At the risk of sounding argumentative, how do you even compare watching TV shows on cable or satellite (or Hulu) to sales of those same TV shows on Blu-ray or DVD. The reason people watch Hulu is precisely because it's free. By that very definition, those people were never in the market for buying those shows on disc. Also, this doesn't account for the quality of the show in question. The notion that people go for the free and sooner alternatives as opposed to waiting for the eventual Blu-ray/DVD release has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with the desire of the fans of those shows wanting to watch each new episode as it is aired. Heck, even I'll admit that I have no desire to buy a TV show on disc if I saw it for free (or as part of my normal satellite subscription).
You made the comment?
Quote:
When you watch an episode of House or C.S.I. or any other show for that matter in HD, it's just not good enough (for me) to have to watch it in anything less.
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are ?good enough? for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it?s not good enough to watch so the fact that it?s free?or more accurately ad-supported?which appeals to most people?s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn?t the norm.
I?m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I?ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I?m using is too slow to stream Hulu?s 480p content.
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are ?good enough? for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it?s not good enough to watch so the fact that it?s free?or more accurately ad-supported?which appeals to most people?s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn?t the norm.
I?m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I?ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I?m using is too slow to stream Hulu?s 480p content.
Blu-ray sales are having a record year. Machines are at $200. A big holiday item this year. Get with the program. You'll eventually get it like you got MMS and video on your iPhone this year both of which you never wanted- this I promise you.
Blu-ray sales are having a record year. Machines are at $200. A big holiday item this year. Get with the program. You'll eventually get it like you got MMS and video on your iPhone this year both of which you never wanted- this I promise you.
Of course they are having a record year, It?s obvious they would. Now show me where they are overtaking DVD drives in PCs and where they cannibalizing every other form of media. They simply aren?t. It?s great for the home entertainment system and that is where it will remain.
I?ve had a blu-ray player for years now (which you would know if you ever comprehended what you read), and it?s great for what it is, but it?s not ideal for the average PC, especially the most popular consumer PC, the notebook.
PS: I still don?t use MMS and wish my iPhone had no camera at all. It?s a personal choice, but you don?t hear whining in every post about how Apple doesn?t make a phone with no camera just for me and me alone.
And this is precisely why I'm saying the "in 2-years" quote from the Netflix CEO is a little premature. It just takes too damned long to stream or download anything of better-than "good enough" quality. When you watch an episode of House or C.S.I. or any other show for that matter in HD, it's just not good enough (for me) to have to watch it in anything less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
You made the comment…
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are “good enough” for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it’s not good enough to watch so the fact that it’s free—or more accurately ad-supported—which appeals to most people’s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn’t the norm.
I’m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I’ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I’m using is too slow to stream Hulu’s 480p content.
You took my quote out of context. If you read my original quote in it's entirety, I was simply making the point that trying to stream or download HD "took too damn long". This statement was in response to a comment about Netflix going all streaming in 2 years. You also could have concluded that I could watch the show in HD on satellite (or cable) when it airs. So no, I don't put off watching TV shows only when they come out on DVD or Blu-ray a year layer.
It's common knowledge that there are two types of DVD/Blu-ray consumers, the renters and the buyers. You happen to be the former and I am the latter and each works best for us for our own reasons. As for your internet connection being too slow to stream 480p, I sincerely am sorry to heard that, but (depending on why your connection speed is what it is) it's further evidence that the infrastructure is not quite mature enough to support wide adoption of a streaming or downloading method of delivery. Heck, I live near a major metropolitan area, have a 15Mbps service and even that is too slow IMO.
You took my quote out of context. If you read my original quote in it's entirety, I was simply making the point that trying to stream or download HD "took too damn long". This statement was in response to a comment about Netflix going all streaming in 2 years. You also could have concluded that I could watch the show in HD on satellite (or cable) when it airs. So no, I don't put off watching TV shows only when they come out on DVD or Blu-ray a year layer.
It's common knowledge that there are two types of DVD/Blu-ray consumers, the renters and the buyers. You happen to be the former and I am the latter. As for your internet connection being too slow to stream 480p, I sincerely am sorry to heard that, but it's further evidence that the infrastructure is not quite mature enough to support wide adoption of a streaming or downloading method of delivery. Heck, I have a 15Mbps service and even that is too slow IMO.
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it?s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough? quality?, but the definition of ?good enough? is that it?s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn?t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We?re seeing that happen.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don?t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people?s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn?t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
Of course they are having a record year, It?s obvious they would. Now show me where they are overtaking DVD drives in PCs and where they cannibalizing every other form of media. They simply aren?t. It?s great for the home entertainment system and that is where it will remain.
I?ve had a blu-ray player for years now (which you would know if you ever comprehended what you read), and it?s great for what it is, but it?s not ideal for the average PC, especially the most popular consumer PC, the notebook.
There are further along than where DVDs were are the same point in their history.
DO you use your Blu-ray? You must rent only or just use for DVD playback?
There are further along than where DVDs were are the same point in their history.
DO you use your Blu-ray? You must rent only or just use for DVD playback?
Considering the size of the market now and how long ago it has been since DVD hit the seen, that isn?t hot.
I stated I use it for specific things that I want to see in the best definition. Usually I only care about ?good enough? which tends to fall in line with the majority. I don?t own a single DVD or Blu-ray disc.
There are Blu-ray readers that double as DVD/CD burners you know? The question is not whether you need to burn DVDs and CDs, but whether or not you need to burn Blu-rays. I would wager that most people don't need to. Of course adding a Blu-ray reader to the mac pro with no Blu-ray writer available would be stupid.
I personally don't see the purpose of a Blu-ray player on a Mac. Certainly not as long as we hadn't an external reader for the family to watch movies with.
Perhaps one reason for the hesitation for not including a Blu-ray writer is that "?recordable discs don't play reliably across the range of Blu-ray players.*"
It might not be critical if you created a Blu-ray disc that didn't play your buddies pc, but disastrous if the next Mac you bought couldn't read your previous Blu-ray backups.
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it’s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough” quality’, but the definition of “good enough” is that it’s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn’t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We’re seeing that happen.
Didn't say he was wrong, just a bit too optimistic. I see it coming too, just not as soon as you or the Netflix guy does.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don’t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people’s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn’t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
This is unfortunate because we are constantly being conditioned to settle for less. Low quality MP3 files are/have been replacing CDs and now they want us to settle for "good enough" for sake of convenience. I do look at it from other people's perspectives, I just don't understand why people are willing to settle for less.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
That sheds a little light on your preference for streaming. I guess I'd be much more into streaming as well if I travelled a lot.
Internal Blue Ray drives in an iMac is a waste of the consumer's dollars. Unless it is offered as a internal superdrive without added cost to the consumer, I would not want it in an iMac. Why?
You really aren't going to benefit viewing a Blue Ray movie on a 20-24" screen. Data storage BR disc are way too expensive for the average consumer to replace their current storage needs. My guess is very few consumers are even taking full advantage of the superdrive's capabilities that come standard in their iMac.
If Apple offers an internal BR superdrive across its iMac line, it will be for future usage when BR data disc are as cheap as burnable CD/DVDs and it won't happen until Apple's cost is equal to their present superdrive.
For those very few people who need the data storage of Blue Ray, used their Macs as media centers connected to large screen HDTVs, and can afford the expense, there are third party options.
Didn't say he was wrong, just a bit too optimistic. I see it coming too, just not as soon as you or the Netflix guy does.
Then you feel he is wrong about the timeframe. He very could be, but from what I?ve seen of internet-based media, it?s growing very fast.
Quote:
This is unfortunate because we are constantly being conditioned to settle for less. Low quality MP3 files are/have been replacing CDs and now they want us to settle for "good enough" for sake of convenience. I do look at it from other people's perspectives, I just don't understand why people are willing to settle for less.
You bring up a good point. the iTMS became successful with 128kbps AAC, no liner notes, not transferable for resale and came with DRM. In the land of the lazy, convenience is king.
Around the same time, others with connections to the Mac maker have shared word that Intel's recently released Core i7 'Clarksfield' quad-core mobile processors may find their way into the new iMac line in some capacity, making the new models the first consumer-oriented Macs with four processing cores.
The chips are available in 1.6GHz and 1.73GHz flavors, in addition to a pricer 2.0GHz variant that Apple would appear less likely to adopt in a consumer Mac given a price tag north of $1000.
Definitely agree. It's the hardware that sells a Mac. Quad-cores have been available on desktops for the last 3 years, while mobile quad-cores have been available for 2 years already. Apple is the last computer maker to offer its customers the power of quad-cores for its pricier line of desktop substitutes, the all in one iMacs. It's about time.
Considering the size of the market now and how long ago it has been since DVD hit the seen, that isn’t hot.
I stated I use it for specific things that I want to see in the best definition. Usually I only care about “good enough” which tends to fall in line with the majority. I don’t own a single DVD or Blu-ray disc.
And therefore you're not the norm yet you constantly posts your reasons why we should all have the same modus operandi as yourself? That's both preposterous and ridiculous!!
Why the big hoopla over Blu ray? Sure, Blu ray drives sound great (and they are great), but for notebooks (which are Apple's main bread 'n' butter) they are pointless. Let's be honest too- the majority of users would simply use the drive to watch movies. But, unless you own a 17" Macbook Pro or a 24" iMac, which have native resolutions of 1920x1200, you're not getting true HD. That and the power consumption issue. Desktops are one thing, but Blu ray drives just don't belong in notebooks of any kind, IMO.
For those very few people who need the data storage of Blue Ray, used their Macs as media centers connected to large screen HDTVs, and can afford the expense, there are third party options.
Or FCS users who need a better method of HD delivery. Unfortunately, you may be right. I'll probably have to resort to a 3rd-party solution. You think they would at least make it available on the Mac Pro for FCS users.
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it?s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough? quality?, but the definition of ?good enough? is that it?s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn?t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We?re seeing that happen.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don?t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people?s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn?t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
I would wager that the people who rent DVDs through Netflix do not represent the average consumer, especially one wishing to purchase, not rent. Even if Netflix distributes more streaming video that physical media within two years, I doubt that the general market will be anywhere near that ratio. It doesn't really matter if the ratio of people ditching DVD and people getting Blu-ray is one-to-one. The number of people using Blu-ray is/will be far too large to ignore.
Lastly, there is a whole world outside of the US that does not have access to the streaming services that Americans are accustomed to. No matter how much you guys want to spin it, there is a need for Blu-ray.
And therefore you're not the norm yet you constantly posts your reasons why we should all have the same modus operandi as yourself? That's both preposterous and ridiculous!!
I write ?I don?t own?? and you read ?I don?t use.? Those English classes aren?t quite paying off for you yet. Ever heard of renting?
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
You constantly said for 2 years that Blu-ray wasn't going anywhere and this year it has. Once again- you've been proven wrong.
The facts show that Blu-ray is growing. As usual, you can?t comprehend even the simplest of sentences. Blu-ray is not growing at a substantial rate in the PC world. Without OS X supporting AACS don?t expect Blu-ray drives in your next Mac notebook. Of course, you?ll read that as an absolute statement.
Why the big hoopla over Blu ray? Sure, Blu ray drives sound great (and they are great), but for notebooks (which are Apple's main bread 'n' butter) they are pointless. Let's be honest too- the majority of users would simply use the drive to watch movies. But, unless you own a 17" Macbook Pro or a 24" iMac, which have native resolutions of 1920x1200, you're not getting true HD. That and the power consumption issue. Desktops are one thing, but Blu ray drives just don't belong in notebooks of any kind, IMO.
For the umpteenth time. Do you want to buy the same movie twice? Blu-ray for your home theater, DVD for your mac. If that is what you want, I have a PSP and some UMD movies to sell you.
Comments
At the risk of sounding argumentative, how do you even compare watching TV shows on cable or satellite (or Hulu) to sales of those same TV shows on Blu-ray or DVD. The reason people watch Hulu is precisely because it's free. By that very definition, those people were never in the market for buying those shows on disc. Also, this doesn't account for the quality of the show in question. The notion that people go for the free and sooner alternatives as opposed to waiting for the eventual Blu-ray/DVD release has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with the desire of the fans of those shows wanting to watch each new episode as it is aired. Heck, even I'll admit that I have no desire to buy a TV show on disc if I saw it for free (or as part of my normal satellite subscription).
You made the comment?
When you watch an episode of House or C.S.I. or any other show for that matter in HD, it's just not good enough (for me) to have to watch it in anything less.
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are ?good enough? for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it?s not good enough to watch so the fact that it?s free?or more accurately ad-supported?which appeals to most people?s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn?t the norm.
I?m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I?ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I?m using is too slow to stream Hulu?s 480p content.
You made the comment?
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are ?good enough? for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it?s not good enough to watch so the fact that it?s free?or more accurately ad-supported?which appeals to most people?s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn?t the norm.
I?m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I?ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I?m using is too slow to stream Hulu?s 480p content.
Blu-ray sales are having a record year. Machines are at $200. A big holiday item this year. Get with the program. You'll eventually get it like you got MMS and video on your iPhone this year both of which you never wanted- this I promise you.
Blu-ray sales are having a record year. Machines are at $200. A big holiday item this year. Get with the program. You'll eventually get it like you got MMS and video on your iPhone this year both of which you never wanted- this I promise you.
Of course they are having a record year, It?s obvious they would. Now show me where they are overtaking DVD drives in PCs and where they cannibalizing every other form of media. They simply aren?t. It?s great for the home entertainment system and that is where it will remain.
I?ve had a blu-ray player for years now (which you would know if you ever comprehended what you read), and it?s great for what it is, but it?s not ideal for the average PC, especially the most popular consumer PC, the notebook.
PS: I still don?t use MMS and wish my iPhone had no camera at all. It?s a personal choice, but you don?t hear whining in every post about how Apple doesn?t make a phone with no camera just for me and me alone.
And this is precisely why I'm saying the "in 2-years" quote from the Netflix CEO is a little premature. It just takes too damned long to stream or download anything of better-than "good enough" quality. When you watch an episode of House or C.S.I. or any other show for that matter in HD, it's just not good enough (for me) to have to watch it in anything less.
You made the comment…
If none of the non-Blu-ray-based options are “good enough” for you then I must conclude that you have to wait for the season to air on Blu-ray a year after the season starts before you can begin to watch. You said that it’s not good enough to watch so the fact that it’s free—or more accurately ad-supported—which appeals to most people’s interests does not appeal to yours. That is fine, but that isn’t the norm.
I’m also not the norm as I want nearly everything to be digital and saved on various HDDs. The only use I have to a Blu-ray player is for a very select type of movie with excellent special effects, and even then I want to only rent it, not buy it. There is no TV show that I require to be in 1080p. I’ll even watch my favorite programs in 360p on Hulu is the internet connection I’m using is too slow to stream Hulu’s 480p content.
You took my quote out of context. If you read my original quote in it's entirety, I was simply making the point that trying to stream or download HD "took too damn long". This statement was in response to a comment about Netflix going all streaming in 2 years. You also could have concluded that I could watch the show in HD on satellite (or cable) when it airs. So no, I don't put off watching TV shows only when they come out on DVD or Blu-ray a year layer.
It's common knowledge that there are two types of DVD/Blu-ray consumers, the renters and the buyers. You happen to be the former and I am the latter and each works best for us for our own reasons. As for your internet connection being too slow to stream 480p, I sincerely am sorry to heard that, but (depending on why your connection speed is what it is) it's further evidence that the infrastructure is not quite mature enough to support wide adoption of a streaming or downloading method of delivery. Heck, I live near a major metropolitan area, have a 15Mbps service and even that is too slow IMO.
You took my quote out of context. If you read my original quote in it's entirety, I was simply making the point that trying to stream or download HD "took too damn long". This statement was in response to a comment about Netflix going all streaming in 2 years. You also could have concluded that I could watch the show in HD on satellite (or cable) when it airs. So no, I don't put off watching TV shows only when they come out on DVD or Blu-ray a year layer.
It's common knowledge that there are two types of DVD/Blu-ray consumers, the renters and the buyers. You happen to be the former and I am the latter. As for your internet connection being too slow to stream 480p, I sincerely am sorry to heard that, but it's further evidence that the infrastructure is not quite mature enough to support wide adoption of a streaming or downloading method of delivery. Heck, I have a 15Mbps service and even that is too slow IMO.
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it?s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough? quality?, but the definition of ?good enough? is that it?s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn?t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We?re seeing that happen.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don?t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people?s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn?t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
Of course they are having a record year, It?s obvious they would. Now show me where they are overtaking DVD drives in PCs and where they cannibalizing every other form of media. They simply aren?t. It?s great for the home entertainment system and that is where it will remain.
I?ve had a blu-ray player for years now (which you would know if you ever comprehended what you read), and it?s great for what it is, but it?s not ideal for the average PC, especially the most popular consumer PC, the notebook.
There are further along than where DVDs were are the same point in their history.
DO you use your Blu-ray? You must rent only or just use for DVD playback?
There are further along than where DVDs were are the same point in their history.
DO you use your Blu-ray? You must rent only or just use for DVD playback?
Considering the size of the market now and how long ago it has been since DVD hit the seen, that isn?t hot.
I stated I use it for specific things that I want to see in the best definition. Usually I only care about ?good enough? which tends to fall in line with the majority. I don?t own a single DVD or Blu-ray disc.
There are Blu-ray readers that double as DVD/CD burners you know? The question is not whether you need to burn DVDs and CDs, but whether or not you need to burn Blu-rays. I would wager that most people don't need to. Of course adding a Blu-ray reader to the mac pro with no Blu-ray writer available would be stupid.
I personally don't see the purpose of a Blu-ray player on a Mac. Certainly not as long as we hadn't an external reader for the family to watch movies with.
Perhaps one reason for the hesitation for not including a Blu-ray writer is that "?recordable discs don't play reliably across the range of Blu-ray players.*"
It might not be critical if you created a Blu-ray disc that didn't play your buddies pc, but disastrous if the next Mac you bought couldn't read your previous Blu-ray backups.
*http://digitalcontentproducer.com/vi.../bluray_blues/
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it’s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough” quality’, but the definition of “good enough” is that it’s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn’t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We’re seeing that happen.
Didn't say he was wrong, just a bit too optimistic. I see it coming too, just not as soon as you or the Netflix guy does.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don’t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people’s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn’t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
This is unfortunate because we are constantly being conditioned to settle for less. Low quality MP3 files are/have been replacing CDs and now they want us to settle for "good enough" for sake of convenience. I do look at it from other people's perspectives, I just don't understand why people are willing to settle for less.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
That sheds a little light on your preference for streaming. I guess I'd be much more into streaming as well if I travelled a lot.
You really aren't going to benefit viewing a Blue Ray movie on a 20-24" screen. Data storage BR disc are way too expensive for the average consumer to replace their current storage needs. My guess is very few consumers are even taking full advantage of the superdrive's capabilities that come standard in their iMac.
If Apple offers an internal BR superdrive across its iMac line, it will be for future usage when BR data disc are as cheap as burnable CD/DVDs and it won't happen until Apple's cost is equal to their present superdrive.
For those very few people who need the data storage of Blue Ray, used their Macs as media centers connected to large screen HDTVs, and can afford the expense, there are third party options.
Didn't say he was wrong, just a bit too optimistic. I see it coming too, just not as soon as you or the Netflix guy does.
Then you feel he is wrong about the timeframe. He very could be, but from what I?ve seen of internet-based media, it?s growing very fast.
This is unfortunate because we are constantly being conditioned to settle for less. Low quality MP3 files are/have been replacing CDs and now they want us to settle for "good enough" for sake of convenience. I do look at it from other people's perspectives, I just don't understand why people are willing to settle for less.
You bring up a good point. the iTMS became successful with 128kbps AAC, no liner notes, not transferable for resale and came with DRM. In the land of the lazy, convenience is king.
Around the same time, others with connections to the Mac maker have shared word that Intel's recently released Core i7 'Clarksfield' quad-core mobile processors may find their way into the new iMac line in some capacity, making the new models the first consumer-oriented Macs with four processing cores.
The chips are available in 1.6GHz and 1.73GHz flavors, in addition to a pricer 2.0GHz variant that Apple would appear less likely to adopt in a consumer Mac given a price tag north of $1000.
Definitely agree. It's the hardware that sells a Mac. Quad-cores have been available on desktops for the last 3 years, while mobile quad-cores have been available for 2 years already. Apple is the last computer maker to offer its customers the power of quad-cores for its pricier line of desktop substitutes, the all in one iMacs. It's about time.
Considering the size of the market now and how long ago it has been since DVD hit the seen, that isn’t hot.
I stated I use it for specific things that I want to see in the best definition. Usually I only care about “good enough” which tends to fall in line with the majority. I don’t own a single DVD or Blu-ray disc.
And therefore you're not the norm yet you constantly posts your reasons why we should all have the same modus operandi as yourself? That's both preposterous and ridiculous!!
Of course they are having a record year, It’s obvious they would.
You constantly said for 2 years that Blu-ray wasn't going anywhere and this year it has. Once again- you've been proven wrong.
For those very few people who need the data storage of Blue Ray, used their Macs as media centers connected to large screen HDTVs, and can afford the expense, there are third party options.
Or FCS users who need a better method of HD delivery. Unfortunately, you may be right. I'll probably have to resort to a 3rd-party solution. You think they would at least make it available on the Mac Pro for FCS users.
You say the Netflix CEO is wrong. I think that 2 years looks to be about right. perhaps even sooner. You say that it?s not possible to streaming anything 'better-than "good enough? quality?, but the definition of ?good enough? is that it?s good enough for the majority. Convenience rules the roost in the end and shouldn?t forge that people are inherently looking for the simplest solution. At one time the internet was a scary place but they get Netflix streaming or Hulu up and running things start changing. We?re seeing that happen.
Blu-ray will NOT be replaced by streaming anytime soon. The quality in audio and video is just too high, but don?t make the mistake of discounting what is not good for you as not being good enough for others. Look at it from other people?s perspective.poor quality, ad-supported content is growing while DVD rentals are dropping. There isn?t a 1:1 ratio of DVD to Blu-ray.
PS: Usually my internet connection is quite fast, but every now and then I have to tether with my phone and a slow 3G or EDGE may used. Sometimes a congested WiFI network may also be a problem. I travel a lot so I get to test many different connections.
I would wager that the people who rent DVDs through Netflix do not represent the average consumer, especially one wishing to purchase, not rent. Even if Netflix distributes more streaming video that physical media within two years, I doubt that the general market will be anywhere near that ratio. It doesn't really matter if the ratio of people ditching DVD and people getting Blu-ray is one-to-one. The number of people using Blu-ray is/will be far too large to ignore.
Lastly, there is a whole world outside of the US that does not have access to the streaming services that Americans are accustomed to. No matter how much you guys want to spin it, there is a need for Blu-ray.
In the land of the lazy, convenience is king.
Now there's something I totally agree on. Very well said.
And therefore you're not the norm yet you constantly posts your reasons why we should all have the same modus operandi as yourself? That's both preposterous and ridiculous!!
I write ?I don?t own?? and you read ?I don?t use.? Those English classes aren?t quite paying off for you yet. Ever heard of renting?
You constantly said for 2 years that Blu-ray wasn't going anywhere and this year it has. Once again- you've been proven wrong.
The facts show that Blu-ray is growing. As usual, you can?t comprehend even the simplest of sentences. Blu-ray is not growing at a substantial rate in the PC world. Without OS X supporting AACS don?t expect Blu-ray drives in your next Mac notebook. Of course, you?ll read that as an absolute statement.
Why the big hoopla over Blu ray? Sure, Blu ray drives sound great (and they are great), but for notebooks (which are Apple's main bread 'n' butter) they are pointless. Let's be honest too- the majority of users would simply use the drive to watch movies. But, unless you own a 17" Macbook Pro or a 24" iMac, which have native resolutions of 1920x1200, you're not getting true HD. That and the power consumption issue. Desktops are one thing, but Blu ray drives just don't belong in notebooks of any kind, IMO.
For the umpteenth time. Do you want to buy the same movie twice? Blu-ray for your home theater, DVD for your mac. If that is what you want, I have a PSP and some UMD movies to sell you.