40. Now they are given away as key chain promotional items. At the same time their is little business incentive for electronics manufacturers to use flash storage. They prefer to keep us locked into the current player/physical media business.

In all you are saying the prices of Blu-ray are quickly dropping while the prices of solid state storage will take years to drop. Isn't that going out of your way to stack the deck.

It isn't whether there's an advantage, it's the cost. Remember that whatever the cost of the physical media and packaging is, that cost is tripled to the consumer. That's the way it is, or the manufacturer actually loses money, because of the costs of distribution and retail. If it only costs $1 for the DVD and stuff, and it costs $4 for the stick and stuff, that's $3 to the consumer vs $12 to the consumer.

No, I'm not stacking the deck. Pressing Cd's, DVDs, and B-R is a well known technology, and it's just a matter of having the plants in place. The actual costs of the media, e.g. the polycarbonate disks, are exactly the same.

With flash, or whatever they would use for the stick, it's the price of the media itself that has to come down. That takes new generations of process technology.

For example, Intel is now manufacturing their flash for their SSD's on 34 nm. That's brought the cost down for high speed flash memory, but its still pretty expensive memory. Regular stick Flash is much cheaper of course, but still is far more expensive than a pressed disk.

Don't forget that we can buy high grade recordable CD's or DVD's for $0.15 apiece, and on some sales, for much less. The cost of an actual disk for pressing, without the cost of the pressing itself being done, is less than a penny.

We can't go by the price of recordable B-R disks because they have nothing in common with the pressed disks. The disks themselves also cost less than a penny.

Quote:
Broadband use among active internet users is at 94.7%, broadband penetration over all in the US is at 63%. So at least 63% of households should have a 10Mb/s connection.

That's the straw man that most BR advocates throw into the argument. Most people don't want/need Blu-ray quality video. Their is little need or demand to stream/download Blu-ray quality video.

I have no idea what "active" means. Is this some standard I don't know about?

Most people have internet service that no greater than 1Mb/s. In some areas, it's even 256Kb/s. That's called broadband, but it's useless for this purpose.

It's just a small fraction of internet users that have more than 1Mb/s.
post #130 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

you also seem to miss the point with Netflix. They RELY on DVD and BD for business. If BD and DVD die, then so does Netflix.

EVEN netflix see's with their instant watch program the future . AND its free.

million upon millions of discs coming and going >>>>>>
compared to trillions of 1's/0's cruising the lighted fiber optic way with zero carbon foot print and much lower prices and no more pirates.

Flash stick movies with the best digital standard will pass dvd by so fast . So i wonder how all your BR-hd discs will look with all your laser discs collection ??

lol >> teckstud could say this in 2 lines
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #131 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

Good luck with that. Although that is in the specs, none of the Blu Ray titles offer that feature.

Great article on the topic:
http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6664863.html

As of the articles writing (6/11/09) Apple has not signed on for managed copy yet and titles won't be released until 1st quarter 2010.
post #132 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Bruce, you are really out of it. It was all over the news last year that HD-DVD died. And good riddance!

I did 7 ,months of chemo radition last year . So HD lives on with itunes and amazon DL ??? NO br DL ???

BOY i feel stupid now .
fcuk

9

Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

The "bonus content" for the extended edition was kind of cool because it was like you were watching the feature with the director right there. he would pause the movie to talk about particular scenes, focus on areas you might miss. The bonus features on the added disc were just OK, i think the first one was the best, more about he history of the Graphic novel.

The extended scenes are seamlessly integrated and if you read the graphic novel, you'll appreciate the added content. Much like LotR extended editions. Nothing compares to the quality of the bonus features on LotR. I've yet to find anything as comprehensive.

IS this on what format ??
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #133 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

I'm running a year old iMac with 2gb of RAM and a 250gb hard drive. This should have nothing to do with my specs. i know I'm not alone in complaining about the speed. Doing a search on this yields a ton results. As for my apps I do have lot. Some in the vicinity of 150 or so and since they all fit on my phone I'm pretty sure I'm not doing it wrong.

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php...itunes+is+fast
post #134 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

VHS is still in production, hate to break it to you; even though stores don't sell them, they still exist and people are using them.]

Dude.. what are you talking about. You cannot buy Brand new released movies on VHS. Even if there are a FEW titles available, the majority of stuff is DVD only meaning that if you want to be able to watch the latest movies.. you can't on VHS. Thus VHS is Obsolete.
post #135 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I didn't get that. It seemed as though you were saying that the difference wasn't that great when compared to the earlier advances.



No, I'm not stacking the deck. Pressing Cd's, DVDs, and B-R is a well known technology, and it's just a matter of having the plants in place. The actual costs of the media, e.g. the polycarbonate disks, are exactly the same.

With flash, or whatever they would use for the stick, it's the price of the media itself that has to come down. That takes new generations of process technology.

For example, Intel is now manufacturing their flash for their SSD's on 34 nm. That's brought the cost down for high speed flash memory, but its still pretty expensive memory. Regular stick Flash is much cheaper of course, but still is far more expensive than a pressed disk.

Don't forget that we can buy high grade recordable CD's or DVD's for $0.15 apiece, and on some sales, for much less. The cost of an actual disk for pressing, without the cost of the pressing itself being done, is less than a penny.

We can't go by the price of recordable B-R disks because they have nothing in common with the pressed disks. The disks themselves also cost less than a penny.

/s.

MELL i can use this post 6 months from now and argue the other way .

The disc is a way to control their profits
when flash sticks become cheap or re-usable
bring your used 100g flash card dongle and pick up 3 top quality movies for 6.99 each
the studios can make a killing because the whole brick and mortar dvd infrastrucure will die
the studios will make a killing because the pirates are dead with such a low price/high quality

AS i stated before i have watched star trek on a flash card given to me /and it opened my eyes to the tiny SD card universe coming . IMAC MBP ROKU on and on can play instead of a dvd player TODAY IT CAN this

6 yrs from now cutting out all the stores plastic gas oil trucks factories players on and on that it takes to keep the disc world alive will be fast fading away , Our carbon foot print will get smaller

mayne i will vist you mel in 7 yrs and we can laff about how wrong we all was .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #136 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I didn't get that. It seemed as though you were saying that the difference wasn't that great when compared to the earlier advances.

Oh yes I have said that. From the average sitting position in the living room the average person cannot see a huge difference from BR and DVD.

Ten years ago the average person could see a difference between VHS and DVD.


I think Apple has been using it as an excuse. None of the player manufacturers seem to have a problem. None of the other computer manufacturers who provide B-R with their their towers or portables seem to be having a problem with it.


Quote:
But at what cost to computer sales? Apple would have to sell 11 aTv's to one computer in order to equal their average MSRP. I doubt that will ever happen.

Well obviously they don't see that BR sells more computers.


Quote:
We can't go by the price of recordable B-R disks because they have nothing in common with the pressed disks. The disks themselves also cost less than a penny.

We are essentially comparing the price of write once optical discs to rewritable SSD. Write once SSD would be a lot cheaper than RW.

Look at it this way. Back when DVD was new, they were typically around $25 - $20 depending on the movie. You could buy the VHS version for $10 - $5. I'm sure at the time it was a lot cheaper to make VHS tapes than press DVD's. Until DVD production really ramped up.

I'm sure they can create a write once SSD format, it doesn't need to be the fastest high quality variant. They could sell movies for $40 - $30 with the advantage that the movie can play in anything without the need for a third media player.



Quote:
I have no idea what "active" means. Is this some standard I don't know about?

Most people have internet service that no greater than 1Mb/s. In some areas, it's even 256Kb/s. That's called broadband, but it's useless for this purpose.

It's just a small fraction of internet users that have more than 1Mb/s.

From the article I got the numbers from. Active users were people who use the internet on a regular basis.

Yeah I wasn't paying close enough attention and got MB and Mb confused.
post #137 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

MELL i can use this post 6 months from now and argue the other way .

The disc is a way to control their profits
when flash sticks become cheap or re-usable
bring your used 100g flash card dongle and pick up 3 top quality movies for 6.99 each
the studios can make a killing because the whole brick and mortar dvd infrastrucure will die
the studios will make a killing because the pirates are dead with such a low price/high quality

AS i stated before i have watched star trek on a flash card given to me /and it opened my eyes to the tiny SD card universe coming . IMAC MBP ROKU on and on can play instead of a dvd player TODAY IT CAN this

6 yrs from now cutting out all the stores plastic gas oil trucks factories players on and on that it takes to keep the disc world alive will be fast fading away , Our carbon foot print will get smaller

mayne i will vist you mel in 7 yrs and we can laff about how wrong we all was .

by the time flash becomes that cheap, optical will become even cheaper. believe it or not i first read about what is now called blu-ray being successful tested in a lab back in 1998 or 1999. don't have links, but i've already read about optical storage mediums that make BD seem like a floppy disk. and almost every single TV sold today can already do better resolution than the max BD resolution
post #138 of 249
Nothing at this point can have a zero carbon foot print. The electricity used to run all of these systems mostly comes from burning coal. The goal at this point is to lower the carbon foot print as much as possible within current practical means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

million upon millions of discs coming and going >>>>>>
compared to trillions of 1's/0's cruising the lighted fiber optic way with zero carbon foot print and much lower prices and no more pirates.
post #139 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

MELL i can use this post 6 months from now and argue the other way .

The disc is a way to control their profits
when flash sticks become cheap or re-usable
bring your used 100g flash card dongle and pick up 3 top quality movies for 6.99 each
the studios can make a killing because the whole brick and mortar dvd infrastrucure will die
the studios will make a killing because the pirates are dead with such a low price/high quality

AS i stated before i have watched star trek on a flash card given to me /and it opened my eyes to the tiny SD card universe coming . IMAC MBP ROKU on and on can play instead of a dvd player TODAY IT CAN this

6 yrs from now cutting out all the stores plastic gas oil trucks factories players on and on that it takes to keep the disc world alive will be fast fading away , Our carbon foot print will get smaller

mayne i will vist you mel in 7 yrs and we can laff about how wrong we all was .

Teno is talking about buying the movie on a stick, not bringing your own in.

I don't think that bringing your own in would work. You could do that now with a DVD or even a CD disk, but you can't. I know that a stick would be better, because the kiosk wouldn't need an optical recorder with the possible breakdowns, but I just don't see this working.

Pirates will always be around as something has to be paid for. Even if a movie cost one dollar, they would still pirate it.

I think a flash stick is stuck between two worlds. The world of optical, which will be around for a while yet, and the world of download which will be dribbling in over the next ten years.

I just don't see a place for it. It seems to be a product without a market in this regard.
post #140 of 249
Quote:

I just wanted to chime in and say "itunes is slow". Because it is!

There are several ways to measure speed, but the most important one to humans are the responsiveness of the user interface. A well-designed user interface continues to function while the application performs background tasks. Itunes consistently ignores input when communicating with my iPod, AppleTV or when switching views. If they don't want to patch this beast together before they switch to Cocoa, then they'd better get switchin' because it is very annoying.

This is a top-of-the-line MacBook Pro from last year. Makes me miss WinAmp. So, fingers crossed Steve will yell "surprise! I wasn't sick, I've just been rewriting iTunes instead of sleeping" and BRING IT ON.
post #141 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

I had to look up "Cocoa" because i'm not an IT person. Personally, i think for Apple to cater to people wining about not having a "Cocoa" version is just unrealistic. I'd like to see a quote of how many Mac Users actually use Cocoa or even know what it is. Then we can start asking Apple for favors....

Cocoa is not a program. It's a fundamental OS technology that Apple has set as it's core application development engine for Mac OS X. It is a modern coding architecture. Cocoa is 32bit and 64bit compliant.

Why is everyone crying out for Cocoa? Because Cocoa is object oriented, meaning it's a cleaner, less buggy, better optimized, and 64bit capable app technology. The other option is the legacy Carbon APIs which Apple has publically stated for 10 years are on a path for obscelescence. This starts now with Snow Leopard where everything is going 64bit and carbon is being left behind.

iTunes is slow for many reasons, not just due to it's basis on carbon. Still, Cocoa would at the very least make iTunes run faster, be 64bit compliant, and would give iTunes access into the rich technologies in Snow Leopard such as Grand Central.

The simple idea is this: iTunes uses legacy technologies that apple's Mac OS X departments
aren't advancing and making better. At the current time, iTunesis unweildy and unoptimized.

And just to answer your question, Mail, iCal, iChat, and dozens of other apps are already based on Cocoa in Leopard. Mac OS X users use cocoa 24/7 on their mac. Just because they don't know what it is, doesn't mean they don't use it.
post #142 of 249
I agree I don't think flash for media will work as a major distribution format, at least not the way things are currently set up.

I think if electronics manufacturers were being smart about the future this is they way they would go to keep physical media going, perhaps some years down the road they will. At the current moment they are most concerned with keeping us locked into buying players and discs. They are going to ride that business model until it collapses. Usually they are slow to change and the collapse is very hard for them.

I don't agree streaming will only dribble. The options and choices for watching streamed video has greater potential than Blu-ray. What will really put streaming/downloading over the top will be mobile devices. Apple has pretty much set the iPhone up for media streaming. Media streaming services are working on adapting for the mobile space. Its taking other phone manufacturers more time to get themselves to a point where media streaming services can take advantage of their platforms. Soon it will all come together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I think a flash stick is stuck between two worlds. The world of optical, which will be around for a while yet, and the world of download which will be dribbling in over the next ten years.

I just don't see a place for it. It seems to be a product without a market in this regard.
post #143 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Oh yes I have said that. From the average sitting position in the living room the average person cannot see a huge difference from BR and DVD.

Ten years ago the average person could see a difference between VHS and DVD.

Yes. That's exactly what I've been saying. We've had this discussion on a number of other threads here over the past couple of years.

Quote:
Well obviously they don't see that BR sells more computers.

That's possible at this point in time. But it didn't sell many computers when they put the first DVD recorder into the $3,5000 Powermac I bought either. It takes a couple of years.

That's why they should offer it as an upgrade. Even if they couldn't offer it on a MacBook, they could on the Mac Pro, the iMac, and even the Mini.

That wouldn't cost them much, and would let them know what the demand is, and if it's rising over time, or falling.

At worst, make the OS compatible, and let third party companies continue to offer the players and recorders. That would cost them little.

Quote:
We are essentially comparing the price of write once optical discs to rewritable SSD. Write once SSD would be a lot cheaper than RW.

When I mentioned Intel's SSD, it was just to show that prices for flash come down with a generational shift in process technology, as capacity goes up. I did mention that it was more expensive flash than stick flash. And you're talking about stick flash. Prices there are subject to the same advances as flash for SSD's.

But, re-writable disks still cost little. No more than a few cents more than the write once versions.

I was mostly making the comparisons between a pressed disk cost vs the cost for the flash stick. And that flash, would have to be non- rewritable. It would really have to be a ROM, but you were talking about flash.

Quote:
Look at it this way. Back when DVD was new, they were typically around $25 - $20 depending on the movie. You could buy the VHS version for $10 - $5. I'm sure at the time it was a lot cheaper to make VHS tapes than press DVD's. Until DVD production really ramped up.

It's always cheaper to press disks than to record to tape. I remember it. DVD costs were cheaper after the first year.

Quote:
I'm sure they can create a write once SSD format, it doesn't need to be the fastest high quality variant. They could sell movies for $40 - $30 with the advantage that the movie can play in anything without the need for a third media player.

They already have ROMS. You would put the movie on a ROM. This is easy to do.

No one would buy a movie for $30 to $40. You were the one who just used $20 to $30 pricing on B-R movies (rare these days) as a reason why almost no one would buy them.

I see some people caring, but not too many. As most things do have an optical player, that's not much of an incentive.

In a year, we'll see B-R players for under $100, maybe $75. Why buy a movie for $30-40, when the B-R will cost $15. That will quickly cost more than a B-R player.

And before holiday season 2011, B-R players will be selling for $50, less on sale.

Quote:
From the article I got the numbers from. Active users were people who use the internet on a regular basis.

Honestly, I still don't now what that means.

Quote:
Yeah I wasn't paying close enough attention and got MB and Mb confused.

Happens
post #144 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmers View Post

I just wanted to chime in and say "itunes is slow". Because it is!

There are several ways to measure speed, but the most important one to humans are the responsiveness of the user interface. A well-designed user interface continues to function while the application performs background tasks. Itunes consistently ignores input when communicating with my iPod, AppleTV or when switching views. If they don't want to patch this beast together before they switch to Cocoa, then they'd better get switchin' because it is very annoying.

This is a top-of-the-line MacBook Pro from last year. Makes me miss WinAmp. So, fingers crossed Steve will yell "surprise! I wasn't sick, I've just been rewriting iTunes instead of sleeping" and BRING IT ON.

Hmmm, doesn't seem to be slow on my 8 core Nehalem Mac Pro. I wonder why?
post #145 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I agree I don't think flash for media will work as a major distribution format, at least not the way things are currently set up.

I think if electronics manufacturers were being smart about the future this is they way they would go to keep physical media going, perhaps some years down the road they will. At the current moment they are most concerned with keeping us locked into buying players and discs. They are going to ride that business model until it collapses. Usually they are slow to change and the collapse is very hard for them.

I don't agree streaming will only dribble. The options and choices for watching streamed video has greater potential than Blu-ray. What will really put streaming/downloading over the top will be mobile devices. Apple has pretty much set the iPhone up for media streaming. Media streaming services are working on adapting for the mobile space. Its taking other phone manufacturers more time to get themselves to a point where media streaming services can take advantage of their platforms. Soon it will all come together.

We agree on some things. But I'm really concerned as the point of this discussion, with HD downloads. That's what we're talking about.

Right now, Apple's 720 downloads look just a bit better than a DVD of the same movie. A bit sharper, but sometimes not as good in shadow detail, or highlights, or color saturation, where they seem noisy in comparison.

A 1080p download at the same quality level as their 720 offerings will not come close to the B-R disk. When I compare the 720 download to the B-R, all I can say is Ugh!! And the price is the same or higher!

What bandwidth will Apple need to offer an uncompressed (over the format's built-in compression) download of the movie, and how many people will have the bandwidth on their end?

That's the real question. All the rest pales in comparison.

So, let's get some real numbers.

Assuming a download bandwidth of 10Mb/s, that gives us an ideal rate of 1.25 MB/s.

If we have a 1080p movie at the same quality level as a B-R, let's assume 25GB. Some longer movies are using dual layer B-R disks already.

That comes out to a download time of 333 minutes, or almost 5.6 hours.

How many people are willing to wait 5.6 hours for the movie to download? Because 10Mb/s isn't enough bandwidth to stream the movie obviously.

To do that requires at least 25Mb/s.

How long do you think it will be before the majority of people have connections of even the paltry 10Mb/s? How many will have 25Mb/s in a decent amount of time from now?

And that's ideal. What if someone else in the house wants to use the connection at the same time?
post #146 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by webraider View Post

Dude.. what are you talking about. You cannot buy Brand new released movies on VHS. Even if there are a FEW titles available, the majority of stuff is DVD only meaning that if you want to be able to watch the latest movies.. you can't on VHS. Thus VHS is Obsolete.

2006 is when major industry stopped producing VHS. So you are correct but many companies still support it (see my post about Panasonic's combo BD/VHS) and required it (see my post about reality shows requiring VHS tape for applicant auditions). It may be obsolete but not completely gone. That's all i was saying. 30 years and not gone yet. And, my point was that everyone on this post seems to think that BD is dead and should just go away. So if VHS is still around after 30 years, BD will probably be around for another 20 if not longer.
post #147 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

I did 7 ,months of chemo radition last year . So HD lives on with itunes and amazon DL ??? NO br DL ???


IS this on what format ??

I was refering to Watchmen BD and LotR on DVD.
post #148 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Askew View Post

Yep, the PlayStation 3 features a slot-load Blu-Ray drive. It works beautifully.

I agree, but it's hardly going to be the size you can put in a sub 1-inch thick laptop is it?
post #149 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by tawilson View Post

I agree, but it's hardly going to be the size you can put in a sub 1-inch thick laptop is it?

People have posted a number of products here earlier.
post #150 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

People have posted a number of products here earlier.

Yes, cos adding nearly $1000 dollars to the pre-markup price of any MacBook is going to be a really compelling idea.

/sarcasm
post #151 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple should allow the option. It's a flimsy excuse to look at the price. When Apple included CD, it was very expensive. Same thing with DVD. Blu-Ray is no different. In fact, in inflated dollars, B-R is cheaper than either CD or DVD was when Apple included them.

The only difference is that back then, Apple had no download business to push. Now it does.

In Apple's defence, the success of CDs and DVDs was inevitable whereas Blu-Ray faces a much more fractured, certainly more complicated marketplace.

It seems to me that Apple has by no means indicated it will not support Blu-Ray ever. The timing wasn't right until maybe now and so Apple waited. Nothing wrong with that.
post #152 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

At worst, make the OS compatible, and let third party companies continue to offer the players and recorders. That would cost them little.

Its true but you know Apple.

Quote:
It's always cheaper to press disks than to record to tape. I remember it. DVD costs were cheaper after the first year.

Ok, I'll take your word for it.

Quote:
No one would buy a movie for $30 to $40. You were the one who just used $20 to $30 pricing on B-R movies (rare these days) as a reason why almost no one would buy them.

I agree few people would buy a $30-$40 movie. What differentiates this idea is that you don't need a stand alone player. You can simply stick the card into a TV or computer and have glorious 1080P and surround sound.

Early adopters would be into this at that price point. As the price comes down, it would filter to the masses. But electronics manufacturers won't do this because it risks destroying their current business model.

Quote:
I see some people caring, but not too many. As most things do have an optical player, that's not much of an incentive.

I think people would have no problem moving on from optical players if given a choice.

I barely use the optical player in my Mac anymore. Most of the software on my computer has been downloaded from the developers website. The last third party application I recall installing from a disc was MS Office and that was about four years ago.

Most of the media I watch is from cable, video on demand, Hulu, iTunes, or Netflix streaming. A growing number of my friends are watching movies through torrents. But I don't participate in that myself.

Several of my gaming friends are more into playing Xbox or Playstation online. You really don't even need the optical disc for that, even though you still have to buy it to play the game online.

Quote:
In a year, we'll see B-R players for under $100, maybe $75. Why buy a movie for $30-40, when the B-R will cost $15. That will quickly cost more than a B-R player. And before holiday season 2011, B-R players will be selling for $50, less on sale.

The electronics industry would charge a premium for this to make up for the loss in media player sales.

$30-$40 would not be that way forever, the price would come down as the price for BR has come down.

Quote:
Honestly, I still don't now what that means.

Its like my Grandmother. She lives in a retirement home and the building is wired for broadband. She has computer hooked up to broadband, but she rarely ever uses it.
post #153 of 249
I agree. In this context BR is clearly is the winner. But quality is not the only variable. For many consumers not particularly important one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We agree on some things. But I'm really concerned as the point of this discussion, with HD downloads. That's what we're talking about.
post #154 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If we have a 1080p movie at the same quality level as a B-R, let's assume 25GB. Some longer movies are using dual layer B-R disks already.

About 62% of US BD releases have been been on BD50
post #155 of 249
Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Hmmm, doesn't seem to be slow on my 8 core Nehalem Mac Pro. I wonder why?

Are you saying that badly written UI(/any) code runs better on faster hardware? That is OUTRAGEOUS!
post #156 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't say "small" pejoratively. I say it because I know, and read of so many people who think that at their normal viewing distance, they can appreciate 1080p with a 42" set, which is the most popular size, though larger sets are being bought more now that prices have dropped.

I say small because in order to get the full resolution of 1080p from it, a person with 20/20 vision needs to sit no further than 5 feet away. How many people do that? In order to see the full 720p you need to sit no further away than 8 feet. Even that's closer than most people sit.

So for the average seating distance that most people have, a 42" set is "small".

These numbers are based on known, and agreed upon viewing abilities of people, it's not an opinion.

Sorry you get the full resolution regardless of the distance, although the typical person wont perceive the full benefit of a 40" 1080P until 5 feet. However blu ray discs contain much more detail (compared to heavily compressed iTunes media). Disks are typically 50GB and main features are typically about 28GB.

Frankly I sit around 6 feet away from my 42" plasma and Blu Ray 1080P content is noticably better than all other sources I use. The best example of this can be found in comparing DVDs to Blu Ray versions of the same film.


On my 24" PC screen the difference may not be obvious however I want to buy a film once and play it back at home and when travelling so blu ray on a Macbook Pro would rock.

In short for home cinema lovers Blu Ray is a must.
post #157 of 249
All I want in iTunes 9 is the ability for it to recheck a remote folder for changes to files and consistently lock on to the folder in Time Capsule. Songbird does this, but I prefer iTunes. I want to be able to keep my music library on my Timecapsule, which already works (just not consistently), and not have to update the location (the same location) randomly when I'm using iTunes.

It's my biggest gripe. Sometimes it just works and I'm impressed, others it does not. I know I'm not the average mac user with this setup, but I don't have the room I need on my laptop.
post #158 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ossian View Post

Sorry you get the full resolution regardless of the distance, although the typical person wont perceive the full benefit of a 40" 1080P until 5 feet. However blu ray discs contain much more detail (compared to heavily compressed iTunes media). Disks are typically 50GB and main features are typically about 28GB.

That was his point. What can be perceived regardless of the actual resolution on the screen.

Quote:
Frankly I sit around 6 feet away from my 42" plasma and Blu Ray 1080P content is noticably better than all other sources I use.

6 feet is really close for a 40" television. That means the TV is larger than is needed for your room.
post #159 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Nothing at this point can have a zero carbon foot print. The electricity used to run all of these systems mostly comes from burning coal. The goal at this point is to lower the carbon foot print as much as possible within current practical means.


Well yes and no
yes
Everything thing alive has some carbon foot print.
AND NO


By going 100 percent digital do you suppose that all those
Dvd AND dvd player factories being closed saves carbon and other terrible stuff. ?
Shipping dvd players and dvd's to warehouse's and then reshipping again to local; stores or to amazon and then shipped a third or even fourth time to the person who bought the dvd /dvd player

And driving to those stores add a forth or fifth carbon action

plastic/cardboard wrapping again ADDS to all that and shipping to assembly plants and the producing of materials itself
Cradle to grave demands that I mention that all these trillions of discs are never going back to nature like say THE MBP glass screen . And all that plastic and other landfill stuff , in the digital world there are no words for any of these items because the carbon foot print of mega mega server farms is very low per single billable MB item

In fact the carbon saved by going all digital woulld be so large that if you had mega server farms that only did itunes/amazon DL's you would be carbon plus forever .

You can slightly reduce the dvd world carbon foot print a bit by grabbing low hanging fruit like solar or wind to some production area's . Shipping by boat or car or plane is already at its best carbon level . So you can only reduce by 10 to 40 percent considering how scattered the whole dvd industry is .

Server farms already save so much carbon at the start compared to the mega large dvd industry
\\ Yet they can go all the down to 8 percent by adding wind/wave/solar /thermal/geo /and better SW to manage the whole thing , LOW amp chips made in the billions will also reduce the cooling costs of all digital world server farms .

AND best of all
an all digital world means direct to consumer from artist transactions
And all the pirates can not beat $7.99 DL or $4.99 Dl movies/
So its win-win for lower media prices

i need some daylight
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #160 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Teno is talking about buying the movie on a stick, not bringing your own in.

I don't think that bringing your own in would work. You could do that now with a DVD or even a CD disk, but you can't. I know that a stick would be better, because the kiosk wouldn't need an optical recorder with the possible breakdowns, but I just don't see this working.

Pirates will always be around as something has to be paid for. Even if a movie cost one dollar, they would still pirate it.

I think a flash stick is stuck between two worlds. The world of optical, which will be around for a while yet, and the world of download which will be dribbling in over the next ten years.

I just don't see a place for it. It seems to be a product without a market in this regard.

MEL STOP GETTING stuck on minor details

It is a controllable way to stop pirates
tenobell also has great idea;s about all this .
MY sons already use little squares discs for there DS games so please think ahead my friend
in ten years with fingerprint control we can wipe out the pirates and get cheap movies and studios will make more money
everyone is happy



win win win future

time for some COD4
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's iTunes 9 rumored to have Blu-ray, social media support