believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I don't believe mice are carriers of H1N1.
Seriously, though, are they bringing their own keyboards in too? Perhaps you should suggest alcohol wipes and/or hand sanitizer as a more practical solution, or hand out vinyl gloves (well, you never know who might have a latex allergy). Better yet, install UV germicidal lamps over each computer that switch on whenever someone leaves their chair. OK, well, I was lying when I said, "Seriously."
And I'll bet that it takes you more time to choose the ideal mouse than your Mac.
I just walked into our computer lab and there are 84 stations. There are only 4 stations that have the same mouse, and are all Apple's latest iteration. Most of the graphic stations are manned with users who have bought their own mouse/trackball/corded/wireless/1-5 button, etc. Some even take them home after class.
Not just because it fits them like a glove, but some, believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I wouldn't want Apple to waste time designing a mouse.
Yup, a Mac is easy, a mouse is hard. I use a Logictech MX620 Laser Cordless mouse, and like you say it's hand in glove.
Going from a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2008 to, wait for it, a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2009. Big gain there
Going from an 8800M GTX (Apple calls it an 8800GS) to a GT130 (die shrunk 9600M). No improvement again.
Exactly where is Apple improving performance? Putting in the amount of RAM and size of HD common in sub-$600 PCs back in 2008? That's not even keeping up with the Joneses.
Apple software is where things have been getting better. That and Apple customer service is why they have a better satisfaction rate. Apple notebooks fare well against direct competition, but their desktop lineup is mediocre at best and is badly outperformed by PC hardware costing half as much.
Making the iMac thinner will only appeal to people who value form over function and can afford to replace their computer every couple of years.
Ever since the personal computer was invented the most important measurements have always been reliability and performance per dollar because those tell you how many years you'll get from your purchase and thus what it'll really cost you.
I believe today's Core i7 PCs are as powerful as the iMac will be in 2012. So take the lifespan of the iMac and add 3 years. Now that would be good value for the consumer, but it would kill Apple to have machines last 6 years because sales would plummet. They have to make them good enough to get you to buy them, but crappy enough that you'll need to replace them frequently.
Viewed from that perspective it's clear that Apple doesn't want customers who can do simple math. They would rather have us shut up, go away and buy a PC. If we install OS X on our PCs then we're supporting the Mac software market so that's OK.
Actually the performance gains for the iMac were not touted as much as the others. It was tweaked under the graphics hardware, the memory type, and the memory bus speed to bring it in line with the rest of Apple's offerings. It was not a completely new product. If you don't like it, don't buy it (obviously you didn't if your using some home built hackintosh).
I'm guessing you haven't done any homework on the graphics cards either:
The T130 is leaps and bounds above the older 8800 and 9600 series.
Your price quotes are also for aftermarket individual parts, or wholesaler costs like TigerDirect. You won't find anything like that from an actual PC manufacturer like HP, Dell, Lenovo, Sony, etc. Find the same hardware at any PC manufacturer's site and you will find the exact same prices for comparable hardware. Please show me a laptop from Dell with a Core 2 Duo 3 Ghz processor, a dedicated graphics card, 4 GB of ram, and a 20" or 24" display for less than $600 dollars. It's common knowledge that Apple's prices are no different than any other Manufacturer.
Have you even looked at the performance numbers for a 3.06 iMac compared to the dual quad core and the single quad core Mac Pro's? It is no slouch, even on the older 3.06 GHz 2008 models with the slower bus speed. It is not supposed to be a high end Mac Pro. It is purely mid range and more like a desktop with laptop parts than a true desktop. If you want more horsepower, buy a dual quad-core Mac Pro.
Internal BD-Rom drives are actually very cheap. They can be had for about a hundred bucks retail. With Apple's buying power, they could be had for much less. There is no loss here as they are all compatible with the various DVD formats. That leaves either licensing costs, or coding costs to implement DRM, or a combination of both.
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
The slot-loading 12.7mm drives that Apple uses in their iMac can?t be had for about $100. The notebooks are even more expensive because they use 9.5mm slot-loading drives.
Then to say that whatever price you see online means that Apple will sell them to you for cheaper because they can buy in bulk is likely not correct. Apple has to support these drives with warranties on the HW and make sure the drives work with their OS, and because these a premium item that would surely be a BTO option you are not likely to pay less than buying the drive from a cheap unknown retailer online.
The slot-loading 12.7mm drives that Apple uses in their iMac can?t be had for about $100. The notebooks are even more expensive because they use 9.5mm slot-loading drives.
Then to say that whatever price you see online means that Apple will sell them to you for cheaper because they can buy in bulk is likely not correct. Apple has to support these drives with warranties on the HW and make sure the drives work with their OS, and because these a premium item that would surely be a BTO option you are not likely to pay less than buying the drive from a cheap unknown retailer online.
There is no need to put a 9.5mm drive in an iMac. There is plenty of case thickness to go with a 12.7mm drive.
If you think Apple can't leverage it's buying power to get them cheaper direct from the manufacturer, than you're deluding yourself. The fact is simply that BD hardware is no longer as expensive as it was 2 year ago. The cost to add it to an iMac would be minimal in bulk. You can also bet that agreements between Apple and a hardware vendor would come with warranty's from the hardware manufacturers as well. It would take research to find good quality drives, but Apple does this all the time for every piece of hardware they offer. This is no different.
There is no need to put a 9.5mm drive in an iMac. There is plenty of case thickness to go with a 12.7mm drive.
If you think Apple can't leverage it's buying power to get them cheaper direct from the manufacturer, than you're deluding yourself. The fact is simply that BD hardware is no longer as expensive as it was 2 year ago. The cost to add it to an iMac would be minimal in bulk. You can also bet that agreements between Apple and a hardware vendor would come with warranty's from the hardware manufacturers as well. It would take research to find good quality drives, but Apple does this all the time for every piece of hardware they offer. This is no different.
1) They won?t fit into Mac notebooks or are you saying that ONLY the iMac should get Blu-ray (not even the Mac Pro which is the easiest fit of all).
2) Those are IDE, not SATA.
3) They are not burners (remember how you mentioned ripping).
4) never said they couldn?t get them cheaper from the retailer, I said they wouldn?t sell it to the customer at cost. Besides Apple making a profit on their BTO options they now have to support it which costs them money.
5) There is a reason why items on outlet stores are discounted heavily. Sometimes you can find a good deal, but often these items have major faults in other ways that make them less than ideal. go ahead and buy it, create an IDE to SATA convertor that sticks the back of your iMac and dremel a big ass hole in the side for the tray. Good luck with that!
6) Finding the cheapest drive you can isn?t exactly a fit for the HW Apple would use. But finding the cheapest drive you can that is only satisfied by one criteria but fails on even working in the iMac is disingenuous at best. Some people are going to read that and think that drive will work in there iMac. Shameful!
I never mentioned the Macbook. They are already highly priced due to the tiny hardware required to cram them into such small spaces. I would never expect anything low cost for a Macbook of any kind.
I'm not interested in a BD-RW. I think you'll find that most people aren't. The media is still way to expensive per MB than a cheap external USB hard drive. I'm only interested in ripping which requires only BD-Rom.
Given the fact that you can buy them retail for such a cheap price from top tier vendors like Panasonic, Apple could include them for very little price increase. You're missing the point. I'm not suggesting Apple go to TigerDirect and buy some cheapie hardare to throw in a Mac. That would never happen. I'm suggesting with their buying power, and vendor connections, they could easily add the hardware for minimal cost. They don't need to charge a Mac buyer full retail for all of the individual parts. I already mentioned that I don't believe the hardware cost is the issue. I suspect with the thin margins on the internal hardware, that the cost of licensing is actually more of a deterrent than the hardware itself.
I'd like to see some video connectors that are compatible with the tons of stuff in my house. I have PCs, Macs, monitors, HDTVs, DVRs, digital TV receivers - none of it connects to my unibody Macbook and I can't buy an Apple Cinema display because only one of them (the 1 Macbook) would be able to connect to it. Even my brother's new refurbished macbook would need TWO adapters to get to the Apple Cinema.
I never mentioned the Macbook. They are already highly priced due to the tiny hardware required to cram them into such small spaces. I would never expect anything low cost for a Macbook of any kind.
I'm not interested in a BD-RW. I think you'll find that most people aren't. The media is still way to expensive per MB than a cheap external USB hard drive. I'm only interested in ripping which requires only BD-Rom.
Given the fact that you can buy them retail for such a cheap price from top tier vendors like Panasonic, Apple could include them for very little price increase. You're missing the point. I'm not suggesting Apple go to TigerDirect and buy some cheapie hardare to throw in a Mac. That would never happen. I'm suggesting with their buying power, and vendor connections, they could easily add the hardware for minimal cost. They don't need to charge a Mac buyer full retail for all of the individual parts. I already mentioned that I don't believe the hardware cost is the issue. I suspect with the thin margins on the internal hardware, that the cost of licensing is actually more of a deterrent than the hardware itself.
Apple could add a lot of stuff. They could add a lot of things but that mean that it makes sense for them to do so. You haven?t mentioned why Apple?s iMac should get Blu-ray when no other machine should. Does the Mac Pro with a standard size Blu-ray really come after the iMac here? Why does ignoring the fastest growing and largest seller to the Macs
You?re coming at this from the standpoint of what you want, not at what is best for Apple?s roadmap. The iMac is not Apple?s only machine, it?s not their best selling machine and while it?s growing compared to the desktop segment it?s not a primary focus of Apple, nor should it be. Focusing on Blu-ray for the iMac makes no sense. On top of that, what is preventing any Mac from playing Blu-ray movies is not the exclusion of a Blu-ray drive but the lack of OS support from Apple. If Blu-ray video is so important to Apple and not both a crutch in licensing, potentially in coding, and not a competitor to the burgeoning iTS video then why have yet added the OS support so the few that want to play Blu-ray movies on a small display can do so?
I'd like to see some video connectors that are compatible with the tons of stuff in my house. I have PCs, Macs, monitors, HDTVs, DVRs, digital TV receivers - none of it connects to my unibody Macbook and I can't buy an Apple Cinema display because only one of them (the 1 Macbook) would be able to connect to it. Even my brother's new refurbished macbook would need TWO adapters to get to the Apple Cinema.
Could we please live in the world?
You are living in the world. You want to live in a Utopia. That ain?t gonna happen. You can buy adapters and Apple makes a nice 24? display for your MacBook. The good thing about miniDisplayPort is that it?s a very future-forward standard compared to what we had in the past.
Steve Jobs demanded outrageous stock option bonuses for himself and his hand picked Vice Presidents.
Steve's compensation has been very modest compared to the enormous value that he has contributed to Apple and shareholders such as myself. Steve is the only person on the planet with his combination of exceptional skills and we would have been getting good value if we had been paying him 10x more than we have.
Apple could add a lot of stuff. They could add a lot of things but that mean that it makes sense for them to do so. You haven?t mentioned why Apple?s iMac should get Blu-ray when no other machine should. Does the Mac Pro with a standard size Blu-ray really come after the iMac here? Why does ignoring the fastest growing and largest seller to the Macs
You?re coming at this from the standpoint of what you want, not at what is best for Apple?s roadmap. The iMac is not Apple?s only machine, it?s not their best selling machine and while it?s growing compared to the desktop segment it?s not a primary focus of Apple, nor should it be. Focusing on Blu-ray for the iMac makes no sense. On top of that, what is preventing any Mac from playing Blu-ray movies is not the exclusion of a Blu-ray drive but the lack of OS support from Apple. If Blu-ray video is so important to Apple and not both a crutch in licensing, potentially in coding, and not a competitor to the burgeoning iTS video then why have yet added the OS support so the few that want to play Blu-ray movies on a small display can do so?
Isn't what I want the point of this entire thread?
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
Because that mouse has been universally panned. From it's constant clogginess, it sluggishness, and bad sensitivity, from it's micro scroll ball, to its color scheme left over from the white iMac.
Just how would you rip a Blue-ray on a Mac or any other computer with an internal BD-ROM?
You've really never heard of Boot Camp? I never said ripping it in OS X. I said ripping it on a Mac. It's a pain in the arse to rip it on my HP laptop and then copy 40 GB files back to my Mac for processing.
Isn't what I want the point of this entire thread?
There is little Apple couldn?t do that others are doing, but that does not mean it?s a good fit for their business. For Apple?s PoV I don?t see that Blu-ray is a great fit and this is backed by the complete lack of support for it in the OS. You can?t just slap in a drive and have it work, which you are aware, and Apple had a great opportunity with Snow Leopard to include and test Blu-ray playback in Snow Leopard yet it?s not there. DVD Player didn?t even get an update. I?d wager that Apple will be removing optical drives from their notebook line before they add Blu-ray support to their OS.
You've really never heard of Boot Camp? I never said ripping it in OS X. I said ripping it on a Mac. It's a pain in the arse to rip it on my HP laptop and then copy 40 GB files back to my Mac for processing.
And you can write to a Blur-ray disk with a Blue-ray ROM on a PC?
Comments
believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I don't believe mice are carriers of H1N1.
Seriously, though, are they bringing their own keyboards in too? Perhaps you should suggest alcohol wipes and/or hand sanitizer as a more practical solution, or hand out vinyl gloves (well, you never know who might have a latex allergy). Better yet, install UV germicidal lamps over each computer that switch on whenever someone leaves their chair. OK, well, I was lying when I said, "Seriously."
And I'll bet that it takes you more time to choose the ideal mouse than your Mac.
I just walked into our computer lab and there are 84 stations. There are only 4 stations that have the same mouse, and are all Apple's latest iteration. Most of the graphic stations are manned with users who have bought their own mouse/trackball/corded/wireless/1-5 button, etc. Some even take them home after class.
Not just because it fits them like a glove, but some, believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I wouldn't want Apple to waste time designing a mouse.
Yup, a Mac is easy, a mouse is hard. I use a Logictech MX620 Laser Cordless mouse, and like you say it's hand in glove.
Yup, a Mac is easy, a mouse is hard. I use a Logictech MX620 Laser Cordless mouse, and like you say it's hand in glove.
As you might expect, I'm keeping the type of mouse I use secret.
Performance gains?!?!?!?!?
Going from a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2008 to, wait for it, a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2009. Big gain there
Going from an 8800M GTX (Apple calls it an 8800GS) to a GT130 (die shrunk 9600M). No improvement again.
Exactly where is Apple improving performance? Putting in the amount of RAM and size of HD common in sub-$600 PCs back in 2008? That's not even keeping up with the Joneses.
Apple software is where things have been getting better. That and Apple customer service is why they have a better satisfaction rate. Apple notebooks fare well against direct competition, but their desktop lineup is mediocre at best and is badly outperformed by PC hardware costing half as much.
Making the iMac thinner will only appeal to people who value form over function and can afford to replace their computer every couple of years.
Ever since the personal computer was invented the most important measurements have always been reliability and performance per dollar because those tell you how many years you'll get from your purchase and thus what it'll really cost you.
I believe today's Core i7 PCs are as powerful as the iMac will be in 2012. So take the lifespan of the iMac and add 3 years. Now that would be good value for the consumer, but it would kill Apple to have machines last 6 years because sales would plummet. They have to make them good enough to get you to buy them, but crappy enough that you'll need to replace them frequently.
Viewed from that perspective it's clear that Apple doesn't want customers who can do simple math. They would rather have us shut up, go away and buy a PC. If we install OS X on our PCs then we're supporting the Mac software market so that's OK.
Actually the performance gains for the iMac were not touted as much as the others. It was tweaked under the graphics hardware, the memory type, and the memory bus speed to bring it in line with the rest of Apple's offerings. It was not a completely new product. If you don't like it, don't buy it (obviously you didn't if your using some home built hackintosh).
I'm guessing you haven't done any homework on the graphics cards either:
nVidia Product Comparison Benchmarks
The T130 is leaps and bounds above the older 8800 and 9600 series.
Your price quotes are also for aftermarket individual parts, or wholesaler costs like TigerDirect. You won't find anything like that from an actual PC manufacturer like HP, Dell, Lenovo, Sony, etc. Find the same hardware at any PC manufacturer's site and you will find the exact same prices for comparable hardware. Please show me a laptop from Dell with a Core 2 Duo 3 Ghz processor, a dedicated graphics card, 4 GB of ram, and a 20" or 24" display for less than $600 dollars. It's common knowledge that Apple's prices are no different than any other Manufacturer.
Have you even looked at the performance numbers for a 3.06 iMac compared to the dual quad core and the single quad core Mac Pro's? It is no slouch, even on the older 3.06 GHz 2008 models with the slower bus speed. It is not supposed to be a high end Mac Pro. It is purely mid range and more like a desktop with laptop parts than a true desktop. If you want more horsepower, buy a dual quad-core Mac Pro.
Internal BD-Rom drives are actually very cheap. They can be had for about a hundred bucks retail. With Apple's buying power, they could be had for much less. There is no loss here as they are all compatible with the various DVD formats. That leaves either licensing costs, or coding costs to implement DRM, or a combination of both.
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
The slot-loading 12.7mm drives that Apple uses in their iMac can?t be had for about $100. The notebooks are even more expensive because they use 9.5mm slot-loading drives.
Then to say that whatever price you see online means that Apple will sell them to you for cheaper because they can buy in bulk is likely not correct. Apple has to support these drives with warranties on the HW and make sure the drives work with their OS, and because these a premium item that would surely be a BTO option you are not likely to pay less than buying the drive from a cheap unknown retailer online.
The slot-loading 12.7mm drives that Apple uses in their iMac can?t be had for about $100. The notebooks are even more expensive because they use 9.5mm slot-loading drives.
Then to say that whatever price you see online means that Apple will sell them to you for cheaper because they can buy in bulk is likely not correct. Apple has to support these drives with warranties on the HW and make sure the drives work with their OS, and because these a premium item that would surely be a BTO option you are not likely to pay less than buying the drive from a cheap unknown retailer online.
Note these Panasonic internal slimline drive prices at consumer RETAIL: http://www.outletpc.com/c2316.html
There is no need to put a 9.5mm drive in an iMac. There is plenty of case thickness to go with a 12.7mm drive.
If you think Apple can't leverage it's buying power to get them cheaper direct from the manufacturer, than you're deluding yourself. The fact is simply that BD hardware is no longer as expensive as it was 2 year ago. The cost to add it to an iMac would be minimal in bulk. You can also bet that agreements between Apple and a hardware vendor would come with warranty's from the hardware manufacturers as well. It would take research to find good quality drives, but Apple does this all the time for every piece of hardware they offer. This is no different.
Note these Panasonic internal slimline drive prices at consumer RETAIL: http://www.outletpc.com/c2316.html
There is no need to put a 9.5mm drive in an iMac. There is plenty of case thickness to go with a 12.7mm drive.
If you think Apple can't leverage it's buying power to get them cheaper direct from the manufacturer, than you're deluding yourself. The fact is simply that BD hardware is no longer as expensive as it was 2 year ago. The cost to add it to an iMac would be minimal in bulk. You can also bet that agreements between Apple and a hardware vendor would come with warranty's from the hardware manufacturers as well. It would take research to find good quality drives, but Apple does this all the time for every piece of hardware they offer. This is no different.
1) They won?t fit into Mac notebooks or are you saying that ONLY the iMac should get Blu-ray (not even the Mac Pro which is the easiest fit of all).
2) Those are IDE, not SATA.
3) They are not burners (remember how you mentioned ripping).
4) never said they couldn?t get them cheaper from the retailer, I said they wouldn?t sell it to the customer at cost. Besides Apple making a profit on their BTO options they now have to support it which costs them money.
5) There is a reason why items on outlet stores are discounted heavily. Sometimes you can find a good deal, but often these items have major faults in other ways that make them less than ideal. go ahead and buy it, create an IDE to SATA convertor that sticks the back of your iMac and dremel a big ass hole in the side for the tray. Good luck with that!
6) Finding the cheapest drive you can isn?t exactly a fit for the HW Apple would use. But finding the cheapest drive you can that is only satisfied by one criteria but fails on even working in the iMac is disingenuous at best. Some people are going to read that and think that drive will work in there iMac. Shameful!
I don't believe mice are carriers of H1N1.
I see what ya did there.
I'm not interested in a BD-RW. I think you'll find that most people aren't. The media is still way to expensive per MB than a cheap external USB hard drive. I'm only interested in ripping which requires only BD-Rom.
Given the fact that you can buy them retail for such a cheap price from top tier vendors like Panasonic, Apple could include them for very little price increase. You're missing the point. I'm not suggesting Apple go to TigerDirect and buy some cheapie hardare to throw in a Mac. That would never happen. I'm suggesting with their buying power, and vendor connections, they could easily add the hardware for minimal cost. They don't need to charge a Mac buyer full retail for all of the individual parts. I already mentioned that I don't believe the hardware cost is the issue. I suspect with the thin margins on the internal hardware, that the cost of licensing is actually more of a deterrent than the hardware itself.
I see what ya did there.
I completely missed that post. Quite clever, Anonymouse.
Could we please live in the world?
I never mentioned the Macbook. They are already highly priced due to the tiny hardware required to cram them into such small spaces. I would never expect anything low cost for a Macbook of any kind.
I'm not interested in a BD-RW. I think you'll find that most people aren't. The media is still way to expensive per MB than a cheap external USB hard drive. I'm only interested in ripping which requires only BD-Rom.
Given the fact that you can buy them retail for such a cheap price from top tier vendors like Panasonic, Apple could include them for very little price increase. You're missing the point. I'm not suggesting Apple go to TigerDirect and buy some cheapie hardare to throw in a Mac. That would never happen. I'm suggesting with their buying power, and vendor connections, they could easily add the hardware for minimal cost. They don't need to charge a Mac buyer full retail for all of the individual parts. I already mentioned that I don't believe the hardware cost is the issue. I suspect with the thin margins on the internal hardware, that the cost of licensing is actually more of a deterrent than the hardware itself.
Apple could add a lot of stuff. They could add a lot of things but that mean that it makes sense for them to do so. You haven?t mentioned why Apple?s iMac should get Blu-ray when no other machine should. Does the Mac Pro with a standard size Blu-ray really come after the iMac here? Why does ignoring the fastest growing and largest seller to the Macs
You?re coming at this from the standpoint of what you want, not at what is best for Apple?s roadmap. The iMac is not Apple?s only machine, it?s not their best selling machine and while it?s growing compared to the desktop segment it?s not a primary focus of Apple, nor should it be. Focusing on Blu-ray for the iMac makes no sense. On top of that, what is preventing any Mac from playing Blu-ray movies is not the exclusion of a Blu-ray drive but the lack of OS support from Apple. If Blu-ray video is so important to Apple and not both a crutch in licensing, potentially in coding, and not a competitor to the burgeoning iTS video then why have yet added the OS support so the few that want to play Blu-ray movies on a small display can do so?
I'd like to see some video connectors that are compatible with the tons of stuff in my house. I have PCs, Macs, monitors, HDTVs, DVRs, digital TV receivers - none of it connects to my unibody Macbook and I can't buy an Apple Cinema display because only one of them (the 1 Macbook) would be able to connect to it. Even my brother's new refurbished macbook would need TWO adapters to get to the Apple Cinema.
Could we please live in the world?
You are living in the world. You want to live in a Utopia. That ain?t gonna happen. You can buy adapters and Apple makes a nice 24? display for your MacBook. The good thing about miniDisplayPort is that it?s a very future-forward standard compared to what we had in the past.
Steve Jobs demanded outrageous stock option bonuses for himself and his hand picked Vice Presidents.
Steve's compensation has been very modest compared to the enormous value that he has contributed to Apple and shareholders such as myself. Steve is the only person on the planet with his combination of exceptional skills and we would have been getting good value if we had been paying him 10x more than we have.
Apple could add a lot of stuff. They could add a lot of things but that mean that it makes sense for them to do so. You haven?t mentioned why Apple?s iMac should get Blu-ray when no other machine should. Does the Mac Pro with a standard size Blu-ray really come after the iMac here? Why does ignoring the fastest growing and largest seller to the Macs
You?re coming at this from the standpoint of what you want, not at what is best for Apple?s roadmap. The iMac is not Apple?s only machine, it?s not their best selling machine and while it?s growing compared to the desktop segment it?s not a primary focus of Apple, nor should it be. Focusing on Blu-ray for the iMac makes no sense. On top of that, what is preventing any Mac from playing Blu-ray movies is not the exclusion of a Blu-ray drive but the lack of OS support from Apple. If Blu-ray video is so important to Apple and not both a crutch in licensing, potentially in coding, and not a competitor to the burgeoning iTS video then why have yet added the OS support so the few that want to play Blu-ray movies on a small display can do so?
Isn't what I want the point of this entire thread?
Why?
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
Because that mouse has been universally panned. From it's constant clogginess, it sluggishness, and bad sensitivity, from it's micro scroll ball, to its color scheme left over from the white iMac.
I wouldn't want Apple to waste time designing a mouse.
Any Dell or Microsoft mouse I hate to say is better. All it has it looks- that's it. And it looks like that thing women use to shave their legs.
Just how would you rip a Blue-ray on a Mac or any other computer with an internal BD-ROM?
You've really never heard of Boot Camp? I never said ripping it in OS X. I said ripping it on a Mac. It's a pain in the arse to rip it on my HP laptop and then copy 40 GB files back to my Mac for processing.
Isn't what I want the point of this entire thread?
There is little Apple couldn?t do that others are doing, but that does not mean it?s a good fit for their business. For Apple?s PoV I don?t see that Blu-ray is a great fit and this is backed by the complete lack of support for it in the OS. You can?t just slap in a drive and have it work, which you are aware, and Apple had a great opportunity with Snow Leopard to include and test Blu-ray playback in Snow Leopard yet it?s not there. DVD Player didn?t even get an update. I?d wager that Apple will be removing optical drives from their notebook line before they add Blu-ray support to their OS.
You've really never heard of Boot Camp? I never said ripping it in OS X. I said ripping it on a Mac. It's a pain in the arse to rip it on my HP laptop and then copy 40 GB files back to my Mac for processing.
And you can write to a Blur-ray disk with a Blue-ray ROM on a PC?
How do you do that?