Wow. I totally don't care. Thanks for saving one adapter and instituting another. How would this be an improvement? I don't need to send audio to my cinema display and I would never use built-in speakers if they had them (personally). It's not like they could get rid of the other audio ports if they did this either. Sounds suspicious, except maybe for the mac mini. I guess there are more and more computer displays with HDMI, but usually as an optional port and not a primary. Whatever, so long as optical/ analog ports remain, who cares?
Would be fine if you routed sound and picture to your AV amp with the one cable. Then continue on from the amp to the TV with another HDMI. That's how I have my ONKYO set up with my Apple TV. All inputs go to the amp and one HDMI goes to the TV. The TV stays on the one source setting and all the switching between sources is handled by the amp. Easy
That has nothing to do with Mini DisplayPort and everything to do with HDCP.
If they had HDMI this won't change.
It has everything to do with Mini DisplayPort and nothing to do with HDCP. You can go from Mini DisplayPort to HDMI because it is capable of transmitting HDMI/DVI signalling. You can't go from HDMI to Mini DisplayPort (for less than $100) because it cannot receive HDMI signals and HDMI can't transmit Mini DisplayPort signals. Both DisplayPort and the latest macs are HDCP compliant.
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better.
$2.33 for a 25GB disc. Do the math and the cost is the same. I also cannot ship my hard drive to MANY people with videos of the kids.
Re: Quality: I disagree. It is NOT good enough. It may be for you, but I think there are MANY people who watch Blu-ray on a 1080P HDTV. It is MUCH better than a 720p download from iTunes. To get Blu-ray quality online...be prepared to wait for a day for that download. The speeds and bandwidth are not there yet.
Quote:
The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner.
Blu-ray discs are NOT twice the price ($40???). Please get your facts right. There are many that I have bought for $20 (yes, new titles - the same price as the DVD option). At most, you may pay $5 more. I do at my local Walmart. Here is a sample: http://www.walmart.com/browse/Blu-ra...&path=0%3A4096
Quote:
Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
You could also argue that EVERY technology is transitional, but seriously...are you kidding me? Blu-ray is being adopted faster than DVD ever did. It won the HD-DVD battle as the new standard.
Blu-ray is going to be here and popular for at least the next 5 years. Whilst you may not think that is long, it is a lifetime in technology. If Apple want to "skip" a generation, that's fine; but not with me.
I also find it ironic that Steve Jobs in on the Blu-ray board!
The people that want to hook a mini up to their HDTV are a niche within a niche within a niche.
Apple's not going to add HDMI (which mean licensing fees) when they have DisplayPort (license free) that has backwards compatibility with HDMI signaling.
As we move to higher resolution monitor DisplayPort becomes even more necessary to maintain higher refresh rates and bits per pixel displays.
Turning the Notebooks and Mac Minis into stealth Apple TV units to play iTunes content.
I'm kind of hoping ALL miniDPs can output video and sound one day through an adaptor (I have a '08 MacBook Pro), but this doesn't sound too hopeful from the article.
hasn't this already been possible? the cheapest PC's ship with HDMI
Ideally, the adapter was to accompany Apple's move to include Blu-ray drives in the high-end iMac (and offer them as build-to-order options on the rest of the line), allowing the all-in-one desktops to connect to big-screen HDTVs that would leverage their Blu-ray drives and high-def iTunes video content. But a near last-minute decision by Apple to scrap Blu-ray from the iMac line this past fall kept the adapter under wraps. It's therefore possible that it could still emerge as a solution that could accompany a future update to the company's notebook lines.
I love how folks just keep on with this "Apple was going to put blu-ray in their machines but changed their minds' schtick. Sorry but I don't see it. When Apple added 720p videos to the itunes store it was pretty clear they were trying to push past optical disks. and each new thing in the store adds to this. And then there's the SD card/Express card slot and growing work on bigger cards and even movies etc being sold on them. As soon as one company retails a handful of titles, blu-ray is going to be at high risk of dying fast.
They MIGHT add HDMI to the Mini cause there's a lot of blogs out there about using the little guy as the cornerstone of a home media center and that port would push that game in a good way (and potentially itunes video sales). They might add it to the mac pro as well since that machine is a fav of video content producers. But they are unlikely to ever put it on the notebooks and the imacs is a toss up right now.
but anything beyond data burning with an external blu-ray drive is fantasy land. sorry folks but that's the way Apple is going.
HDMI on a mac mini will bring ONE thing : HDCP video support for your tv , the ability to play hdcp crypted content on your tv (itunes store has some hdcp content)
I used a 1st gen mac mini with a DVI to HDMI cable before I got my apple tv. It worked fine playing itunes content. Am I misunderstanding you, because you can already play HDCP encrypted content with a mac mini. As others have stated DVI and HDMI are basically the same thing.
I used a 1st gen mac mini with a DVI to HDMI cable before I got my apple tv. It worked fine playing itunes content. Am I misunderstanding you, because you can already play HDCP encrypted content with a mac mini. As others have stated DVI and HDMI are basically the same thing.
I think you're right and that DVI has supported HDCP for years.
Like many have already stated, there is really no need for HDMI ports on iMac for instance.
Well, not a huge need, it's true. But in my case my iMac is my only computer, and it rests on my home office desk, against the wall that has my HDTV and home theater system at it's other side, in the living room. I just made a hole on the wall and passed a Mini-DVI-to-HDMI plus an optical TOSLINK cables through. Would be nice to be able to use only HDMI, or mDP-to-HDMI if it had support for sound.
I also have the issue some people mentioned of the screen not fitting perfectly. Since my Phillips HDTV doesn't save my settings, every time I turn it on or change the video source I have to go to the TV's video settings again and set it to "Native 1080P" to fix it. I'm not an expert, but maybe if the connection was HDMI-HDMI this wouldn't be necessary...
2) because all of your competitors offer the technology and not having said technology on your machines makes you look . . . decidedly "stick in the mud" from a competitive POV
You might be right, if it wasn't for Apple embracing and encouraging the post blu-ray/optical disk technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleggy
but I think there are MANY people who watch Blu-ray on a 1080P HDTV.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
I work in the industry and even when we are creating something at blu-ray quality, it is burned and taken to a viewing room to be tested, NOT just played back on a computer. Because that 50 inch screen, surround sound etc is how the end result is going to be view by you and the rest of Joe Q Public in 99% of cases.
Quote:
It is MUCH better than a 720p download from iTunes. To get Blu-ray quality online...be prepared to wait for a day for that download. The speeds and bandwidth are not there yet.
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Quote:
Blu-ray discs are NOT twice the price ($40???). Please get your facts right. There are many that I have bought for $20 (yes, new titles - the same price as the DVD option).
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
Quote:
I also find it ironic that Steve Jobs in on the Blu-ray board!
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
hasn't this already been possible? the cheapest PC's ship with HDMI
You're missing the poster's point - he is hoping that the the mini display port would in future be able to carry sound and video feed down one cable. Something which is not currently possible.
I've yet to buy a cheap wintel machine with HDMI - where are you looking?
Even with the dispute between Intel and nVidia, it's best they keep it with the Core 2 Duo so that they remain with the current price points. It'll give both parties a chance to sort out their issues before the mini jumps to the newer architecture. Also, using a newer chipset than the MCP79 means that it's bound to be faster as well.
Here's hoping that the expected refresh can take place by June (sticking to the 8-9 month refresh cycle from Oct 2009) . I'd be more than interested in buying it as I'm saving up now!
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better. The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner. Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
Have you looked at the average streamed content off NetFlix? the quality stinks, HD is lower than DVD, more like VHS. If you want to stream that crap then more power to you. But I should have the option of higher quality and that is Blu-ray. In bulk you can buy 25GB blanks for under $3.00 each and that price is coming down. For the Video/Audiophile Blu-ray is it for a long time to come.
You might be right, if it wasn't for Apple embracing and encouraging the post blu-ray/optical disk technology.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
I work in the industry and even when we are creating something at blu-ray quality, it is burned and taken to a viewing room to be tested, NOT just played back on a computer. Because that 50 inch screen, surround sound etc is how the end result is going to be view by you and the rest of Joe Q Public in 99% of cases.
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
Then why can you get a $700.00 PC with a Blu-ray drive? All Apple does is rip off it's brain dead customers that shell out $1,500 or more for a computer that is no more powerful than a $700.00 PC. And if Apple is having trouble with software it's Apple because quick time is the software.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
Well, I would think I am not in the minority. Sony, Toshiba, Dell and pretty much EVERY other manufacturer offers the option (and let me stress...make it an option). Is it only Apple that sees differently? Even if there were an alternative (which there is not today), it would take at least 3 years to get where Blu-ray is now.
Quote:
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Yes, they may be doing that! Here is hoping!! But as I need something today (or in the very near future). It is not much good to me in 2 or even 3 years time. That for me, would also mean...bring in HDMI. Apple is awesome at making things simple...one wire for audio and visual fits that bill, right?
Quote:
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
Ahhh, okay. I still want to burn Blu-ray though. Data backup is one reason, but home videos is what I am after. I want to burn the native AVCHD file, because Apple converts (ProRes) and you lose a little quality. I don't want to spend $1k on FCP, because it is way too much for me (financially and feature needs).
Quote:
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
Massive conflict of interest, perhaps? I think SJ knows Blu-ray is here to stay (5 years or so), but that does not fit his "iStore" business model. He is on the fence.
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better. The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner. Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
if you are smart you would back-up that 1TB drive so now you have $200.00. with content that is locked into your home or iPod.
Comments
Wow. I totally don't care. Thanks for saving one adapter and instituting another. How would this be an improvement? I don't need to send audio to my cinema display and I would never use built-in speakers if they had them (personally). It's not like they could get rid of the other audio ports if they did this either. Sounds suspicious, except maybe for the mac mini. I guess there are more and more computer displays with HDMI, but usually as an optional port and not a primary. Whatever, so long as optical/ analog ports remain, who cares?
Would be fine if you routed sound and picture to your AV amp with the one cable. Then continue on from the amp to the TV with another HDMI. That's how I have my ONKYO set up with my Apple TV. All inputs go to the amp and one HDMI goes to the TV. The TV stays on the one source setting and all the switching between sources is handled by the amp. Easy
HDMI may be coming but teh image is clearly faked, half a second with levels in PS shows that
That has nothing to do with Mini DisplayPort and everything to do with HDCP.
If they had HDMI this won't change.
It has everything to do with Mini DisplayPort and nothing to do with HDCP. You can go from Mini DisplayPort to HDMI because it is capable of transmitting HDMI/DVI signalling. You can't go from HDMI to Mini DisplayPort (for less than $100) because it cannot receive HDMI signals and HDMI can't transmit Mini DisplayPort signals. Both DisplayPort and the latest macs are HDCP compliant.
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better.
$2.33 for a 25GB disc. Do the math and the cost is the same. I also cannot ship my hard drive to MANY people with videos of the kids.
Re: Quality: I disagree. It is NOT good enough. It may be for you, but I think there are MANY people who watch Blu-ray on a 1080P HDTV. It is MUCH better than a 720p download from iTunes. To get Blu-ray quality online...be prepared to wait for a day for that download. The speeds and bandwidth are not there yet.
The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner.
Blu-ray discs are NOT twice the price ($40???). Please get your facts right. There are many that I have bought for $20 (yes, new titles - the same price as the DVD option). At most, you may pay $5 more. I do at my local Walmart. Here is a sample: http://www.walmart.com/browse/Blu-ra...&path=0%3A4096
Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
You could also argue that EVERY technology is transitional, but seriously...are you kidding me? Blu-ray is being adopted faster than DVD ever did. It won the HD-DVD battle as the new standard.
Blu-ray is going to be here and popular for at least the next 5 years. Whilst you may not think that is long, it is a lifetime in technology. If Apple want to "skip" a generation, that's fine; but not with me.
I also find it ironic that Steve Jobs in on the Blu-ray board!
Apple's not going to add HDMI (which mean licensing fees) when they have DisplayPort (license free) that has backwards compatibility with HDMI signaling.
As we move to higher resolution monitor DisplayPort becomes even more necessary to maintain higher refresh rates and bits per pixel displays.
no no no NO NO!
THIS GOES AGAINST EVERYTHING PEOPLE AROUND HERE HAVE BEEN SAYING.
LOL!!!
Now is it going to be HDMI 1.4 or are they only going to settle for 1.3? HDMI is fine with me, now release those 30" LED-Cinema Displays
Turning the Notebooks and Mac Minis into stealth Apple TV units to play iTunes content.
I'm kind of hoping ALL miniDPs can output video and sound one day through an adaptor (I have a '08 MacBook Pro), but this doesn't sound too hopeful from the article.
hasn't this already been possible? the cheapest PC's ship with HDMI
Ideally, the adapter was to accompany Apple's move to include Blu-ray drives in the high-end iMac (and offer them as build-to-order options on the rest of the line), allowing the all-in-one desktops to connect to big-screen HDTVs that would leverage their Blu-ray drives and high-def iTunes video content. But a near last-minute decision by Apple to scrap Blu-ray from the iMac line this past fall kept the adapter under wraps. It's therefore possible that it could still emerge as a solution that could accompany a future update to the company's notebook lines.
I love how folks just keep on with this "Apple was going to put blu-ray in their machines but changed their minds' schtick. Sorry but I don't see it. When Apple added 720p videos to the itunes store it was pretty clear they were trying to push past optical disks. and each new thing in the store adds to this. And then there's the SD card/Express card slot and growing work on bigger cards and even movies etc being sold on them. As soon as one company retails a handful of titles, blu-ray is going to be at high risk of dying fast.
They MIGHT add HDMI to the Mini cause there's a lot of blogs out there about using the little guy as the cornerstone of a home media center and that port would push that game in a good way (and potentially itunes video sales). They might add it to the mac pro as well since that machine is a fav of video content producers. But they are unlikely to ever put it on the notebooks and the imacs is a toss up right now.
but anything beyond data burning with an external blu-ray drive is fantasy land. sorry folks but that's the way Apple is going.
HDMI on a mac mini will bring ONE thing : HDCP video support for your tv , the ability to play hdcp crypted content on your tv (itunes store has some hdcp content)
I used a 1st gen mac mini with a DVI to HDMI cable before I got my apple tv. It worked fine playing itunes content. Am I misunderstanding you, because you can already play HDCP encrypted content with a mac mini. As others have stated DVI and HDMI are basically the same thing.
I used a 1st gen mac mini with a DVI to HDMI cable before I got my apple tv. It worked fine playing itunes content. Am I misunderstanding you, because you can already play HDCP encrypted content with a mac mini. As others have stated DVI and HDMI are basically the same thing.
I think you're right and that DVI has supported HDCP for years.
Like many have already stated, there is really no need for HDMI ports on iMac for instance.
Well, not a huge need, it's true. But in my case my iMac is my only computer, and it rests on my home office desk, against the wall that has my HDTV and home theater system at it's other side, in the living room. I just made a hole on the wall and passed a Mini-DVI-to-HDMI plus an optical TOSLINK cables through. Would be nice to be able to use only HDMI, or mDP-to-HDMI if it had support for sound.
I also have the issue some people mentioned of the screen not fitting perfectly. Since my Phillips HDTV doesn't save my settings, every time I turn it on or change the video source I have to go to the TV's video settings again and set it to "Native 1080P" to fix it. I'm not an expert, but maybe if the connection was HDMI-HDMI this wouldn't be necessary...
2) because all of your competitors offer the technology and not having said technology on your machines makes you look . . . decidedly "stick in the mud" from a competitive POV
You might be right, if it wasn't for Apple embracing and encouraging the post blu-ray/optical disk technology.
but I think there are MANY people who watch Blu-ray on a 1080P HDTV.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
I work in the industry and even when we are creating something at blu-ray quality, it is burned and taken to a viewing room to be tested, NOT just played back on a computer. Because that 50 inch screen, surround sound etc is how the end result is going to be view by you and the rest of Joe Q Public in 99% of cases.
It is MUCH better than a 720p download from iTunes. To get Blu-ray quality online...be prepared to wait for a day for that download. The speeds and bandwidth are not there yet.
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Blu-ray discs are NOT twice the price ($40???). Please get your facts right. There are many that I have bought for $20 (yes, new titles - the same price as the DVD option).
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
I also find it ironic that Steve Jobs in on the Blu-ray board!
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
What? More so then flickering, yellow 27" iMac screens?
Yes, because it would have been standard, rather than sporadic issues caused by varying factors experienced by a tiny percentage of users.
hasn't this already been possible? the cheapest PC's ship with HDMI
You're missing the poster's point - he is hoping that the the mini display port would in future be able to carry sound and video feed down one cable. Something which is not currently possible.
I've yet to buy a cheap wintel machine with HDMI - where are you looking?
Here's hoping that the expected refresh can take place by June (sticking to the 8-9 month refresh cycle from Oct 2009) . I'd be more than interested in buying it as I'm saving up now!
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better. The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner. Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
Have you looked at the average streamed content off NetFlix? the quality stinks, HD is lower than DVD, more like VHS. If you want to stream that crap then more power to you. But I should have the option of higher quality and that is Blu-ray. In bulk you can buy 25GB blanks for under $3.00 each and that price is coming down. For the Video/Audiophile Blu-ray is it for a long time to come.
BluRay, like Flash, is just a placeholder, while better things develop.
You might be right, if it wasn't for Apple embracing and encouraging the post blu-ray/optical disk technology.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
I work in the industry and even when we are creating something at blu-ray quality, it is burned and taken to a viewing room to be tested, NOT just played back on a computer. Because that 50 inch screen, surround sound etc is how the end result is going to be view by you and the rest of Joe Q Public in 99% of cases.
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
Then why can you get a $700.00 PC with a Blu-ray drive? All Apple does is rip off it's brain dead customers that shell out $1,500 or more for a computer that is no more powerful than a $700.00 PC. And if Apple is having trouble with software it's Apple because quick time is the software.
Yes and how many of those people actually want to watch blu-ray movies on their much smaller computer.
Probably not as many as you think
Well, I would think I am not in the minority. Sony, Toshiba, Dell and pretty much EVERY other manufacturer offers the option (and let me stress...make it an option). Is it only Apple that sees differently? Even if there were an alternative (which there is not today), it would take at least 3 years to get where Blu-ray is now.
You are correct about this. However, for all we know, Apple is leading the drive to create new codecs and compressions to have 1080p files that aren't 6 times the size of a 720.
Yes, they may be doing that! Here is hoping!! But as I need something today (or in the very near future). It is not much good to me in 2 or even 3 years time. That for me, would also mean...bring in HDMI. Apple is awesome at making things simple...one wire for audio and visual fits that bill, right?
Except we're talking about blanks, not pressed commercial titles etc
And while you can find some cheap Blu-ray blanks, they are often no name companies etc. When you are backing up data most folks will want some level of guaranteed reliability and that means way more per GB than a hard drive.
Ahhh, okay. I still want to burn Blu-ray though. Data backup is one reason, but home videos is what I am after. I want to burn the native AVCHD file, because Apple converts (ProRes) and you lose a little quality. I don't want to spend $1k on FCP, because it is way too much for me (financially and feature needs).
More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'
Massive conflict of interest, perhaps? I think SJ knows Blu-ray is here to stay (5 years or so), but that does not fit his "iStore" business model. He is on the fence.
You need to look at what's going on around you, right in front of your face. Blockbuster is circling the drain. Hollywood Video has already assumed room temperature. Netflix is in the process of moving to online content delivery. iTunes is already there.
How much evidence does it take to get the picture? Physical media is on the way out and the trend is accelerating. Blu-ray is completely useless as a data storage or backup media when blank discs are expensive and one can buy a 1TB hard drive for under a hundred bucks. Online content delivery is "good enough" and getting better. The Blu-ray titles are twice as expensive as standard DVD. Walk into any video rental store, or Walmart and take a look at the Blu-ray section squirreled away n the corner. Blu-ray is a technology whose time has already come and gone. It's legacy will be as a transitional technology. Why people can't see that is a mystery to me.
So why should Apple waste its time and expense on a technology that is on the way out, just like the floppy disk drive was when the iMac was introduced?
if you are smart you would back-up that 1TB drive so now you have $200.00. with content that is locked into your home or iPod.