It's funny you should say that. I bought a Sony BD player w/wifi about a year ago since I have a 52-inch TV and thought that it would be a good investment.
Since then, I have watched exactly one BD movie
The worst use of $250 that I can (recently) recall. \
The only person you can blame for this is yourself.
Who's interested in licensing and supporting a dying format? B-Ray has just a few years of life left. Microsoft loves getting itself tied into losing technologies and then claiming to be smart...
Because that's a lot less hassle than sliding in a disc. Any excuse to not admit your'e on the losing side for once.
I'l bet if you surveyed a random sample of Mac owners, not the fanatics on the boards here, and asked them did the want BR the majority would say yes. I'd say 99% of the Mac Mini crowd would immediately.
Just admit Lord Jobs is stroking you cos he cant extract enough blood from your wallet through Blu_ray and move on.
BTW, I'm a Mac user, who bought a PS3 just to play Blu-Rays.
I have a PS3... and don't need Blu-ray on my macs... but here is how it always goes:
Wife: "I want to watch a movie on my MacBook"
Me: "We only have it on Blu-ray"
Wife: "That's dumb. Why doesn't my Mac play Blu-ray"
Me: "Because Apple wants us to download movies"
Wife "Don't we get charged $5 per gig for downloads?"
Me "Yes, and that's why we don't download movies"
So... for those in the land of mega-super-zinga free bandwidth - I envy you. There are lots of that would have preferred Apple spend another $8 and put a Blu-ray drive in...
Blu-ray's look beautiful but there's no reason in today's networked world to print movies on to optical disc for distribution.
Apple is just trying to stay on the leading edge, and not waste resources on something that's not going to be around much longer.
If you live in that world, yes. I live in a networked world where my internet comes from a joint-venture WiMax project, I get 1mb down, sometimes, and pay $5 per GB.
10GB for a 'rental' movie costs me $50. Great deal.
Who's interested in licensing and supporting a dying format? B-Ray has just a few years of life left.
I disagree with this point, unless you are regulating it to the consumer PC market where it still hasn?t hasn?t taken off after many years. If you mean that, in general, Blu-ray will start to decrease I think this is incorrect as it does offer the best audio and visual experience for your HDTV.
Of course, digital streaming and downloads will still accelerate at break neck speeds but Blu-ray should also continue to grow for many years, thus it?s not dying or obsolescing at this point.
Quote:
Microsoft loves getting itself tied into losing technologies and then claiming to be smart...
This is something that has been overlooked in this thread. They do have a long history of backing the wrong horse which has lead to their stagnation in many areas of business. Granted, Windows 7 is the best version of Windows they?ve made, and Windows Phone 7 is a MS I?d like to see more of, but in backing a technology they tend to be to late to the rodeo.
Last thing, then I will stop. ;-) If history is any measure of what happens, then DVDs/Blu-Ray will go the way of the Dodo, in favor of Downloadable Content; just like it was for the CD.
No one is denying this, everyone knows this, it just isn't going to happen for several years. The infrastructure is missing to enable HD downloads (not the overly compressed Apple stuff) to be download, I have a 16Mb internet connect, I can't even watch the HD movie previews on my Apple TV without it pausing three times to catch up
But for the first several years that I had the high end capability, there were several issues with Blu-ray that were obstacles to my participation:
(1) Blu-ray players were relatively expensive, as were the disks,
(2) it was unclear how the format wars would turn out, and
(3) there was very little content available in that format, etc.
I got into Blu-ray during the format wars, a PS3 was an ok price, the discs were cheap as they were doing 2 for 1 deals a lot, and there was a good selection to choose from.
Now I only got mine in June 2007, so maybe things were different before then...
I doubt that Apple makes its marketing decisions based on petulance, in spite of how it may feel to someone who really really wants a capability that they aren't providing. And I don't think it's necessarily all about the money either (certainly that is a factor). I think that they consider engineering trade-offs and all kinds of other things that never come to light. I'm not trying to be an Apple apologist here. I'm just saying that I think your perspective is influenced by our lack of insight into the Apple decision process as well as your strong desire for BlueRay.
Thompson
I seem to recall there being an issue with the need to open up certain parts of the OS for HDCP to be implemented, not to mention the physical hardware required for Mac's to be HDCP compliant. Fair enough on Apple's part, I believe.
To be honest I've never felt the need to watch blu-ray via a computer. PS3 and big screen all the way.
A quick google search will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the difference between 720p and 1080p is really only tangible on displays larger than 48".
Since there are no 50" iMacs, I'd say Apple made the right choice and stayed clear of the "bag of hurt" that is blu-ray.
The minority that chooses to buy 60" TV's can buy themselves a blu-ray player and spend retarded amounts on media.
For the rest of us, we'll continue to enjoy our content the convenient way... without the need for physical media that scratches, breaks, get's left at home, etc. To say nothing of cost.
There is an old saying, don't believe everything you read. You don't need a screen that large to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can tell easily on my 40" TV, I can tell the difference on my 24" iMac
I have an external Bluray player on my Mac. It works fine. Last I knew Microsoft doesn't make any Blu-ray drives either. They don't even have support on their Xbox citing similar reasons to Apple.
Another ridiculous post from the ill informed and misguided - Wow! BR was $500 million in sales last year! Sorry fool but that makes it a minor player in the grand scheme of things. BR is a single feature and is in no way a reason to buy or not buy a particular brand of laptop. BTW, do you even realize that MSFT DOES NOT MAKE computers and therefore has no control over wether or not one comes with BR functionality? DUH! Further, on a laptop screen, the video quality difference is negligible, especially realizing that Macs typically have higher res screens than most laptops in use today. Another big DUH at you...
According to this link, they have bone a billion ytd
There is an old saying, don't believe everything you read. You don't need a screen that large to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can tell easily on my 40" TV, I can tell the difference on my 24" iMac
That depends on how close to the TV you are. You can't see the pixels on an iPhone 4 either until you are less then 12 inches from the screen.
This commercial's really clever, but until we start seeing HD screens on laptops I don't see why Blu Ray is needed. I haven't thought twice about it.
And the same silly argument yet again.
So I have a hundred of so BDs (I watch them on my PS3) and virtually no DVDs. I want to watch a movie on my laptop when I go away somewhere but own no BD drive for my PC to ripp/re-encode my BDs.
My options are:
a) Play the BDs on a PC laptop with a BD drive
b) Buy a BD drive for my PC, ripp my movies, then re-encode them to a lower quality as 50gb ripps are rather large.
c) Re-buy my films from Apple in 480p, or rent them in 720p. (no HD purchases here in the UK with Apple) That is of course, assuming iTunes has the content I want, which they often don't.
I'm thinking option A is the path of least resistance.
Again, you started talking without engaging your brain.
He claimed he stores 12 Blu-ray movies on his iPad, if you assume an average 35Gb for a blu-ray movie, that would 420Gb, I wasn't aware that Apple sold a iPad with this capacity.
Now if they were trying to be funny, and they were blu-ray rips converted down, then they would no longer be blu-rays would they...
I'm not a particularly active BD buyer (I rent discs usually), but I still have around 100 BDs and am down to about 2 or 3 DVDs. So for me, BD is the format my content lives on, which is why I want a BD player in as many devices as possible.
I would say 100 Bluray discs makes you an active buyer.
Comments
It's funny you should say that. I bought a Sony BD player w/wifi about a year ago since I have a 52-inch TV and thought that it would be a good investment.
Since then, I have watched exactly one BD movie
The worst use of $250 that I can (recently) recall.
The only person you can blame for this is yourself.
Apple is just trying to stay on the leading edge, and not waste resources on something that's not going to be around much longer.
Because that's a lot less hassle than sliding in a disc. Any excuse to not admit your'e on the losing side for once.
I'l bet if you surveyed a random sample of Mac owners, not the fanatics on the boards here, and asked them did the want BR the majority would say yes. I'd say 99% of the Mac Mini crowd would immediately.
Just admit Lord Jobs is stroking you cos he cant extract enough blood from your wallet through Blu_ray and move on.
BTW, I'm a Mac user, who bought a PS3 just to play Blu-Rays.
I have a PS3... and don't need Blu-ray on my macs... but here is how it always goes:
Wife: "I want to watch a movie on my MacBook"
Me: "We only have it on Blu-ray"
Wife: "That's dumb. Why doesn't my Mac play Blu-ray"
Me: "Because Apple wants us to download movies"
Wife "Don't we get charged $5 per gig for downloads?"
Me "Yes, and that's why we don't download movies"
So... for those in the land of mega-super-zinga free bandwidth - I envy you. There are lots of that would have preferred Apple spend another $8 and put a Blu-ray drive in...
Will the three people who use Blu-Ray please raise their hands?
I think you are trying to make a joke, but it is a bit higher than three...
http://www.dvdinformation.com/pressr...USf_Q32010.pdf
Blu-ray's look beautiful but there's no reason in today's networked world to print movies on to optical disc for distribution.
Apple is just trying to stay on the leading edge, and not waste resources on something that's not going to be around much longer.
If you live in that world, yes. I live in a networked world where my internet comes from a joint-venture WiMax project, I get 1mb down, sometimes, and pay $5 per GB.
10GB for a 'rental' movie costs me $50. Great deal.
Who's interested in licensing and supporting a dying format? B-Ray has just a few years of life left.
I disagree with this point, unless you are regulating it to the consumer PC market where it still hasn?t hasn?t taken off after many years. If you mean that, in general, Blu-ray will start to decrease I think this is incorrect as it does offer the best audio and visual experience for your HDTV.
Of course, digital streaming and downloads will still accelerate at break neck speeds but Blu-ray should also continue to grow for many years, thus it?s not dying or obsolescing at this point.
Microsoft loves getting itself tied into losing technologies and then claiming to be smart...
This is something that has been overlooked in this thread. They do have a long history of backing the wrong horse which has lead to their stagnation in many areas of business. Granted, Windows 7 is the best version of Windows they?ve made, and Windows Phone 7 is a MS I?d like to see more of, but in backing a technology they tend to be to late to the rodeo.
Last thing, then I will stop. ;-) If history is any measure of what happens, then DVDs/Blu-Ray will go the way of the Dodo, in favor of Downloadable Content; just like it was for the CD.
No one is denying this, everyone knows this, it just isn't going to happen for several years. The infrastructure is missing to enable HD downloads (not the overly compressed Apple stuff) to be download, I have a 16Mb internet connect, I can't even watch the HD movie previews on my Apple TV without it pausing three times to catch up
But for the first several years that I had the high end capability, there were several issues with Blu-ray that were obstacles to my participation:
(1) Blu-ray players were relatively expensive, as were the disks,
(2) it was unclear how the format wars would turn out, and
(3) there was very little content available in that format, etc.
I got into Blu-ray during the format wars, a PS3 was an ok price, the discs were cheap as they were doing 2 for 1 deals a lot, and there was a good selection to choose from.
Now I only got mine in June 2007, so maybe things were different before then...
I doubt that Apple makes its marketing decisions based on petulance, in spite of how it may feel to someone who really really wants a capability that they aren't providing. And I don't think it's necessarily all about the money either (certainly that is a factor). I think that they consider engineering trade-offs and all kinds of other things that never come to light. I'm not trying to be an Apple apologist here. I'm just saying that I think your perspective is influenced by our lack of insight into the Apple decision process as well as your strong desire for BlueRay.
Thompson
I seem to recall there being an issue with the need to open up certain parts of the OS for HDCP to be implemented, not to mention the physical hardware required for Mac's to be HDCP compliant. Fair enough on Apple's part, I believe.
To be honest I've never felt the need to watch blu-ray via a computer. PS3 and big screen all the way.
A quick google search will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the difference between 720p and 1080p is really only tangible on displays larger than 48".
Since there are no 50" iMacs, I'd say Apple made the right choice and stayed clear of the "bag of hurt" that is blu-ray.
The minority that chooses to buy 60" TV's can buy themselves a blu-ray player and spend retarded amounts on media.
For the rest of us, we'll continue to enjoy our content the convenient way... without the need for physical media that scratches, breaks, get's left at home, etc. To say nothing of cost.
There is an old saying, don't believe everything you read. You don't need a screen that large to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can tell easily on my 40" TV, I can tell the difference on my 24" iMac
Another ridiculous post from the ill informed and misguided - Wow! BR was $500 million in sales last year! Sorry fool but that makes it a minor player in the grand scheme of things. BR is a single feature and is in no way a reason to buy or not buy a particular brand of laptop. BTW, do you even realize that MSFT DOES NOT MAKE computers and therefore has no control over wether or not one comes with BR functionality? DUH! Further, on a laptop screen, the video quality difference is negligible, especially realizing that Macs typically have higher res screens than most laptops in use today. Another big DUH at you...
According to this link, they have bone a billion ytd
http://www.dvdinformation.com/pressr...USf_Q32010.pdf
There is an old saying, don't believe everything you read. You don't need a screen that large to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, I can tell easily on my 40" TV, I can tell the difference on my 24" iMac
That depends on how close to the TV you are. You can't see the pixels on an iPhone 4 either until you are less then 12 inches from the screen.
This commercial's really clever, but until we start seeing HD screens on laptops I don't see why Blu Ray is needed. I haven't thought twice about it.
And the same silly argument yet again.
So I have a hundred of so BDs (I watch them on my PS3) and virtually no DVDs. I want to watch a movie on my laptop when I go away somewhere but own no BD drive for my PC to ripp/re-encode my BDs.
My options are:
a) Play the BDs on a PC laptop with a BD drive
b) Buy a BD drive for my PC, ripp my movies, then re-encode them to a lower quality as 50gb ripps are rather large.
c) Re-buy my films from Apple in 480p, or rent them in 720p. (no HD purchases here in the UK with Apple) That is of course, assuming iTunes has the content I want, which they often don't.
I'm thinking option A is the path of least resistance.
That makes perfect sense¡
Again, you started talking without engaging your brain.
He claimed he stores 12 Blu-ray movies on his iPad, if you assume an average 35Gb for a blu-ray movie, that would 420Gb, I wasn't aware that Apple sold a iPad with this capacity.
Now if they were trying to be funny, and they were blu-ray rips converted down, then they would no longer be blu-rays would they...
I'm not a particularly active BD buyer (I rent discs usually), but I still have around 100 BDs and am down to about 2 or 3 DVDs. So for me, BD is the format my content lives on, which is why I want a BD player in as many devices as possible.
I would say 100 Bluray discs makes you an active buyer.
Blu-ray's look beautiful but there's no reason in today's networked world to print movies on to optical disc for distribution.
Apple is just trying to stay on the leading edge, and not waste resources on something that's not going to be around much longer.
Maybe in your world everything is networked, but the actual world that we actually live in, isn't as networked as you think it is.
Blu-ray's look beautiful but there's no reason in today's networked world to print movies on to optical disc for distribution.
Apple is just trying to stay on the leading edge, and not waste resources on something that's not going to be around much longer.
5mbit 720p with lossy audio is 'leading edge'. Seriously?
Try watching Avatar on BD on a good home cinema set-up. Then compare to the download option. You will see a world of difference.