Michael Moore delivered a DVD without copy protection I believe. However Sony being the DRM loving fiends that they are require Blu-ray discs all have copy protection.
Sony is a small part of the Blu-ray association, there are many other companies involved, a lot of them had the requirement of forcing DRM.
Why single Sony out. While we are at it, why does Apple force DRM on iOS applications? Why do Apple force DRM on audio books (even though Audible are happy for some not to have it)?
And even? even going past ALL of that, it STILL doesn't address the lack of cable/satellite support.
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
Interesting point, and I agree with you, but there's still a fundamental difference in what radio represents in comparison to cable/satellite and DVD libraries.
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
Wow. This nonsense is still going on.
An FM tuner is simply a bonus on an MP3 player.
A Tuner on a TV is fundamental element of being a TV.
A TV without a tuner, is like a car without wheels.
It is sheer nonsense to suggest anyone (let alone Apple) would sell a "TV" without inputs or tuners.
There will have to be a big premium if they hope to make money because the TV business has turned into a cutthroat no margin commodity business. Sony and Panasonic have lost Billions selling TVs.
Only the bare panel makers like LG/Samsung seem to be making any money.
Since Apple doesn't make panels they will be more like Sony if they decided to get into this market.
No, if they plan to enter the TV market in a way other than the current Apple TV product is part of it, and they hope to make money, there will have to be a redefinition of the market. If you can't win a game playing the same strategy as the current players (because that strategy insures no winner), you have to come up with a different strategy.
Except they are talking about not having inputs either. No tuner, no inputs for an Xbox/PS3/Blu Ray player.
Is a satellite radio receiver still a radio? I'd say yes.
It's not the broadcasting technology involved that makes it a TV, it's the programming. If Apple can make a TV with all the programming, without a tuner, it's still a TV.
But it should damn well have some way to connect peripheral devices, like media players and game consoles.
Is a satellite radio receiver still a radio? I'd say yes.
It's not the broadcasting technology involved that makes it a TV, it's the programming. If Apple can make a TV with all the programming, without a tuner, it's still a TV.
But it should damn well have some way to connect peripheral devices, like media players and game consoles.
Just as you say it damn well better have input connections, most people would say it damn well better have tuners as well.
Even without those silly limitations, Apple isn't likely to get into the TV business.
There is no business case for it.
People are simply taking rumors for granted and assuming some kind of new magical TV, with a new magical business case.
Sony is a small part of the Blu-ray association, there are many other companies involved, a lot of them had the requirement of forcing DRM.
Why single Sony out. While we are at it, why does Apple force DRM on iOS applications? Why do Apple force DRM on audio books (even though Audible are happy for some not to have it)?
No Sony is the lead company behind Blu-ray
The disc - Sony created
BD+ - Sony created
The first BD player - Sony .
They led the format charge and like many Sony products hobbled it with DRM. I cannot blame others for the DRM as Sony is really the company pushing the BDA forward/backward depending on who you ask. The problem with mandatory DRM is that companies have to pay for the license which means higher costs. Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
They led the format charge and like many Sony products hobbled it with DRM. I cannot blame others for the DRM as Sony is really the company pushing the BDA forward/backward depending on who you ask. The problem with mandatory DRM is that companies have to pay for the license which means higher costs. Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
Maybe you should have a look at the technology behind Blu-ray, then look at who developed it, Sony is one player, there are others that have supplied a lot more, think Pioneer, think Panasonic.
You are being ignorant to continue with the Sony is Blu-ray theory,
BD+ was created by Cryptography Research, and pushed for by Fox
AACS was created by a bunch of companies (Yes Sony was one of them, but so was Disney)
HDCP was an Intel technology
The disc, that would be Sony and Philips.
The first player? Someone had to be first, and Pioneer wasn't far behind them
The video formats? Nope, Sony didn't push that either.
And Steve was wrong about his comment, the reason he said it was because they want to push forward with iTunes video sales, that was the only reason. And for some reason you are happy for Apple to push for their future, but not others? Apple sits there, pushes DRM on videos, on audiobooks, and on apps, but they don't seem to be trying to get rid of any of them, why is that?
Why does the mic have to be (only) on the TV? How about a remote with one 'Siri' button and a mic? Or control through the iPhone/iPad 'Remote' app (together with AirPlay)
Already done...the current AppleTV interface can be run through an iPodTouch/iPad/iPhone App.
Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
I have invested in Blue Ray, too (a Player + capable projector). Frankly, I think that the drawbacks are greater than the advantages (which explains I still buy "normal" DVDs, in addition to a very few number of Blue rays, but which represent less than 2% of my library).
The image quality is higher, admittedly, but this is only meaningful if you project on a very large screen, and good quality DVD players can significatively enhance the normal DVD image quality.
In addition to the cost of a blue Ray, you have to wait for an incomprehensible and unacceptable long time (several minutes) before the Blue Ray consents to start.
Steve was right on that point also, and anyway, talking about computers, because of the size screen, there is absolutely no benefit of having Blue Ray capability. The PC manufacturers campaign trying to mock this "Mac shortcoming" has not been successful, as far as I know.
As always with Apple, facts about what Apple decides NOT to do, is even more significant than what it decides to do.
I have invested in Blue Ray, too (a Player + capable projector). Frankly, I think that the drawbacks are greater than the advantages (which explains I still buy "normal" DVDs, in addition to a very few number of Blue rays, but which represent less than 2% of my library).
The image quality is higher, admittedly, but this is only meaningful if you project on a very large screen, and good quality DVD players can significatively enhance the normal DVD image quality.
Maybe you should purchase better quality equipment. It is easy to tell the difference between DVDs and Blu-rays on small TVs, a 26" TV from a distance still displays a nicer image with Blu-ray than DVD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by umrk_lab
In addition to the cost of a blue Ray, you have to wait for an incomprehensible and unacceptable long time (several minutes) before the Blue Ray consents to start.
The cost of blu-ray? Is everything else free? Everything has a cost. And several minutes for startup? What equipment are you running? Do you still have a 2006 player? Neither my Panasonic blu-ray player, nor my PS3s take "several minutes" to start a play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by umrk_lab
Steve was right on that point also, and anyway, talking about computers, because of the size screen, there is absolutely no benefit of having Blue Ray capability. The PC manufacturers campaign trying to mock this "Mac shortcoming" has not been successful, as far as I know.
Steve was not right, it was his opinion based on the Apples direction. And size of the screen? If there is no benefit in having a better quality image on these high res screens, why have them? Why don't we still run 512x384 monitors? After all the image quality doesn't matter
Panasonic DMP BD35 (4 stars out of five on Amazon)
I have the same player, It was recommended by a trusted, and professional audio-visual dealer as being a very good player. He also explained that Blu-rays players at the time (2008) were dreadfully slow at loading the blu-ray discs. I don't know if the load times have improved but you could make eggo's in the toaster before it is ready to play. He said that they should get better as the tech advances but that this is where it was at that time. I will not be buying another since I can easily satisfy our appetite for HD content through TV rentals. And before someone starts arguing the difference in the quality of HD, it is obvious that blu-ray is better. It is just not worth the hassle or expense to go the 10 miles each way to the movie rental store, or to pay the high price for ownership at walmart (15miles away BTW) for the media.
itunes rental $4-5 and it plays in 5 seconds
movie store Rentals = $3 +gas $3
own the media $20 or more + gas $5
It is just so much fucking faster and simpler. NO QUESTION ABOUT IT !!!
Comments
It's not illegal to rip a DVD or BR disc if you own the disc.
Yeah. It is. It's illegal to circumvent disc DRM.
It's NOT illegal to have a backup copy of media you own. You're confusing this with that.
And because you'll probably say "then I don't need Siri," just try to type out a intelligent find command…
My response to that is contained in an earlier portion of your post:
iOS device.
It becomes uncomplicated immediately upon the inclusion of a touchscreen and dynamic interface.
Yeah, TVs today suck. A non-hobby Apple TV would remove the desire to ever use any software but its own with your TV.
Michael Moore delivered a DVD without copy protection I believe. However Sony being the DRM loving fiends that they are require Blu-ray discs all have copy protection.
Sony is a small part of the Blu-ray association, there are many other companies involved, a lot of them had the requirement of forcing DRM.
Why single Sony out. While we are at it, why does Apple force DRM on iOS applications? Why do Apple force DRM on audio books (even though Audible are happy for some not to have it)?
Sony is a small part of the Blu-ray association, there are many other companies involved, a lot of them had the requirement of forcing DRM.
Why single Sony out.
I actually don't think it's Sony's fault at all. It's the content companies that enable the DRM on Blu-ray disks they publish.
And even? even going past ALL of that, it STILL doesn't address the lack of cable/satellite support.
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
That's a bad sign.
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
Interesting point, and I agree with you, but there's still a fundamental difference in what radio represents in comparison to cable/satellite and DVD libraries.
One last comment (promised) on this : as you noted, there is no FM tuner on iPods (which is something Apple could have easily implemented). This did not prevent it from being a huge success...
Wow. This nonsense is still going on.
An FM tuner is simply a bonus on an MP3 player.
A Tuner on a TV is fundamental element of being a TV.
A TV without a tuner, is like a car without wheels.
It is sheer nonsense to suggest anyone (let alone Apple) would sell a "TV" without inputs or tuners.
There will have to be a big premium if they hope to make money because the TV business has turned into a cutthroat no margin commodity business. Sony and Panasonic have lost Billions selling TVs.
Only the bare panel makers like LG/Samsung seem to be making any money.
Since Apple doesn't make panels they will be more like Sony if they decided to get into this market.
No, if they plan to enter the TV market in a way other than the current Apple TV product is part of it, and they hope to make money, there will have to be a redefinition of the market. If you can't win a game playing the same strategy as the current players (because that strategy insures no winner), you have to come up with a different strategy.
Wow. This nonsense is still going on.
An FM tuner is simply a bonus on an MP3 player.
A Tuner on a TV is fundamental element of being a TV.
A TV without a tuner, is like a car without wheels.
It is sheer nonsense to suggest anyone (let alone Apple) would sell a "TV" without inputs or tuners.
Actually, a TV without a tuner is just a computer monitor.
Actually, a TV without a tuner is just a computer monitor.
Except they are talking about not having inputs either. No tuner, no inputs for an Xbox/PS3/Blu Ray player.
Except they are talking about not having inputs either. No tuner, no inputs for an Xbox/PS3/Blu Ray player.
Is a satellite radio receiver still a radio? I'd say yes.
It's not the broadcasting technology involved that makes it a TV, it's the programming. If Apple can make a TV with all the programming, without a tuner, it's still a TV.
But it should damn well have some way to connect peripheral devices, like media players and game consoles.
I actually don't think it's Sony's fault at all. It's the content companies that enable the DRM on Blu-ray disks they publish.
Sony being one of those content companies that is most heinous about forcing DRM.
Is a satellite radio receiver still a radio? I'd say yes.
It's not the broadcasting technology involved that makes it a TV, it's the programming. If Apple can make a TV with all the programming, without a tuner, it's still a TV.
But it should damn well have some way to connect peripheral devices, like media players and game consoles.
Just as you say it damn well better have input connections, most people would say it damn well better have tuners as well.
Even without those silly limitations, Apple isn't likely to get into the TV business.
There is no business case for it.
People are simply taking rumors for granted and assuming some kind of new magical TV, with a new magical business case.
Sony is a small part of the Blu-ray association, there are many other companies involved, a lot of them had the requirement of forcing DRM.
Why single Sony out. While we are at it, why does Apple force DRM on iOS applications? Why do Apple force DRM on audio books (even though Audible are happy for some not to have it)?
No Sony is the lead company behind Blu-ray
The disc - Sony created
BD+ - Sony created
The first BD player - Sony .
They led the format charge and like many Sony products hobbled it with DRM. I cannot blame others for the DRM as Sony is really the company pushing the BDA forward/backward depending on who you ask. The problem with mandatory DRM is that companies have to pay for the license which means higher costs. Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
No Sony is the lead company behind Blu-ray
The disc - Sony created
BD+ - Sony created
The first BD player - Sony .
They led the format charge and like many Sony products hobbled it with DRM. I cannot blame others for the DRM as Sony is really the company pushing the BDA forward/backward depending on who you ask. The problem with mandatory DRM is that companies have to pay for the license which means higher costs. Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
Maybe you should have a look at the technology behind Blu-ray, then look at who developed it, Sony is one player, there are others that have supplied a lot more, think Pioneer, think Panasonic.
You are being ignorant to continue with the Sony is Blu-ray theory,
BD+ was created by Cryptography Research, and pushed for by Fox
AACS was created by a bunch of companies (Yes Sony was one of them, but so was Disney)
HDCP was an Intel technology
The disc, that would be Sony and Philips.
The first player? Someone had to be first, and Pioneer wasn't far behind them
The video formats? Nope, Sony didn't push that either.
And Steve was wrong about his comment, the reason he said it was because they want to push forward with iTunes video sales, that was the only reason. And for some reason you are happy for Apple to push for their future, but not others? Apple sits there, pushes DRM on videos, on audiobooks, and on apps, but they don't seem to be trying to get rid of any of them, why is that?
Why does the mic have to be (only) on the TV? How about a remote with one 'Siri' button and a mic? Or control through the iPhone/iPad 'Remote' app (together with AirPlay)
Already done...the current AppleTV interface can be run through an iPodTouch/iPad/iPhone App.
Hence the "Bag of hurt" commentary from the late Steve Jobs.
I have invested in Blue Ray, too (a Player + capable projector). Frankly, I think that the drawbacks are greater than the advantages (which explains I still buy "normal" DVDs, in addition to a very few number of Blue rays, but which represent less than 2% of my library).
The image quality is higher, admittedly, but this is only meaningful if you project on a very large screen, and good quality DVD players can significatively enhance the normal DVD image quality.
In addition to the cost of a blue Ray, you have to wait for an incomprehensible and unacceptable long time (several minutes) before the Blue Ray consents to start.
Steve was right on that point also, and anyway, talking about computers, because of the size screen, there is absolutely no benefit of having Blue Ray capability. The PC manufacturers campaign trying to mock this "Mac shortcoming" has not been successful, as far as I know.
As always with Apple, facts about what Apple decides NOT to do, is even more significant than what it decides to do.
I have invested in Blue Ray, too (a Player + capable projector). Frankly, I think that the drawbacks are greater than the advantages (which explains I still buy "normal" DVDs, in addition to a very few number of Blue rays, but which represent less than 2% of my library).
The image quality is higher, admittedly, but this is only meaningful if you project on a very large screen, and good quality DVD players can significatively enhance the normal DVD image quality.
Maybe you should purchase better quality equipment. It is easy to tell the difference between DVDs and Blu-rays on small TVs, a 26" TV from a distance still displays a nicer image with Blu-ray than DVD.
In addition to the cost of a blue Ray, you have to wait for an incomprehensible and unacceptable long time (several minutes) before the Blue Ray consents to start.
The cost of blu-ray? Is everything else free? Everything has a cost. And several minutes for startup? What equipment are you running? Do you still have a 2006 player? Neither my Panasonic blu-ray player, nor my PS3s take "several minutes" to start a play.
Steve was right on that point also, and anyway, talking about computers, because of the size screen, there is absolutely no benefit of having Blue Ray capability. The PC manufacturers campaign trying to mock this "Mac shortcoming" has not been successful, as far as I know.
Steve was not right, it was his opinion based on the Apples direction. And size of the screen? If there is no benefit in having a better quality image on these high res screens, why have them? Why don't we still run 512x384 monitors? After all the image quality doesn't matter
What equipment are you running?
Panasonic DMP BD35 (4 stars out of five on Amazon)
Panasonic DMP BD35 (4 stars out of five on Amazon)
I have the same player, It was recommended by a trusted, and professional audio-visual dealer as being a very good player. He also explained that Blu-rays players at the time (2008) were dreadfully slow at loading the blu-ray discs. I don't know if the load times have improved but you could make eggo's in the toaster before it is ready to play. He said that they should get better as the tech advances but that this is where it was at that time. I will not be buying another since I can easily satisfy our appetite for HD content through TV rentals. And before someone starts arguing the difference in the quality of HD, it is obvious that blu-ray is better. It is just not worth the hassle or expense to go the 10 miles each way to the movie rental store, or to pay the high price for ownership at walmart (15miles away BTW) for the media.
itunes rental $4-5 and it plays in 5 seconds
movie store Rentals = $3 +gas $3
own the media $20 or more + gas $5
It is just so much fucking faster and simpler. NO QUESTION ABOUT IT !!!