To be fair, the comments may not be coming from the same persons each time. Some people wanted the second hard disk, and now it's an option (albeit with SL Server included whether you want it or not). Others have wanted the BluRay drive, which is still missing. Don't conflate the two groups.
Overall, people want more configuration flexibility than what Apple offers. What's frustrating is Apple's limited options are for the most part artificial - there's really no technical reason to not offer a package that can accommodate these different requests. The constraints are a result of Apple's obsession with small size and ideological stance on such things as BluRay (why do they still not offer it, even as read-only, in the Mac Pro, let alone other desktop machines?) I understand that there are inventory and support costs associated with each new technology, but we somehow got card-readers added to iMacs and I don't remember a lot of people clamoring for those.
For home theater use, for which the Mini is very well suited, offering BluRay (as read-only) as an option is so obvious it's difficult to understand Apple's reluctance to satisfy that market in this day and age.
The only probable explanation is that Apple is in no hurry to assist in the growth of Blu-Ray. Keep in mind that adding Blu-Ray via an external device would always be there but there is no widespread adoption of such technology in play at the moment. No computer software is being distributed via Blu-Ray and few are using blank Blu-Ray discs for storage. If Blu-Ray gains a foothold, support will become an automatic but I suspect Apple is hoping that on the road to that adoption, some will seek out alternatives and choose to go other routes for their HD video fix, routes like downloading HD conten storing movies as computer files that can be stored on any medium or via a hard drive, etc.
Still, at this time, Blu-Ray isn't a critical component for most on their computers. At some point it probably will be and when that happens, Apple will include support both via software and hardware. While that inches closer to happening, people are finding there are other ways of working with HD content. Apple is a beneficiary of that search for alternatives and hence, has no reason to hasten Blu-Ray's adoption. It cannot, however, stop Blu-Ray from becoming DVD's replacement and isn't going to try to stop it. It's just that on the other hand, there's nothing to be gained from embracing the technology at the expense of content delivery that makes Apple a ton of cash. The bottom line is that when the time comes, Apple will not shun Blu-Ray. There would simply be too many third-party workarounds for Apple to push Blu-Ray aside even if it wanted to. I'm thinking within two years Blu-Ray will be incorporated into the Mac environment. Within five years it will be as if it had always been there.
It's just that on the other hand, there's nothing to be gained from embracing the technology at the expense of content delivery that makes Apple a ton of cash.
Note that throughout all these discussions on the Mini, it's Apple's customers who are complaining about the lack of Blu-Ray. They happen to be the ones who ultimately pay Apple's bills.
Quote:
The bottom line is that when the time comes, Apple will not shun Blu-Ray.
The time has come! And Apple is most definitely shunning Blu-Ray.
Quote:
I'm thinking within two years Blu-Ray will be incorporated into the Mac environment. Within five years it will be as if it had always been there.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
I'm generally impressed with all that Apple gets right these days. And I've been using their computers since the 80's, so I've seen Apple get a lot of things wrong over the years, including most of the 90's. In this case, I think they're getting it wrong, and customers are well-justified to call them on it.
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
Note that throughout all these discussions on the Mini, it's Apple's customers who are complaining about the lack of Blu-Ray. They happen to be the ones who ultimately pay Apple's bills.
The time has come! And Apple is most definitely shunning Blu-Ray.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
I'm generally impressed with all that Apple gets right these days. And I've been using their computers since the 80's, so I've seen Apple get a lot of things wrong over the years, including most of the 90's. In this case, I think they're getting it wrong, and customers are well-justified to call them on it.
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
I don't think consumers are staying clear of Apple products in significant numbers because of a dearth of Blu-ray support. It's not as if Blu-ray can never be added to existing machines. However, the time will come when not offering at least a Blu-ray reader would make Apple look rather absurd. My view is that when it gets to the point where not offering Blu-ray would embarrass Apple, Blu-ray would be offered. That time is likely to come within the next couple of years. One of the developments that needs to happen is that there have to be enough Blu-ray titles in consumers' hands that many of them would be irked over not being able to watch those discs on their computers. Also, until Blu-ray players are commonplace, what's the point of recording video onto a Blu-ray if many of the people you'd like to share that video with can't play the thing. I don't have any relatives with a Blu-ray player and I'm sure quite a few others are in a similar position. Slowly that will change and when it does, Blu-ray will come to the Mac.
This speaks to Apple's overall philosophy which boils down to thinking products through. While everybody else was focused on the technical specs related to MP3 players, Apple developed iTunes which has turned out to be a key ingredient to the iPod experience. Blu-ray is MIA right now because it would be of very limited value. Most of us would have little use for it.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
They certainly could, but that does not mean they should. Should they re-add floppy discs or all the various cards readers Sony supports on their PCs simply because it's technically possible? Of course not. I don't see Blu-Ray being useful in today's PCs. CD and DVD came along when a DVD held more data than my HDD, and home networking and fast Internet wasn't yet feasible for many people.
I expect ODDs to leave Apple's notebooks shortly. They take up a lot of space, use 5" of port-side "real estate", are slow to read/write, prone to breaking, and use a great deal of power doing it.
Quote:
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
It can be dropped in then drop one in or use an external Blu-Ray player. Have you tried pricing a 9.5mm ultra-slim slot-loading Blu-ray drive? Have you seen the tempurare and power usag of just a CD in a drive? They ain't pretty.
That still leaves the issue of OS support for AACS but you didn't address that so I won't.
Before anyone pegs me as a big Blu-Ray fanboy - I'm not. I don't even own any discs... yet. (And part of the reason for that is I would rather play them in a Mini that serves as my home-theater machine, but it seems to be missing a certain component required to play them...)
Anyway:
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
They certainly could, but that does not mean they should. Should they re-add floppy discs or all the various cards readers Sony supports on their PCs simply because it's technically possible?
There's a big difference between a device that plays a superset of existing disc formats that all share the same physical dimensions, versus additional hardware that doesn't accommodate those same discs. C'mon, that's not a valid argument.
Quote:
I don't see Blu-Ray being useful in today's PCs. CD and DVD came along when a DVD held more data than my HDD, and home networking and fast Internet wasn't yet feasible for many people.
Remember that quote about skating where the puck will be? Apple certainly isn't reckless with their hardware features, but they can certainly be ahead of the curve (or in this case, keeping up.) Remember the Superdrive, when most PCs barely had CD-ROMs? Or GigE back in 2001? There are still low-end PCs being sold that only supply 100baseT.
I'm not advocating for Blu-Ray burners as standard across the entire product line, but at least a Blu-Ray reader for the desktop machines, including the Mini--which is unquestionably chosen by many Apple users for home media use--would be a sensible BTO option. Hell, charge a premium for it - at least it should be cheaper and one less box than buying a standalone player with yet another remote and set of cables. Otherwise, what's the argument for even including a DVD drive at all?
Quote:
I expect ODDs to leave Apple's notebooks shortly. They take up a lot of space, use 5" of port-side "real estate", are slow to read/write, prone to breaking, and use a great deal of power doing it.
In this we can agree. I don't see the requirement for an optical drive in most laptops. I'm focused primarily on desktop machines.
Quote:
That still leaves the issue of OS support for AACS but you didn't address that so I won't.
It may be a bag of hurt, but so is screwing around with any Blu-Ray player. All I want is one less box in my living room, with the prospects of intelligent software upgrades as the format settles down. It's not as if Sony, of all people, hasn't solved this with their PS3. I don't see what's holding Apple back.
Before anyone pegs me as a big Blu-Ray fanboy - I'm not. I don't even own any discs... yet. (And part of the reason for that is I would rather play them in a Mini that serves as my home-theater machine, but it seems to be missing a certain component required to play them...)
Anyway:
There's a big difference between a device that plays a superset of existing disc formats that all share the same physical dimensions, versus additional hardware that doesn't accommodate those same discs. C'mon, that's not a valid argument.
Remember that quote about skating where the puck will be? Apple certainly isn't reckless with their hardware features, but they can certainly be ahead of the curve (or in this case, keeping up.) Remember the Superdrive, when most PCs barely had CD-ROMs? Or GigE back in 2001? There are still low-end PCs being sold that only supply 100baseT.
I'm not advocating for Blu-Ray burners as standard across the entire product line, but at least a Blu-Ray reader for the desktop machines, including the Mini--which is unquestionably chosen by many Apple users for home media use--would be a sensible BTO option. Hell, charge a premium for it - at least it should be cheaper and one less box than buying a standalone player with yet another remote and set of cables. Otherwise, what's the argument for even including a DVD drive at all?
In this we can agree. I don't see the requirement for an optical drive in most laptops. I'm focused primarily on desktop machines.
It may be a bag of hurt, but so is screwing around with any Blu-Ray player. All I want is one less box in my living room, with the prospects of intelligent software upgrades as the format settles down. It's not as if Sony, of all people, haven't solved this with their PS3. I don't see what's holding Apple back.
My apologie for thinking you meant the entire Mac line. I'd like to see AACS support in the OS even if they don't support it with Blu-Ray drives. At least those who really want one cab then get one without having to run Windows. Their lack of support in the OS seems clear and I don't expect it until after they feel thyve made their iTS option more solid.
As for the cost, you can buy a Blu-ray appliance for under $100, but yiu can't get those 9.5mm slot-loading drives used in allacs but the Mac Pro for that price. i think we'd have to see OS support with HW support in the Mac Pro first. Any other Mac simply won't be first.
I also don't expect the next AppleTV to get it. Besides raising the price considerably I bet you'll mind consumers not wanting To pay for Blu-ry they won't use or pay for a 2nd Blu-Ray player since they already have a standalone player or PS3, than you will those who won't buy it because it doesn't have a BRD. I think it's best keep a dedicated Internet media appliance simple in tha regard.
A lot more people purchase or rent Blu-Rays than people purchase or rent via digital download, yet Apple wants to support that.
Sure they do. It's great how you leave out all the other streaming options offered by YouTube, Hulu and Netflix. Just because you live in an upside down reality doesn't mean you can discount Apple's and other American-based companies clear an concise notices. Frak, Google isn't even supporting HDDs in their Chrome OS yet HDDs outnumber the PS3 installed base even if you don't include every single PS3's HDD. Perhaps you should strt looking at where technology is going, not where you want it to be.
Sure they do. It's great how you leave out all the other streaming options offered by YouTube, Hulu and Netflix. Just because you live in an upside down reality doesn't mean you can discount Apple's and other American-based companies clear an concise notices. Frak, Google isn't even supporting HDDs in their Chrome OS yet HDDs outnumber the PS3 installed base even if you don't include every single PS3's HDD. Perhaps you should strt looking at where technology is going, not where you want it to be.
Hulu and Netflix are not available to 95% of the worlds population, but of course, according to you, that makes everyone outside the US someone living in a "upside down reality", a bit if a naive view, but still that is a reason enough not to mention them. But in saying that, doesn't netflix rent movies? And YouTube, apart from the odd Muppet video, what is really on it?
Why should I purchase a device today to be where the technology is going to be in 10 years time when technology changes so much? Streaming/digital downloads are not going to be the market leader for at least 10 more years, stop kidding yourself.
Today, blu-ray rentals and sales beat digital download sales and rentals. That is a fact, put your apple shares aside for a minute and face that fact. Apple Movie sales, and movie rentals will never be the market leader, never, the movie industry will not allow it to be.
Hulu and Netflix are not available to 95% of the worlds population, but of course, according to you, that makes everyone outside the US someone living in a "upside down reality", a bit if a naive view, but still that is a reason enough not to mention them. But in saying that, doesn't netflix rent movies? And YouTube, apart from the odd Muppet video, what is really on it?
Why should I purchase a device today to be where the technology is going to be in 10 years time when technology changes so much? Streaming/digital downloads are not going to be the market leader for at least 10 more years, stop kidding yourself.
Today, blu-ray rentals and sales beat digital download sales and rentals. That is a fact, put your apple shares aside for a minute and face that fact. Apple Movie sales, and movie rentals will never be the market leader, never, the movie industry will not allow it to be.
Great argument! Tell me what modern is CE is readily available 95% of the world’s population? None of them! You still fail to see that Apple is an American company who does so much business in the US that it’s the first and foremost consideration when releasing any new tech.
Streaming and downloads already are the market leader. Netflix’s CEO has already stated that they predict the shift from optical media to streaming as the dominate media for their customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArsTechnica
In a bid to remain relevant in a world of broadband connections and instant gratification, the company is likely to offer a subscription option that skips DVDs entirely, and allows access to its "Watch Instantly" on-demand streaming videos by 2010. "We've got one singular objective, which is 'Be successful in streaming,'" Netflix CEO Reed Hastings.
I’m sorry that you pay for the kilobyte where you are but that is the not the norm in the US and the US has by far largest GDP of any single nation and the current companies making waves in this arena are either working in the US and/or focusing on the US. You don’t have to like the way technology is going but you do have to accept it.
Blu-ray is still going to be the best method for getting high-profile, high-definiton content, and soon 3D content, but that doesn’t mean it will be more used that streaming and downloads. That just isn’t how technology works. Hell, I watched a 50 minute piece about Palm from CES tonight. That is half the typical movie time and it wasn’t on Blu-ray. You are sadly mistaken if you honestly think streaming and downloads are going to fall to the wayside simply because you have to pay for data usage.
Why you think we all need a Blu-ray player in our PS3, AppleTV, TiVo, etc. is beyond me. I bet you think we need one built into every thing. How about just one Blu-ray player for those times when the higher-profile HD warrants it.
I’m off to watch Hulu in 480p because it’s good enough for what I need it for. 40M other Hulu subscribers agree with me.
Great argument! [B]Tell me what modern is CE is readily available 95% of the world?s population?[?B] None of them! You still fail to see that Apple is an American company who does so much business in the US that it?s the first and foremost consideration when releasing any new tech.
Can you try that bolded bit again in English this time? In the course of this discussion I have said anything about Apple limiting themselves to the US, in fact that it is the opposite, they have a video store available in a number of countries. Why do you continue to make things up?
The issue I have with the current Apple video store is, they have a limited selection, and you can only get the HD (and they aren't really that much HD) if you purchase an AppleTV, so even if I want to purchase one and watch it on my Mac, I can't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Streaming and downloads already are the market leader. Netflix?s CEO has already stated that they predict the shift from optical media to streaming as the dominate media for their customers.
So if the CEO of a company says something it is true? Steve predited people would throw away their stereos and purchase a little white speaker system, that worked out as well.
From last year, for feature film revenue, digital (as you like to call it) for rental was around $111m, online retail around $250m, and around $1.27b is for VOD, DVD &Blu-Ray came in around $8.73 billion for retail, and $8.15 for rental (adams Media research), even movie tickets in the states came in at $9.87 billion last year. Your digital downloads have a little way to go...
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I?m sorry that you pay for the kilobyte where you are but that is the not the norm in the US and the US has by far largest GDP of any single nation and the current companies making waves in this arena are either working in the US and/or focusing on the US. You don?t have to like the way technology is going but you do have to accept it.
I don't pay by the kb, I have a fixed limit. The digital downloads will fail to get those big numbers until there is something like the DVD forum, or BDA creating a standard amongst the CE companies, I (and many others) will not be forced to purchase a locked in item to one company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Blu-ray is still going to be the best method for getting high-profile, high-definiton content, and soon 3D content, but that doesn?t mean it will be more used that streaming and downloads. That just isn?t how technology works. Hell, I watched a 50 minute piece about Palm from CES tonight. That is half the typical movie time and it wasn?t on Blu-ray. You are sadly mistaken if you honestly think streaming and downloads are going to fall to the wayside simply because you have to pay for data usage.
That's nice, I watched the menalist on TV tonight via DVB-S, and no, I don't think it will fail due to data usage, I think it will fail due to the current implementations of it, it needs some control, and standards.
But the other advantage that DVD/Blu-Ray has, and as you are in the US you will not be affected as much as outside, is I can purchase a disc from anywhere in the world, kiss that goodbye with digital downloads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Why you think we all need a Blu-ray player in our PS3, AppleTV, TiVo, etc. is beyond me. I bet you think we need one built into every thing. How about just one Blu-ray player for those times when the higher-profile HD warrants it.
I don't think we need a blu-ray player in everything, that is just another thing you have made up, you seem to do that a lot.
I want a blu-ray player so I can watch (and listen to) the item I have paid money for in the best quality currently available. If it costs me $4 to rent a movie on blu-ray, $4 to get it on DVD, or $4 from Apple, blu-ray makes perfect sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I?m off to watch Hulu in 480p because it?s good enough for what I need it for. 40M other Hulu subscribers agree with me.
good for you, but as I have said, since I am current one of the 95% of the worlds population that can't watch Hulu, I don't really care.
It could use a 2nd ethernet port, yes, but I got a mac mini server for work and now I'm thinking about one for home (home media server, etc). Setting up the two hds as raid1, with an external tb backup hd (time machine) is about as safe as one can get without investing in off-site backups. Performance is great - the limit is the network, not the machine, unless you're truly needing heavy server-side crunching.
As late as 2001 I was using an old mac SE as a webserver, though, so I'm biased towards these sorts of solutions.
A lot more people purchase or rent Blu-Rays than people purchase or rent via digital download, yet Apple wants to support that.
Apple sells digital downloads, hence they support them. This is a mystery to you?
It's not Apple that has slowed the adoption of Blu-Ray. A poor economy combined with greedy studios has done that. Also, while Blu-Ray is clearly superior to any other HD delivery method, many consumers are comfortable with what passes for HD via HD downloads, upconverted DVDs and HD via satellite and cable. Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
I have to admit to being surprised that the rollout of Blu-Ray has turned into such a messy, drawn-out affair. Then again, I never thought we'd see the rollout handled with such utter incompetence. First we had that pointless HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war. There were losers all around on that one. Now we have studios charging too much for Blu-Ray titles.
Based on what has been transpiring at this year's CES, it seems the next big thing will be 3D, which is likely not going to work out the way many are hoping. Still, if the price of Blu-Ray discs finally drops to reasonable levels and Hollywood starts offering 3D versions at a premium, maybe that would be a good thing for Blu-Ray. 3D will flop over the long haul but we can finally get our HD content for a good price for optimal quality.
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
If by 'so much has been different this time around' you mean 'BluRay actually exceeded DVD's sales over their initial introduction period' then yes, you are correct:
"According to Adams Media Research, the household penetration for Blu-ray Disc players is 8% after slightly less than three years on the market. Compare this to the three-year estimates of about 3% for Color TV, 2% for CDs and 4% for DVDs."
There's no question that the BluRay/HD-DVD format war was messy to those who closely followed such things, but to the general buying public the only thing that matters is we now have a viable high-def disc format with a growing number of releases and overall sales each year.
Quote:
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
It's time to stop apologizing for Apple's foot-dragging. Either they should support BluRay, even as a higher-priced BTO option, or they should eliminate video DVD playback altogether. Anything in between is simply hypocrisy at this point.
Apple sells digital downloads, hence they support them. This is a mystery to you?
No, it is Apples lack of regard for a superior solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
It's not Apple that has slowed the adoption of Blu-Ray. A poor economy combined with greedy studios has done that. Also, while Blu-Ray is clearly superior to any other HD delivery method, many consumers are comfortable with what passes for HD via HD downloads, upconverted DVDs and HD via satellite and cable. Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
Blu-ray has had 100% year on year growth, and what greedy studios? New release Blu-Rays sell for under $20, the same price as the DVD in cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
I have to admit to being surprised that the rollout of Blu-Ray has turned into such a messy, drawn-out affair. Then again, I never thought we'd see the rollout handled with such utter incompetence. First we had that pointless HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war. There were losers all around on that one. Now we have studios charging too much for Blu-Ray titles.
How are they charging too much? You can purchase the SD version of Harry Potter for example from Apple, US$14.99, I got the Blu-Ray from Amazon for the same price, and it included a blu-ray, DVD, and digital copy. Apart from TV shows alot of the new releases are around US$20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
Based on what has been transpiring at this year's CES, it seems the next big thing will be 3D, which is likely not going to work out the way many are hoping. Still, if the price of Blu-Ray discs finally drops to reasonable levels and Hollywood starts offering 3D versions at a premium, maybe that would be a good thing for Blu-Ray. 3D will flop over the long haul but we can finally get our HD content for a good price for optimal quality.
So what is this "reasonable level" of pricing that you want? After all, this is an Apple forum you are talking in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
No, Apple isn't supporting blu-ray because Jobs is pig headed, big difference.
No, it is Apples lack of regard for a superior solution.
Should hamburgers not exist because Kobe beef filets are superior? Should mopeds not exist because a Bugatti Veyron is faster? Your argument about what is “superior” keeps getting worse and worse.
Sci-fi movies (rent) - Often want Blu-ray
Other movies (rent) - Don’t care about Blu-ray. Usually don’t even care about HD at all.
New TV Shows - Hulu, if available at 480p,then torrents, If still not available then iTS.
Older TV Shows - Hulu or Netflix, but this was so rare that I canceled my Netflix account. If they let me get a cheaper account with no physical media I’ll reconsider.
Movie or TV Shows (own) - While rare, I’ll do torrents or iTS. Convenience is king! Don’t want a but of plastic discs around or spend all day converting to MP4 for storage.
Music videos - YouTube, even DLing some favorites with ClickToFlash or KeepVid.
Video games - A few simples ones, like Chess and Suduko, for my iPhone. I find no joy in modern gaming.
Each of those is superior to Blu-ray in their own way. Your single view that having the highest-bitrate for data is the only consideration makes you sound like a troll as it seems impossible to me that you really can think that there should only be one solution and that streaming and downloads are going to fade away for a slow, inconvenient Blu-ray.
Expect for the PS3 being the best Blu-ray player out there for the price, at the time, I have no other use for it. I have not used a physical DVD or CD in awhile. I don’t even use an optical disc to restore Snow Leopard. I DLed it from Apple’s servers and have it installed as a Boot Disk on every internal and external drive i have. Much easier than Target Disk Mode for troubleshooting as there is no need for a 2nd Mac.
PS: Care to tell us again why an AppleTV, Tivo, HDTV and PS3 in an entertainment center should all have Blu-ray?
Should hamburgers not exist because Kobe beef filets are superior? Should mopeds not exist because a Bugatti Veyron is faster? Your argument about what is “superior” keeps getting worse and worse.
At least I have an argument, roads support both mopeds and the Veyron, big difference, but I don't expect you will understand that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
New TV Shows - Hulu, if available at 480p,then torrents, If still not available then iTS.
Movie or TV Shows (own) - While rare, I’ll do torrents or iTS. Convenience is king! Don’t want a but of plastic discs around or spend all day converting to MP4 for storage.
Music videos - YouTube, even DLing some favorites with ClickToFlash or KeepVid.
I find it quite interesting that you will pirate something before you would think of rewarding the content producer by purchasing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
PS: Care to tell us again why an AppleTV, Tivo, HDTV and PS3 in an entertainment center should all have Blu-ray?
i don't know, you are the one that constantly says that, not me. I am referring to Apples lack of support blu-ray, especially as a BTO
At least I have an argument, roads support both mopeds and the Veyron, big difference, but I don't expect you will understand that.
And movies and TV shows support both internet-based and optical-based retrieval methods yet you think that we all need multiple Blu-ray players and internet streaming and downloads are pointless and stagnant.
And movies and TV shows support both internet-based and optical-based retrieval methods yet you think that we all need multiple Blu-ray players and internet streaming and downloads are pointless and stagnant.
Again, you are making things up, you constantly do this, why is this?
Comments
To be fair, the comments may not be coming from the same persons each time. Some people wanted the second hard disk, and now it's an option (albeit with SL Server included whether you want it or not). Others have wanted the BluRay drive, which is still missing. Don't conflate the two groups.
Overall, people want more configuration flexibility than what Apple offers. What's frustrating is Apple's limited options are for the most part artificial - there's really no technical reason to not offer a package that can accommodate these different requests. The constraints are a result of Apple's obsession with small size and ideological stance on such things as BluRay (why do they still not offer it, even as read-only, in the Mac Pro, let alone other desktop machines?) I understand that there are inventory and support costs associated with each new technology, but we somehow got card-readers added to iMacs and I don't remember a lot of people clamoring for those.
For home theater use, for which the Mini is very well suited, offering BluRay (as read-only) as an option is so obvious it's difficult to understand Apple's reluctance to satisfy that market in this day and age.
The only probable explanation is that Apple is in no hurry to assist in the growth of Blu-Ray. Keep in mind that adding Blu-Ray via an external device would always be there but there is no widespread adoption of such technology in play at the moment. No computer software is being distributed via Blu-Ray and few are using blank Blu-Ray discs for storage. If Blu-Ray gains a foothold, support will become an automatic but I suspect Apple is hoping that on the road to that adoption, some will seek out alternatives and choose to go other routes for their HD video fix, routes like downloading HD conten storing movies as computer files that can be stored on any medium or via a hard drive, etc.
Still, at this time, Blu-Ray isn't a critical component for most on their computers. At some point it probably will be and when that happens, Apple will include support both via software and hardware. While that inches closer to happening, people are finding there are other ways of working with HD content. Apple is a beneficiary of that search for alternatives and hence, has no reason to hasten Blu-Ray's adoption. It cannot, however, stop Blu-Ray from becoming DVD's replacement and isn't going to try to stop it. It's just that on the other hand, there's nothing to be gained from embracing the technology at the expense of content delivery that makes Apple a ton of cash. The bottom line is that when the time comes, Apple will not shun Blu-Ray. There would simply be too many third-party workarounds for Apple to push Blu-Ray aside even if it wanted to. I'm thinking within two years Blu-Ray will be incorporated into the Mac environment. Within five years it will be as if it had always been there.
It's just that on the other hand, there's nothing to be gained from embracing the technology at the expense of content delivery that makes Apple a ton of cash.
Note that throughout all these discussions on the Mini, it's Apple's customers who are complaining about the lack of Blu-Ray. They happen to be the ones who ultimately pay Apple's bills.
The bottom line is that when the time comes, Apple will not shun Blu-Ray.
The time has come! And Apple is most definitely shunning Blu-Ray.
I'm thinking within two years Blu-Ray will be incorporated into the Mac environment. Within five years it will be as if it had always been there.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
I'm generally impressed with all that Apple gets right these days. And I've been using their computers since the 80's, so I've seen Apple get a lot of things wrong over the years, including most of the 90's. In this case, I think they're getting it wrong, and customers are well-justified to call them on it.
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
Note that throughout all these discussions on the Mini, it's Apple's customers who are complaining about the lack of Blu-Ray. They happen to be the ones who ultimately pay Apple's bills.
The time has come! And Apple is most definitely shunning Blu-Ray.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
I'm generally impressed with all that Apple gets right these days. And I've been using their computers since the 80's, so I've seen Apple get a lot of things wrong over the years, including most of the 90's. In this case, I think they're getting it wrong, and customers are well-justified to call them on it.
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
I don't think consumers are staying clear of Apple products in significant numbers because of a dearth of Blu-ray support. It's not as if Blu-ray can never be added to existing machines. However, the time will come when not offering at least a Blu-ray reader would make Apple look rather absurd. My view is that when it gets to the point where not offering Blu-ray would embarrass Apple, Blu-ray would be offered. That time is likely to come within the next couple of years. One of the developments that needs to happen is that there have to be enough Blu-ray titles in consumers' hands that many of them would be irked over not being able to watch those discs on their computers. Also, until Blu-ray players are commonplace, what's the point of recording video onto a Blu-ray if many of the people you'd like to share that video with can't play the thing. I don't have any relatives with a Blu-ray player and I'm sure quite a few others are in a similar position. Slowly that will change and when it does, Blu-ray will come to the Mac.
This speaks to Apple's overall philosophy which boils down to thinking products through. While everybody else was focused on the technical specs related to MP3 players, Apple developed iTunes which has turned out to be a key ingredient to the iPod experience. Blu-ray is MIA right now because it would be of very limited value. Most of us would have little use for it.
Apple could incorporate it today - it's not a technical problem, it's an ideological one.
They certainly could, but that does not mean they should. Should they re-add floppy discs or all the various cards readers Sony supports on their PCs simply because it's technically possible? Of course not. I don't see Blu-Ray being useful in today's PCs. CD and DVD came along when a DVD held more data than my HDD, and home networking and fast Internet wasn't yet feasible for many people.
I expect ODDs to leave Apple's notebooks shortly. They take up a lot of space, use 5" of port-side "real estate", are slow to read/write, prone to breaking, and use a great deal of power doing it.
Your idea of waiting two more years for a simple piece of drop-in hardware is ridiculous!
It can be dropped in then drop one in or use an external Blu-Ray player. Have you tried pricing a 9.5mm ultra-slim slot-loading Blu-ray drive? Have you seen the tempurare and power usag of just a CD in a drive? They ain't pretty.
That still leaves the issue of OS support for AACS but you didn't address that so I won't.
Anyway:
They certainly could, but that does not mean they should. Should they re-add floppy discs or all the various cards readers Sony supports on their PCs simply because it's technically possible?
There's a big difference between a device that plays a superset of existing disc formats that all share the same physical dimensions, versus additional hardware that doesn't accommodate those same discs. C'mon, that's not a valid argument.
I don't see Blu-Ray being useful in today's PCs. CD and DVD came along when a DVD held more data than my HDD, and home networking and fast Internet wasn't yet feasible for many people.
Remember that quote about skating where the puck will be? Apple certainly isn't reckless with their hardware features, but they can certainly be ahead of the curve (or in this case, keeping up.) Remember the Superdrive, when most PCs barely had CD-ROMs? Or GigE back in 2001? There are still low-end PCs being sold that only supply 100baseT.
I'm not advocating for Blu-Ray burners as standard across the entire product line, but at least a Blu-Ray reader for the desktop machines, including the Mini--which is unquestionably chosen by many Apple users for home media use--would be a sensible BTO option. Hell, charge a premium for it - at least it should be cheaper and one less box than buying a standalone player with yet another remote and set of cables. Otherwise, what's the argument for even including a DVD drive at all?
I expect ODDs to leave Apple's notebooks shortly. They take up a lot of space, use 5" of port-side "real estate", are slow to read/write, prone to breaking, and use a great deal of power doing it.
In this we can agree. I don't see the requirement for an optical drive in most laptops. I'm focused primarily on desktop machines.
That still leaves the issue of OS support for AACS but you didn't address that so I won't.
It may be a bag of hurt, but so is screwing around with any Blu-Ray player. All I want is one less box in my living room, with the prospects of intelligent software upgrades as the format settles down. It's not as if Sony, of all people, hasn't solved this with their PS3. I don't see what's holding Apple back.
Before anyone pegs me as a big Blu-Ray fanboy - I'm not. I don't even own any discs... yet. (And part of the reason for that is I would rather play them in a Mini that serves as my home-theater machine, but it seems to be missing a certain component required to play them...)
Anyway:
There's a big difference between a device that plays a superset of existing disc formats that all share the same physical dimensions, versus additional hardware that doesn't accommodate those same discs. C'mon, that's not a valid argument.
Remember that quote about skating where the puck will be? Apple certainly isn't reckless with their hardware features, but they can certainly be ahead of the curve (or in this case, keeping up.) Remember the Superdrive, when most PCs barely had CD-ROMs? Or GigE back in 2001? There are still low-end PCs being sold that only supply 100baseT.
I'm not advocating for Blu-Ray burners as standard across the entire product line, but at least a Blu-Ray reader for the desktop machines, including the Mini--which is unquestionably chosen by many Apple users for home media use--would be a sensible BTO option. Hell, charge a premium for it - at least it should be cheaper and one less box than buying a standalone player with yet another remote and set of cables. Otherwise, what's the argument for even including a DVD drive at all?
In this we can agree. I don't see the requirement for an optical drive in most laptops. I'm focused primarily on desktop machines.
It may be a bag of hurt, but so is screwing around with any Blu-Ray player. All I want is one less box in my living room, with the prospects of intelligent software upgrades as the format settles down. It's not as if Sony, of all people, haven't solved this with their PS3. I don't see what's holding Apple back.
My apologie for thinking you meant the entire Mac line. I'd like to see AACS support in the OS even if they don't support it with Blu-Ray drives. At least those who really want one cab then get one without having to run Windows. Their lack of support in the OS seems clear and I don't expect it until after they feel thyve made their iTS option more solid.
As for the cost, you can buy a Blu-ray appliance for under $100, but yiu can't get those 9.5mm slot-loading drives used in allacs but the Mac Pro for that price. i think we'd have to see OS support with HW support in the Mac Pro first. Any other Mac simply won't be first.
I also don't expect the next AppleTV to get it. Besides raising the price considerably I bet you'll mind consumers not wanting To pay for Blu-ry they won't use or pay for a 2nd Blu-Ray player since they already have a standalone player or PS3, than you will those who won't buy it because it doesn't have a BRD. I think it's best keep a dedicated Internet media appliance simple in tha regard.
(typed on iPhone, sorry for typos)
because it would be of very limited value. Most of us would have little use for it.
A lot more people purchase or rent Blu-Rays than people purchase or rent via digital download, yet Apple wants to support that.
A lot more people purchase or rent Blu-Rays than people purchase or rent via digital download, yet Apple wants to support that.
Sure they do. It's great how you leave out all the other streaming options offered by YouTube, Hulu and Netflix. Just because you live in an upside down reality doesn't mean you can discount Apple's and other American-based companies clear an concise notices. Frak, Google isn't even supporting HDDs in their Chrome OS yet HDDs outnumber the PS3 installed base even if you don't include every single PS3's HDD. Perhaps you should strt looking at where technology is going, not where you want it to be.
Sure they do. It's great how you leave out all the other streaming options offered by YouTube, Hulu and Netflix. Just because you live in an upside down reality doesn't mean you can discount Apple's and other American-based companies clear an concise notices. Frak, Google isn't even supporting HDDs in their Chrome OS yet HDDs outnumber the PS3 installed base even if you don't include every single PS3's HDD. Perhaps you should strt looking at where technology is going, not where you want it to be.
Hulu and Netflix are not available to 95% of the worlds population, but of course, according to you, that makes everyone outside the US someone living in a "upside down reality", a bit if a naive view, but still that is a reason enough not to mention them. But in saying that, doesn't netflix rent movies? And YouTube, apart from the odd Muppet video, what is really on it?
Why should I purchase a device today to be where the technology is going to be in 10 years time when technology changes so much? Streaming/digital downloads are not going to be the market leader for at least 10 more years, stop kidding yourself.
Today, blu-ray rentals and sales beat digital download sales and rentals. That is a fact, put your apple shares aside for a minute and face that fact. Apple Movie sales, and movie rentals will never be the market leader, never, the movie industry will not allow it to be.
Hulu and Netflix are not available to 95% of the worlds population, but of course, according to you, that makes everyone outside the US someone living in a "upside down reality", a bit if a naive view, but still that is a reason enough not to mention them. But in saying that, doesn't netflix rent movies? And YouTube, apart from the odd Muppet video, what is really on it?
Why should I purchase a device today to be where the technology is going to be in 10 years time when technology changes so much? Streaming/digital downloads are not going to be the market leader for at least 10 more years, stop kidding yourself.
Today, blu-ray rentals and sales beat digital download sales and rentals. That is a fact, put your apple shares aside for a minute and face that fact. Apple Movie sales, and movie rentals will never be the market leader, never, the movie industry will not allow it to be.
Great argument! Tell me what modern is CE is readily available 95% of the world’s population? None of them! You still fail to see that Apple is an American company who does so much business in the US that it’s the first and foremost consideration when releasing any new tech.
Streaming and downloads already are the market leader. Netflix’s CEO has already stated that they predict the shift from optical media to streaming as the dominate media for their customers.
In a bid to remain relevant in a world of broadband connections and instant gratification, the company is likely to offer a subscription option that skips DVDs entirely, and allows access to its "Watch Instantly" on-demand streaming videos by 2010. "We've got one singular objective, which is 'Be successful in streaming,'" Netflix CEO Reed Hastings.
I’m sorry that you pay for the kilobyte where you are but that is the not the norm in the US and the US has by far largest GDP of any single nation and the current companies making waves in this arena are either working in the US and/or focusing on the US. You don’t have to like the way technology is going but you do have to accept it.
Blu-ray is still going to be the best method for getting high-profile, high-definiton content, and soon 3D content, but that doesn’t mean it will be more used that streaming and downloads. That just isn’t how technology works. Hell, I watched a 50 minute piece about Palm from CES tonight. That is half the typical movie time and it wasn’t on Blu-ray. You are sadly mistaken if you honestly think streaming and downloads are going to fall to the wayside simply because you have to pay for data usage.
Why you think we all need a Blu-ray player in our PS3, AppleTV, TiVo, etc. is beyond me. I bet you think we need one built into every thing. How about just one Blu-ray player for those times when the higher-profile HD warrants it.
I’m off to watch Hulu in 480p because it’s good enough for what I need it for. 40M other Hulu subscribers agree with me.
Great argument! [B]Tell me what modern is CE is readily available 95% of the world?s population?[?B] None of them! You still fail to see that Apple is an American company who does so much business in the US that it?s the first and foremost consideration when releasing any new tech.
Can you try that bolded bit again in English this time? In the course of this discussion I have said anything about Apple limiting themselves to the US, in fact that it is the opposite, they have a video store available in a number of countries. Why do you continue to make things up?
The issue I have with the current Apple video store is, they have a limited selection, and you can only get the HD (and they aren't really that much HD) if you purchase an AppleTV, so even if I want to purchase one and watch it on my Mac, I can't.
Streaming and downloads already are the market leader. Netflix?s CEO has already stated that they predict the shift from optical media to streaming as the dominate media for their customers.
So if the CEO of a company says something it is true? Steve predited people would throw away their stereos and purchase a little white speaker system, that worked out as well.
From last year, for feature film revenue, digital (as you like to call it) for rental was around $111m, online retail around $250m, and around $1.27b is for VOD, DVD &Blu-Ray came in around $8.73 billion for retail, and $8.15 for rental (adams Media research), even movie tickets in the states came in at $9.87 billion last year. Your digital downloads have a little way to go...
I?m sorry that you pay for the kilobyte where you are but that is the not the norm in the US and the US has by far largest GDP of any single nation and the current companies making waves in this arena are either working in the US and/or focusing on the US. You don?t have to like the way technology is going but you do have to accept it.
I don't pay by the kb, I have a fixed limit. The digital downloads will fail to get those big numbers until there is something like the DVD forum, or BDA creating a standard amongst the CE companies, I (and many others) will not be forced to purchase a locked in item to one company.
Blu-ray is still going to be the best method for getting high-profile, high-definiton content, and soon 3D content, but that doesn?t mean it will be more used that streaming and downloads. That just isn?t how technology works. Hell, I watched a 50 minute piece about Palm from CES tonight. That is half the typical movie time and it wasn?t on Blu-ray. You are sadly mistaken if you honestly think streaming and downloads are going to fall to the wayside simply because you have to pay for data usage.
That's nice, I watched the menalist on TV tonight via DVB-S, and no, I don't think it will fail due to data usage, I think it will fail due to the current implementations of it, it needs some control, and standards.
But the other advantage that DVD/Blu-Ray has, and as you are in the US you will not be affected as much as outside, is I can purchase a disc from anywhere in the world, kiss that goodbye with digital downloads.
Why you think we all need a Blu-ray player in our PS3, AppleTV, TiVo, etc. is beyond me. I bet you think we need one built into every thing. How about just one Blu-ray player for those times when the higher-profile HD warrants it.
I don't think we need a blu-ray player in everything, that is just another thing you have made up, you seem to do that a lot.
I want a blu-ray player so I can watch (and listen to) the item I have paid money for in the best quality currently available. If it costs me $4 to rent a movie on blu-ray, $4 to get it on DVD, or $4 from Apple, blu-ray makes perfect sense.
I?m off to watch Hulu in 480p because it?s good enough for what I need it for. 40M other Hulu subscribers agree with me.
good for you, but as I have said, since I am current one of the 95% of the worlds population that can't watch Hulu, I don't really care.
Double the mini's height and put a Core i7 inside. It'll be the G4 Cube reborn.
As late as 2001 I was using an old mac SE as a webserver, though, so I'm biased towards these sorts of solutions.
A lot more people purchase or rent Blu-Rays than people purchase or rent via digital download, yet Apple wants to support that.
Apple sells digital downloads, hence they support them. This is a mystery to you?
It's not Apple that has slowed the adoption of Blu-Ray. A poor economy combined with greedy studios has done that. Also, while Blu-Ray is clearly superior to any other HD delivery method, many consumers are comfortable with what passes for HD via HD downloads, upconverted DVDs and HD via satellite and cable. Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
I have to admit to being surprised that the rollout of Blu-Ray has turned into such a messy, drawn-out affair. Then again, I never thought we'd see the rollout handled with such utter incompetence. First we had that pointless HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war. There were losers all around on that one. Now we have studios charging too much for Blu-Ray titles.
Based on what has been transpiring at this year's CES, it seems the next big thing will be 3D, which is likely not going to work out the way many are hoping. Still, if the price of Blu-Ray discs finally drops to reasonable levels and Hollywood starts offering 3D versions at a premium, maybe that would be a good thing for Blu-Ray. 3D will flop over the long haul but we can finally get our HD content for a good price for optimal quality.
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
If by 'so much has been different this time around' you mean 'BluRay actually exceeded DVD's sales over their initial introduction period' then yes, you are correct:
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...ng_Nicely/2425
"According to Adams Media Research, the household penetration for Blu-ray Disc players is 8% after slightly less than three years on the market. Compare this to the three-year estimates of about 3% for Color TV, 2% for CDs and 4% for DVDs."
There's no question that the BluRay/HD-DVD format war was messy to those who closely followed such things, but to the general buying public the only thing that matters is we now have a viable high-def disc format with a growing number of releases and overall sales each year.
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
It's time to stop apologizing for Apple's foot-dragging. Either they should support BluRay, even as a higher-priced BTO option, or they should eliminate video DVD playback altogether. Anything in between is simply hypocrisy at this point.
Apple sells digital downloads, hence they support them. This is a mystery to you?
No, it is Apples lack of regard for a superior solution.
It's not Apple that has slowed the adoption of Blu-Ray. A poor economy combined with greedy studios has done that. Also, while Blu-Ray is clearly superior to any other HD delivery method, many consumers are comfortable with what passes for HD via HD downloads, upconverted DVDs and HD via satellite and cable. Back in the day when DVD came along, it was so blatantly superior to every other delivery method that adoption went smoothly and the studios cashed in. Those same studios expected history to repeat itself but so much has been different this time around.
Blu-ray has had 100% year on year growth, and what greedy studios? New release Blu-Rays sell for under $20, the same price as the DVD in cases.
I have to admit to being surprised that the rollout of Blu-Ray has turned into such a messy, drawn-out affair. Then again, I never thought we'd see the rollout handled with such utter incompetence. First we had that pointless HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war. There were losers all around on that one. Now we have studios charging too much for Blu-Ray titles.
How are they charging too much? You can purchase the SD version of Harry Potter for example from Apple, US$14.99, I got the Blu-Ray from Amazon for the same price, and it included a blu-ray, DVD, and digital copy. Apart from TV shows alot of the new releases are around US$20
Based on what has been transpiring at this year's CES, it seems the next big thing will be 3D, which is likely not going to work out the way many are hoping. Still, if the price of Blu-Ray discs finally drops to reasonable levels and Hollywood starts offering 3D versions at a premium, maybe that would be a good thing for Blu-Ray. 3D will flop over the long haul but we can finally get our HD content for a good price for optimal quality.
So what is this "reasonable level" of pricing that you want? After all, this is an Apple forum you are talking in.
Bottom line is, Apple hasn't supported Blu-Ray because those responsible for the technology's rollout have been such a bumbling gang of incompetents. Jobs would rather not be deemed guilty by association. I can't say as I blame him.
No, Apple isn't supporting blu-ray because Jobs is pig headed, big difference.
No, it is Apples lack of regard for a superior solution.
Should hamburgers not exist because Kobe beef filets are superior? Should mopeds not exist because a Bugatti Veyron is faster? Your argument about what is “superior” keeps getting worse and worse.
Sci-fi movies (rent) - Often want Blu-ray
Other movies (rent) - Don’t care about Blu-ray. Usually don’t even care about HD at all.
New TV Shows - Hulu, if available at 480p,then torrents, If still not available then iTS.
Older TV Shows - Hulu or Netflix, but this was so rare that I canceled my Netflix account. If they let me get a cheaper account with no physical media I’ll reconsider.
Movie or TV Shows (own) - While rare, I’ll do torrents or iTS. Convenience is king! Don’t want a but of plastic discs around or spend all day converting to MP4 for storage.
Music videos - YouTube, even DLing some favorites with ClickToFlash or KeepVid.
Video games - A few simples ones, like Chess and Suduko, for my iPhone. I find no joy in modern gaming.
Each of those is superior to Blu-ray in their own way. Your single view that having the highest-bitrate for data is the only consideration makes you sound like a troll as it seems impossible to me that you really can think that there should only be one solution and that streaming and downloads are going to fade away for a slow, inconvenient Blu-ray.
Expect for the PS3 being the best Blu-ray player out there for the price, at the time, I have no other use for it. I have not used a physical DVD or CD in awhile. I don’t even use an optical disc to restore Snow Leopard. I DLed it from Apple’s servers and have it installed as a Boot Disk on every internal and external drive i have. Much easier than Target Disk Mode for troubleshooting as there is no need for a 2nd Mac.
PS: Care to tell us again why an AppleTV, Tivo, HDTV and PS3 in an entertainment center should all have Blu-ray?
Should hamburgers not exist because Kobe beef filets are superior? Should mopeds not exist because a Bugatti Veyron is faster? Your argument about what is “superior” keeps getting worse and worse.
At least I have an argument, roads support both mopeds and the Veyron, big difference, but I don't expect you will understand that.
New TV Shows - Hulu, if available at 480p,then torrents, If still not available then iTS.
Movie or TV Shows (own) - While rare, I’ll do torrents or iTS. Convenience is king! Don’t want a but of plastic discs around or spend all day converting to MP4 for storage.
Music videos - YouTube, even DLing some favorites with ClickToFlash or KeepVid.
I find it quite interesting that you will pirate something before you would think of rewarding the content producer by purchasing it.
PS: Care to tell us again why an AppleTV, Tivo, HDTV and PS3 in an entertainment center should all have Blu-ray?
i don't know, you are the one that constantly says that, not me. I am referring to Apples lack of support blu-ray, especially as a BTO
At least I have an argument, roads support both mopeds and the Veyron, big difference, but I don't expect you will understand that.
And movies and TV shows support both internet-based and optical-based retrieval methods yet you think that we all need multiple Blu-ray players and internet streaming and downloads are pointless and stagnant.
And movies and TV shows support both internet-based and optical-based retrieval methods yet you think that we all need multiple Blu-ray players and internet streaming and downloads are pointless and stagnant.
Again, you are making things up, you constantly do this, why is this?