Reality check - BR is a niche technology. Most people could care less about it, and that won't change any time soon. I would rather see Apple focus their limited resources on technology that has a greater benefit. If you really want to watch a BR movie, pick up a PS3....
I have to agree. Blu Ray, although it is now the new favorite for studios and retailers, is far from being a technology in high demand with consumers.
The plain vanilla DVD will continue to live for many years. The only thing that will kill the DVD will be massive price cutting on BD media and systems.
All I can say about that, is what we already know.
Apple will put the cheapest gpu they think will meet the minimum specs they think they can get away with.
Exactly how they make the decision is one I would love to know. It must be based on some rational (to them!) reasoning. Perhaps it's based on what programs that Apple themselves make that they expect to be used on those machines. Whatever maximum needs those programs have is whay they will use, always opting for the cheaper solution that JUST squeeks through, rather than to opt for the one above?just in case.
They don't seem to consider third party software, just their own.
If they had a game that required a better gpu, they would put it in, otherwise, no.
Sad, really.
Whats really sad is a ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB in a $2700 mac pro
The plain vanilla DVD will continue to live for many years. The only thing that will kill the DVD will be massive price cutting on BD media and systems.
Or studios only releasing new movies in Blu Ray.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
But, as I think Melgross is also saying, Apple needs a BD solution in/on the Mac Pro. Apple is heavily used by the content creation people and they should be able to have BD support NOW so that they can master all the BD movies. Not being able to do that hurts Apple in a key market.
Unfortunately Apple is showing little indication of wanting to support BD in it's ProApps, and is a long way off - development wise - from a workable solution, from what i have heard. Without this why would they put in any hardware support?
Quote:
If Apple wants to get ahead of the curve a bit, maybe they could have BD in consumer machines as an option in a refresh at MacWorld in September.
Perhaps some ppl at apple think they are getting ahead of the curve by jumping straight from dvd to downloads?
I'd like to see an LED display, an eSATA port, more RAM capacity, a faster processor, and the choice of matte or glossy screen.
I'm with you. Although I love the glossy screen for general viewing (especially of video), it's a nightmare to work with for print output. My organization plans to buy upwards of 15 iMacs this summer, provided that they have matte screens. Be there, Apple.
I'm with you. Although I love the glossy screen for general viewing (especially of video), it's a nightmare to work with for print output. My organization plans to buy upwards of 15 iMacs this summer, provided that they have matte screens. Be there, Apple.
Well, for graphic intensive work, including photography, I like the glossy screen, if you have no back light reflections. The main issue is the inconsistent lighting across the entire screen with non-LED displays, which raises old Ned with accurate and consistent colors across the screen.
15 units is significant to someone like me, but, I doubt that it excites Apple when they look at sales numbers in 7 figures. I know that's not PC for an Apple afficianado to say, but they could get their act together to a higher degree, AFAIC. Current non LED displays just suck!
LEDs have been available in some displays for what, a year? And everything else sucks?
Please don't take my word for it, Apple's own website offers plenty of support for my comments, if you are into precise graphics or photography. Other people don't notice, so they think that there's no problem.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
Sony has said that in two years, players will hit the $200 (list), price range. But, before then players will go on sale, as usual. The movies themselves are already selling for much less than they were a year ago.
Sales of the PS3 are also up significantly, and we know that many are used to play movies.
Even if Apple refuses to do this, and I think they will be forced to give in, many PC's will have them, and that's a far larger market than Macs.
What we will see happening, and it's begining now, is that the higher end DVD players are being replaced in manufacturers lines with BD players. That will continue to happen, moving down the line over the next few years, until only the very cheapest players will not have BD, and that will happen as well, once BD hits the under $75 mark.
It's inevitable. You can buy BD movies for less than $15 now, with most under $20. As many DVD movies are still above $20, for the deluxe packs, the prices will converge. It's just a matter of increasing sales.
BD has already sold several million more movies this year than all of last year. That trend will continue.
But we're also in a recession, so adoption will be slower than it could have been. Afterwards, we will see a "pop" as always happens.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
Not even in 2 years. Blu Ray discs are significantly more expensive than DVDs. The vast majority of consumers are price sensitive. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
That's my point. Don't release new titles in DVD format.
As it is DVD is perceived as the 'inferior' format. Consumers expect to pay less for it. Eventually they'll expect to pay next to nothing. I think the studios will move quickly to kill off DVDs as their won't be enough money in them to keep them around.
Not even in 2 years. Blu Ray discs are significantly more expensive than DVDs. The vast majority of consumers are price sensitive. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
I've already gone through this, twice.
They're not.
How do you think they sell BD now? Right next to the DVD racks, on a rack or two of their own, with the BD sign.
And, as I've already brought up, More BD movies have already been sold this year than all of last year, and I think, all the past years included.
And how many BD movies have sold compared to the run of the mill DVD? Odds are, not very many.
That doesn't matter.
How many DVD's sold the first year after they came out compared to VHS?
It's the trajectory that's important, not the actual numbers.
25% of US households now have hi rez screens. Those people (myself included) are migrating to hi rez sources. there are only two.
Broadcast from different companies, and BD. Downloads don't count just yet.
Of the two, BD gives a much better picture. no one argues that.
It's wrong to think that people who have just spent thousands on a large screen, and very possibly a few thousand more on surround sound, won't spend a few hundred more for BD, plus the movie disks.
People are forgetting that DVD was very expensive when it first came out, as was CD before that, and video tape before that.
In fact, all of those previous audio and video formats were much MORE expensive when they first came out, once inflation is taken into account.
Somehow, they were all successful.
It's possible that five years from now, when enough people have FIOS, or the equivalent speed service, we may get high quality video downloads. But, until then, BD will become, at least, fairly popular.
How many DVD's sold the first year after they came out compared to VHS?
It's the trajectory that's important, not the actual numbers.
25% of US households now have hi rez screens. Those people (myself included) are migrating to hi rez sources. there are only two.
Broadcast from different companies, and BD. Downloads don't count just yet.
Of the two, BD gives a much better picture. no one argues that.
It's wrong to think that people who have just spent thousands on a large screen, and very possibly a few thousand more on surround sound, won't spend a few hundred more for BD, plus the movie disks.
People are forgetting that DVD was very expensive when it first came out, as was CD before that, and video tape before that.
In fact, all of those previous audio and video formats were much MORE expensive when they first came out, once inflation is taken into account.
Somehow, they were all successful.
It's possible that five years from now, when enough people have FIOS, or the equivalent speed service, we may get high quality video downloads. But, until then, BD will become, at least, fairly popular.
I don't necessarily disagree with your statements Mel, but you're missing out on a big part of the calculation. The move from VHS to DVD did not require buying a new TV set. The move from DVD to Blu Ray basically does.
Granted, more people will be 'forced' into upgrading their sets thanks to our upcoming switchover to digital broadcast, but many, many more will keep their current sets and just buy a converter box... AND they'll stick with the cheaper format of DVD.
I give Blue Ray a minimum 5 year widespread adoption curve, much like DVD.
I don't necessarily disagree with your statements Mel, but you're missing out on a big part of the calculation. The move from VHS to DVD did not require buying a new TV set. The move from DVD to Blu Ray basically does.
Granted, more people will be 'forced' into upgrading their sets thanks to our upcoming switchover to digital broadcast, but many, many more will keep their current sets and just buy a converter box... AND they'll stick with the cheaper format of DVD.
I give Blue Ray a minimum 5 year widespread adoption curve, much like DVD.
Buying a new Tv set isn't the problem. It's the cause.
People were buying these new, big, hi def Tv's, not because of HD DVD or BD, but because of cable and satellite. Sports, sports, sports, movies, movies, movies.
The fact that 25% of US homes now has one, and that the uptake, even in this recession, is still increasing at a good clip, shows that the means to show a BD movie exists, and is increasing.
Sales of PS3's have been shown to be a good reason why BD movies are increasing in sales as more people buy them for the dual use. As the price of stand-alone players decreases, the movie sales will go even higher.
If Apple refuses to put a BD player, at least, in its machines, the ten and more times larger PC market will do so. And people DO watch movies on their computer. Don't forget that monitor sizes are getting larger as well. The 20" "standard" is giving way to the 22" And at least one manufacturer, though I forget which one, has now introduced a 22" with 1920 x 1080 (or 1200) rez. Can others be far behind?
The fact that sales of BD movies will increase several hundred percent over last year is also telling. And before you question the several hundred percent statement, remember that the more than twice last years sales already for BD movies, is a number that is about %125 -150% of all of last years sales. Those numbers were from the end of March! That's just 25% of the year.
No, BD will do very well.
What is the lifetime? I don't know, nor does anyone else. I would say that five years is a minimum of strong sales, perhaps reaching a peak about then, but having good sales extending for several years beyond that. The usual normal curve.
And that's all that can be expected these days.
We don't really know how the rollout of really fast broadband is going to be. That will decide the fate of all of these industries.
Comments
Trust me, it was the Firewire.
I have the SanDisk cards and reader. It is fast. But it's not a valid comparison. The cards themselves are much slower than HDDs are.
Blind trust, I don't think so. Show me some empirical evidence. It's easy to say that FW causes drive failure, convince me.
Reality check - BR is a niche technology. Most people could care less about it, and that won't change any time soon. I would rather see Apple focus their limited resources on technology that has a greater benefit. If you really want to watch a BR movie, pick up a PS3....
I have to agree. Blu Ray, although it is now the new favorite for studios and retailers, is far from being a technology in high demand with consumers.
The plain vanilla DVD will continue to live for many years. The only thing that will kill the DVD will be massive price cutting on BD media and systems.
All I can say about that, is what we already know.
Apple will put the cheapest gpu they think will meet the minimum specs they think they can get away with.
Exactly how they make the decision is one I would love to know. It must be based on some rational (to them!) reasoning. Perhaps it's based on what programs that Apple themselves make that they expect to be used on those machines. Whatever maximum needs those programs have is whay they will use, always opting for the cheaper solution that JUST squeeks through, rather than to opt for the one above?just in case.
They don't seem to consider third party software, just their own.
If they had a game that required a better gpu, they would put it in, otherwise, no.
Sad, really.
Whats really sad is a ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB in a $2700 mac pro
The plain vanilla DVD will continue to live for many years. The only thing that will kill the DVD will be massive price cutting on BD media and systems.
Or studios only releasing new movies in Blu Ray.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
But, as I think Melgross is also saying, Apple needs a BD solution in/on the Mac Pro. Apple is heavily used by the content creation people and they should be able to have BD support NOW so that they can master all the BD movies. Not being able to do that hurts Apple in a key market.
Unfortunately Apple is showing little indication of wanting to support BD in it's ProApps, and is a long way off - development wise - from a workable solution, from what i have heard. Without this why would they put in any hardware support?
If Apple wants to get ahead of the curve a bit, maybe they could have BD in consumer machines as an option in a refresh at MacWorld in September.
Perhaps some ppl at apple think they are getting ahead of the curve by jumping straight from dvd to downloads?
I'd like to see an LED display, an eSATA port, more RAM capacity, a faster processor, and the choice of matte or glossy screen.
I'm with you. Although I love the glossy screen for general viewing (especially of video), it's a nightmare to work with for print output. My organization plans to buy upwards of 15 iMacs this summer, provided that they have matte screens. Be there, Apple.
I'm with you. Although I love the glossy screen for general viewing (especially of video), it's a nightmare to work with for print output. My organization plans to buy upwards of 15 iMacs this summer, provided that they have matte screens. Be there, Apple.
Well, for graphic intensive work, including photography, I like the glossy screen, if you have no back light reflections. The main issue is the inconsistent lighting across the entire screen with non-LED displays, which raises old Ned with accurate and consistent colors across the screen.
15 units is significant to someone like me, but, I doubt that it excites Apple when they look at sales numbers in 7 figures. I know that's not PC for an Apple afficianado to say, but they could get their act together to a higher degree, AFAIC. Current non LED displays just suck!
Current non LED displays just suck!
LEDs have been available in some displays for what, a year? And everything else sucks?
LEDs have been available in some displays for what, a year? And everything else sucks?
Please don't take my word for it, Apple's own website offers plenty of support for my comments, if you are into precise graphics or photography. Other people don't notice, so they think that there's no problem.
Go and read, be informed.
Blind trust, I don't think so. Show me some empirical evidence. It's easy to say that FW causes drive failure, convince me.
Then you don't know anything about all the problems Apple has had over the years with Firewire.
Problems that have been WELL publicized.
I can't imagine where you've been.
Or studios only releasing new movies in Blu Ray.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
Sony has said that in two years, players will hit the $200 (list), price range. But, before then players will go on sale, as usual. The movies themselves are already selling for much less than they were a year ago.
Sales of the PS3 are also up significantly, and we know that many are used to play movies.
Even if Apple refuses to do this, and I think they will be forced to give in, many PC's will have them, and that's a far larger market than Macs.
What we will see happening, and it's begining now, is that the higher end DVD players are being replaced in manufacturers lines with BD players. That will continue to happen, moving down the line over the next few years, until only the very cheapest players will not have BD, and that will happen as well, once BD hits the under $75 mark.
It's inevitable. You can buy BD movies for less than $15 now, with most under $20. As many DVD movies are still above $20, for the deluxe packs, the prices will converge. It's just a matter of increasing sales.
BD has already sold several million more movies this year than all of last year. That trend will continue.
But we're also in a recession, so adoption will be slower than it could have been. Afterwards, we will see a "pop" as always happens.
Or studios only releasing new movies in Blu Ray.
Won't happen this year, but in 2 years who knows..
Not even in 2 years. Blu Ray discs are significantly more expensive than DVDs. The vast majority of consumers are price sensitive. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
That's my point. Don't release new titles in DVD format.
As it is DVD is perceived as the 'inferior' format. Consumers expect to pay less for it. Eventually they'll expect to pay next to nothing. I think the studios will move quickly to kill off DVDs as their won't be enough money in them to keep them around.
Not even in 2 years. Blu Ray discs are significantly more expensive than DVDs. The vast majority of consumers are price sensitive. Offer DVDs next to Blu Rays and you'll see no movement on BDs.
I've already gone through this, twice.
They're not.
How do you think they sell BD now? Right next to the DVD racks, on a rack or two of their own, with the BD sign.
And, as I've already brought up, More BD movies have already been sold this year than all of last year, and I think, all the past years included.
I've already gone through this, twice.
They're not.
How do you think they sell BD now? Right next to the DVD racks, on a rack or two of their own, with the BD sign.
And, as I've already brought up, More BD movies have already been sold this year than all of last year, and I think, all the past years included.
And how many BD movies have sold compared to the run of the mill DVD? Odds are, not very many.
And how many BD movies have sold compared to the run of the mill DVD? Odds are, not very many.
That doesn't matter.
How many DVD's sold the first year after they came out compared to VHS?
It's the trajectory that's important, not the actual numbers.
25% of US households now have hi rez screens. Those people (myself included) are migrating to hi rez sources. there are only two.
Broadcast from different companies, and BD. Downloads don't count just yet.
Of the two, BD gives a much better picture. no one argues that.
It's wrong to think that people who have just spent thousands on a large screen, and very possibly a few thousand more on surround sound, won't spend a few hundred more for BD, plus the movie disks.
People are forgetting that DVD was very expensive when it first came out, as was CD before that, and video tape before that.
In fact, all of those previous audio and video formats were much MORE expensive when they first came out, once inflation is taken into account.
Somehow, they were all successful.
It's possible that five years from now, when enough people have FIOS, or the equivalent speed service, we may get high quality video downloads. But, until then, BD will become, at least, fairly popular.
That doesn't matter.
How many DVD's sold the first year after they came out compared to VHS?
It's the trajectory that's important, not the actual numbers.
25% of US households now have hi rez screens. Those people (myself included) are migrating to hi rez sources. there are only two.
Broadcast from different companies, and BD. Downloads don't count just yet.
Of the two, BD gives a much better picture. no one argues that.
It's wrong to think that people who have just spent thousands on a large screen, and very possibly a few thousand more on surround sound, won't spend a few hundred more for BD, plus the movie disks.
People are forgetting that DVD was very expensive when it first came out, as was CD before that, and video tape before that.
In fact, all of those previous audio and video formats were much MORE expensive when they first came out, once inflation is taken into account.
Somehow, they were all successful.
It's possible that five years from now, when enough people have FIOS, or the equivalent speed service, we may get high quality video downloads. But, until then, BD will become, at least, fairly popular.
I don't necessarily disagree with your statements Mel, but you're missing out on a big part of the calculation. The move from VHS to DVD did not require buying a new TV set. The move from DVD to Blu Ray basically does.
Granted, more people will be 'forced' into upgrading their sets thanks to our upcoming switchover to digital broadcast, but many, many more will keep their current sets and just buy a converter box... AND they'll stick with the cheaper format of DVD.
I give Blue Ray a minimum 5 year widespread adoption curve, much like DVD.
I don't necessarily disagree with your statements Mel, but you're missing out on a big part of the calculation. The move from VHS to DVD did not require buying a new TV set. The move from DVD to Blu Ray basically does.
Granted, more people will be 'forced' into upgrading their sets thanks to our upcoming switchover to digital broadcast, but many, many more will keep their current sets and just buy a converter box... AND they'll stick with the cheaper format of DVD.
I give Blue Ray a minimum 5 year widespread adoption curve, much like DVD.
Buying a new Tv set isn't the problem. It's the cause.
People were buying these new, big, hi def Tv's, not because of HD DVD or BD, but because of cable and satellite. Sports, sports, sports, movies, movies, movies.
The fact that 25% of US homes now has one, and that the uptake, even in this recession, is still increasing at a good clip, shows that the means to show a BD movie exists, and is increasing.
Sales of PS3's have been shown to be a good reason why BD movies are increasing in sales as more people buy them for the dual use. As the price of stand-alone players decreases, the movie sales will go even higher.
If Apple refuses to put a BD player, at least, in its machines, the ten and more times larger PC market will do so. And people DO watch movies on their computer. Don't forget that monitor sizes are getting larger as well. The 20" "standard" is giving way to the 22" And at least one manufacturer, though I forget which one, has now introduced a 22" with 1920 x 1080 (or 1200) rez. Can others be far behind?
The fact that sales of BD movies will increase several hundred percent over last year is also telling. And before you question the several hundred percent statement, remember that the more than twice last years sales already for BD movies, is a number that is about %125 -150% of all of last years sales. Those numbers were from the end of March! That's just 25% of the year.
No, BD will do very well.
What is the lifetime? I don't know, nor does anyone else. I would say that five years is a minimum of strong sales, perhaps reaching a peak about then, but having good sales extending for several years beyond that. The usual normal curve.
And that's all that can be expected these days.
We don't really know how the rollout of really fast broadband is going to be. That will decide the fate of all of these industries.
We don't really know how the rollout of really fast broadband is going to be. That will decide the fate of all of these industries.
Considering George Gilder once said widely available broadband was 'just around the corner'...
Considering George Gilder once said widely available broadband was 'just around the corner'...
He was right, but that corner it's just around, is still several blocks away.