Many pros don't want to lug around all the extra HW you do when they are in the field.
Huh? Your going to have to lug around something. Then again, with fast wireless data networks, you can just push your critical files into the cloud and skip local media altogether. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
Quote:
Opitcal is smaller than a HDD and cheaper.
I've linked to usb hard drives that are cheaper price per gigabyte then BR media (never mind the cost of the BR drive). A bus powered hard drive is the same size as a BR disk/case - and if you get into real data storage, a hard drive is far smaller then a stack of BR disks and the case to keep them from scratching and becoming worthless. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
Quote:
What if you want to make a copy to give to someone?
That's probably the only advantage of BR - but again it's rather moot - I shared copies of my trip pictures via my web site to fellow passengers on my cruise. For those that wanted large quantities, the handed me their flash drive and I copied the files over.
BR is a solution for a problem that is fast disappearing. It's days of usefulness are fast numbered and I think this is what Apple is watching/waiting for.
I've linked to usb hard drives that are cheaper price per gigabyte then BR media (never mind the cost of the BR drive). A bus powered hard drive is the same size as a BR disk/case - and if you get into real data storage, a hard drive is far smaller then a stack of BR disks and the case to keep them from scratching and becoming worthless. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
How is your HDD solution cheaper than this. Eight bucks for 25 gbs of storage.
While something like this is reasonably cheap and easy to take on the go it's still not cheaper than BD optical.
I would also expect BD optical to get cheaper. In a year I'll bet 25 gb BD will be $5.00. Flash and HDD will never get that cheap.
Thought you were promoting Blu-ray in paticular, not all optical media.
Wait, what? I know that BD drives are backwards compatible with CD/DVD, but above you said "combo drive."
I think I'll refrain from commenting on this 'til I understand your argument.
If Apple were to transition to BD optical its not like they are forsaking CD/DVD. They still would work and be useful in situations were you need to burn a CD or DVD.
If you need to make a copy for someone and they can't play BD you burn a DVD. Eventually though BD penetration will increase.
Times have changed. At the time CD was a much better option than floppy. Optical media over all is becoming less necessary.
I don't disagree entirely but they are still very useful.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
If Apple were to transition to BD optical its not like they are forsaking CD/DVD. They still would work and be useful in situations were you need to burn a CD or DVD.
Alright, thanks for the clarification. Of course, I don't agree with such a move and I'm pretty sure Apple would disagree with you as well because they've worked diligently to kill off the DVD and promote alternatives for sharing content with others: iDisk, Web Gallery, iChat Theater, integration with YouTube, and even plain old email.
With that said, doesn't Final Cut Pro support burning to BD?
You know what, that's what makes markets. Different opinions. Perhaps you'll be right.
However HP is/was growing earnings 15-20% per year as well. I point this out to show that almost all other growth stocks have seen their grow rates discounted. Perhaps Apple will be able to sustain or grow its revenue during these challenging times. I doubt they will.
If they don't, look out below.
HP was growing earnings by 15-20% and their PE has fallen just below that, to 11 (taking your word on all these numbers). AAPL has averaged 100%+ growth rates for the past 5 years and is expected to hit 32% growth this year, and Apple's PE is 18. Even at their lowest points, AAPL's PE should remain higher than HP's, assuming growth expectations remain higher for AAPL than they do for HWP, which they certainly should.
HP was growing earnings by 15-20% and their PE has fallen just below that, to 11 (taking your word on all these numbers). AAPL has averaged 100%+ growth rates for the past 5 years and is expected to hit 32% growth this year, and Apple's PE is 18.
I saw this in the last recession (dotcom bust) as well.
AAPL looked "attractive" because its PE was low. So I bought a bunch of it.
It kept on falling down, luckily I got stopped out, but I was still very pissed at the loss at the time.
What happened? Apple ended up revising their forecasts lower and lower until what was a low PE ended up looking gargantuan.
Patterns repeat again and imo this is what is happening again.
I love the company, love the products, but I love my nest egg more.
I saw this in the last recession (dotcom bust) as well.
AAPL looked "attractive" because its PE was low. So I bought a bunch of it.
It kept on falling down, luckily I got stopped out, but I was still very pissed at the loss at the time.
What happened? Apple ended up revising their forecasts lower and lower until what was a low PE ended up looking gargantuan.
Patterns repeat again and imo this is what is happening again.
I love the company, love the products, but I love my nest egg more.
We disagree on that - while its important to learn lessons from the market's history, its equally important to learn the right ones.
There is no evidence that Apple's sales and profits are going to hit the skids this time. Last time, Apple was in a VERY different place. Today Apple are still growing into a VERY large market in cell phones, and similarly expanding into the HUGE part of the PC market that they don't currently address. Even the most bearish estimates are coming down by just a few nickels, hardly enough to justify a 50% haircut.
Only time will tell, of course, but I'm definitely expanding my position in Apple at what I think are going to look like fire sale prices in 6-9 months.
I don't disagree entirely but they are still very useful.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
You can put HD video on a standard DVD. Just not as much.
By your logic hard drive is more useful than Blu ray. Greater capacity, faster transfer speed, and cheaper by the GB.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
The video quality is only better between DVD-Video and BD-Video where one is MPEG-2 and the other is MPEG-4 (Part-10), but both mediums can hold any file type you wish. The only difference in the capacity, where 2.5 DVDs or 5 DVDs are considerably cheaper than buying a 25GB of 50G BR disc.
That may seem like splitting hairs, but we are talking a personal computer, not the optical video appliance one keeps in their living room. I don't know of anyone who uses their PC to play optical movies in their living room, instead of having a dedicated appliance for the job. On top of that, the CHEAPEST 12.7mm slot-loading BRD I can find is still more than 3x as expensive as its appliance alternative.
None of the number make any sense for including such an expensive drive. Neither do the reasons for Apple to increase the thickness of their machines for a device that isn't much more than a talking point option.
Why would anyone want to buy a thicker Mac notebook that cost considerably more for a storage medium that that is considerably more expensive, excruciatingly slower, and more likely to result in bad writing of data compared to an external HDD. It even takes up more a lot more space when you measure comparable capacities.
Now suggesting that Apple supports it in its OS and App and sells external drivers that are larger than the highly expensive 12.7mm drives out there, which would probably yield faster read/write times is a good idea, IMO.
edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
You can put HD video on a standard DVD. Just not as much.
By your logic hard drive is more useful than Blu ray. Greater capacity, faster transfer speed, and cheaper by the GB.
What about video editors who shoot video in high def? How do they archive stuff in the filed quickly and cheaply? With multiple copies for more than one person?
I carry 40 or 50 large capacity CF cards. Used to haul hard drives around but man, that's a back-breaker, and they are easily subject to damage if dropped. As clumsy as I am, this usually led to loss of source video.
Most videographers I know don't use HDD's any longer, and SD cards are too slow to record video in real time. A lot of equipment is out there to support CF, and most pro camcorders have CF slots.
This is one reason why I've been lobbying unsuccessfully for a number of years with Apple to integrate a CF card reader into MacBooks and MacBook Pros. One less thing to schlep around...
But Apple's trailing the market substantially in even DVD burning, SD or HD, so, I don't think they're anywhere ready to hurdle forward and offer native CF card support on their laptop line... but we can dream, can't we?
It's disheartening to watch the Price Creep going on. Piper Jaffray says prices might start at $899 or $999. So naturally, the headlines says "could be priced from $899". Then we see CNET saying "All across the Web, reporters are saying that at Apple's press event next week, the company will unveil an $800 Mac". Nice piece of rounding guys.
Watch. Apple will come out with a $999 MacBook. Piper-Jaffray will say it was in-line with their predictions. And everyone else will be scandalized because (even though it's a drop from the current price) they'll feel like they were promised lower. And who will they be angry at? Very few of them will remember who actually made them those promises.
I carry 40 or 50 large capacity CF cards. Used to haul hard drives around but man, that's a back-breaker, and they are easily subject to damage if dropped. As clumsy as I am, this usually led to loss of source video.
Most videographers I know don't use HDD's any longer, and SD cards are too slow to record video in real time. A lot of equipment is out there to support CF, and most pro camcorders have CF slots.
This is one reason why I've been lobbying unsuccessfully for a number of years with Apple to integrate a CF card reader into MacBooks and MacBook Pros. One less thing to schlep around...
But Apple's trailing the market substantially in even DVD burning, SD or HD, so, I don't think they're anywhere ready to hurdle forward and offer native CF card support on their laptop line... but we can dream, can't we?
Do you realize how much slower a BR burner would be? And then there is a much larger chance for the burn to be bad. And there is a lot more power consumption for burning, as well as reading, over CF.
Do you realize how much slower a BR burner would be? And then there is a much larger chance for the burn to be bad. And there is a lot more power consumption for burning, as well as reading, over CF.
Sorry but I don't buy that BD is going to just fade away.
And how much does the drive cost? How much would Apple charge for a 12.7mm drive? Or do you think Apple would make their cases thicker and use a tray-loading drive so they can offer a $500 12.7mm tray-loading drive like in the Sony that was recently linked to in one of these posts.
If you next argument is that you only have to buy the drive once, then you need to consider how the price of this overly expensive, slow reading, slower burning drive that will inevitably create some failed discs thereby wasting $8 a pop, be better than using a 2.5" HDD, which is faster to read, faster to burn, cheaper and smaller than a BRD and easier to transport than a bunch of BR discs.
The CF cards are expensive, but they are fast, small, and use little power. Blu-ray can't compete with that so CF has its place. Blu-ray has it's place, too, but the stats show that it's a poor option for most needs. Again, I think Apple should fully support it in their OS and apps for the few people to use with an external BRD, but making it internal when optical drives are being less-and-less used is not forward thinking by any means.
1) Do you think that Apple has silenced Panasonic so they can be the only ones getting the 9.5mm drives they announced back in 12/2007?
2) Do you think Apple will thicken there notebooks just so they can add BRDs as an option that far exceeds the expense of most other OEMs.
3) Do you think that Apple will move to tray-loading drives to lessen the BRD cost?
4) Do you think that a $500+ option for a 12.7mm BRD is going to be popular?
PS: i never said it's going to "go away". I said that it makes little sense for Apple to design its entire notebook business model for a relatively undesirably option. With $150 BRD appliances and DRD-Video costing as much as DVD-Video, in some cases it's amazing that the up take is still so low.
Comments
Many pros don't want to lug around all the extra HW you do when they are in the field.
Huh? Your going to have to lug around something. Then again, with fast wireless data networks, you can just push your critical files into the cloud and skip local media altogether. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
Opitcal is smaller than a HDD and cheaper.
I've linked to usb hard drives that are cheaper price per gigabyte then BR media (never mind the cost of the BR drive). A bus powered hard drive is the same size as a BR disk/case - and if you get into real data storage, a hard drive is far smaller then a stack of BR disks and the case to keep them from scratching and becoming worthless. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
What if you want to make a copy to give to someone?
That's probably the only advantage of BR - but again it's rather moot - I shared copies of my trip pictures via my web site to fellow passengers on my cruise. For those that wanted large quantities, the handed me their flash drive and I copied the files over.
BR is a solution for a problem that is fast disappearing. It's days of usefulness are fast numbered and I think this is what Apple is watching/waiting for.
I've linked to usb hard drives that are cheaper price per gigabyte then BR media (never mind the cost of the BR drive). A bus powered hard drive is the same size as a BR disk/case - and if you get into real data storage, a hard drive is far smaller then a stack of BR disks and the case to keep them from scratching and becoming worthless. I'd call this point a tie, at best.
How is your HDD solution cheaper than this. Eight bucks for 25 gbs of storage.
While something like this is reasonably cheap and easy to take on the go it's still not cheaper than BD optical.
I would also expect BD optical to get cheaper. In a year I'll bet 25 gb BD will be $5.00. Flash and HDD will never get that cheap.
What if you want to make a copy to give to someone?
You're assuming most people have BD players, which most don't.
You're assuming most people have BD players, which most don't.
Combo Drive? The BD drives also read and burn CD/DVD.
This transition isn't any different than the switch from floppy to CDs. Why do people make this harder than it is?
Combo Drive?
Thought you were promoting Blu-ray in paticular, not all optical media.
The BD drives also read and burn CD/DVD.
Wait, what?
This transition isn't any different than the switch from floppy to CDs. Why do people make this harder than it is.
I think I'll refrain from commenting on this 'til I understand your argument.
Thought you were promoting Blu-ray in paticular, not all optical media.
Wait, what?
I think I'll refrain from commenting on this 'til I understand your argument.
If Apple were to transition to BD optical its not like they are forsaking CD/DVD. They still would work and be useful in situations were you need to burn a CD or DVD.
If you need to make a copy for someone and they can't play BD you burn a DVD. Eventually though BD penetration will increase.
Combo Drive? The BD drives also read and burn CD/DVD.
This transition isn't any different than the switch from floppy to CDs. Why do people make this harder than it is?
Times have changed. At the time CD was a much better option than floppy. Optical media over all is becoming less necessary.
Times have changed. At the time CD was a much better option than floppy. Optical media over all is becoming less necessary.
I don't disagree entirely but they are still very useful.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
If Apple were to transition to BD optical its not like they are forsaking CD/DVD. They still would work and be useful in situations were you need to burn a CD or DVD.
Alright, thanks for the clarification. Of course, I don't agree with such a move and I'm pretty sure Apple would disagree with you as well because they've worked diligently to kill off the DVD and promote alternatives for sharing content with others: iDisk, Web Gallery, iChat Theater, integration with YouTube, and even plain old email.
With that said, doesn't Final Cut Pro support burning to BD?
You know what, that's what makes markets. Different opinions. Perhaps you'll be right.
However HP is/was growing earnings 15-20% per year as well. I point this out to show that almost all other growth stocks have seen their grow rates discounted. Perhaps Apple will be able to sustain or grow its revenue during these challenging times. I doubt they will.
If they don't, look out below.
HP was growing earnings by 15-20% and their PE has fallen just below that, to 11 (taking your word on all these numbers). AAPL has averaged 100%+ growth rates for the past 5 years and is expected to hit 32% growth this year, and Apple's PE is 18. Even at their lowest points, AAPL's PE should remain higher than HP's, assuming growth expectations remain higher for AAPL than they do for HWP, which they certainly should.
HP was growing earnings by 15-20% and their PE has fallen just below that, to 11 (taking your word on all these numbers). AAPL has averaged 100%+ growth rates for the past 5 years and is expected to hit 32% growth this year, and Apple's PE is 18.
I saw this in the last recession (dotcom bust) as well.
AAPL looked "attractive" because its PE was low. So I bought a bunch of it.
It kept on falling down, luckily I got stopped out, but I was still very pissed at the loss at the time.
What happened? Apple ended up revising their forecasts lower and lower until what was a low PE ended up looking gargantuan.
Patterns repeat again and imo this is what is happening again.
I love the company, love the products, but I love my nest egg more.
I saw this in the last recession (dotcom bust) as well.
AAPL looked "attractive" because its PE was low. So I bought a bunch of it.
It kept on falling down, luckily I got stopped out, but I was still very pissed at the loss at the time.
What happened? Apple ended up revising their forecasts lower and lower until what was a low PE ended up looking gargantuan.
Patterns repeat again and imo this is what is happening again.
I love the company, love the products, but I love my nest egg more.
We disagree on that - while its important to learn lessons from the market's history, its equally important to learn the right ones.
There is no evidence that Apple's sales and profits are going to hit the skids this time. Last time, Apple was in a VERY different place. Today Apple are still growing into a VERY large market in cell phones, and similarly expanding into the HUGE part of the PC market that they don't currently address. Even the most bearish estimates are coming down by just a few nickels, hardly enough to justify a 50% haircut.
Only time will tell, of course, but I'm definitely expanding my position in Apple at what I think are going to look like fire sale prices in 6-9 months.
I don't disagree entirely but they are still very useful.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
You can put HD video on a standard DVD. Just not as much.
By your logic hard drive is more useful than Blu ray. Greater capacity, faster transfer speed, and cheaper by the GB.
I'm still not certain I understand why not to have them. They video quality is greater with BD vs. DVD. The storage capacity is greater with BD vs. DVD.
So Apple would make the enclosure 3 mm thicker. Small price to pay for advanced technology IMO. If you don't need it then get a MB without it.
The video quality is only better between DVD-Video and BD-Video where one is MPEG-2 and the other is MPEG-4 (Part-10), but both mediums can hold any file type you wish. The only difference in the capacity, where 2.5 DVDs or 5 DVDs are considerably cheaper than buying a 25GB of 50G BR disc.
That may seem like splitting hairs, but we are talking a personal computer, not the optical video appliance one keeps in their living room. I don't know of anyone who uses their PC to play optical movies in their living room, instead of having a dedicated appliance for the job. On top of that, the CHEAPEST 12.7mm slot-loading BRD I can find is still more than 3x as expensive as its appliance alternative.
None of the number make any sense for including such an expensive drive. Neither do the reasons for Apple to increase the thickness of their machines for a device that isn't much more than a talking point option.
Why would anyone want to buy a thicker Mac notebook that cost considerably more for a storage medium that that is considerably more expensive, excruciatingly slower, and more likely to result in bad writing of data compared to an external HDD. It even takes up more a lot more space when you measure comparable capacities.
Now suggesting that Apple supports it in its OS and App and sells external drivers that are larger than the highly expensive 12.7mm drives out there, which would probably yield faster read/write times is a good idea, IMO.
edit:
You can put HD video on a standard DVD. Just not as much.
By your logic hard drive is more useful than Blu ray. Greater capacity, faster transfer speed, and cheaper by the GB.
Pipped by TenoBell.
What about video editors who shoot video in high def? How do they archive stuff in the filed quickly and cheaply? With multiple copies for more than one person?
I carry 40 or 50 large capacity CF cards. Used to haul hard drives around but man, that's a back-breaker, and they are easily subject to damage if dropped. As clumsy as I am, this usually led to loss of source video.
Most videographers I know don't use HDD's any longer, and SD cards are too slow to record video in real time. A lot of equipment is out there to support CF, and most pro camcorders have CF slots.
This is one reason why I've been lobbying unsuccessfully for a number of years with Apple to integrate a CF card reader into MacBooks and MacBook Pros. One less thing to schlep around...
But Apple's trailing the market substantially in even DVD burning, SD or HD, so, I don't think they're anywhere ready to hurdle forward and offer native CF card support on their laptop line... but we can dream, can't we?
Watch. Apple will come out with a $999 MacBook. Piper-Jaffray will say it was in-line with their predictions. And everyone else will be scandalized because (even though it's a drop from the current price) they'll feel like they were promised lower. And who will they be angry at? Very few of them will remember who actually made them those promises.
I carry 40 or 50 large capacity CF cards. Used to haul hard drives around but man, that's a back-breaker, and they are easily subject to damage if dropped. As clumsy as I am, this usually led to loss of source video.
Most videographers I know don't use HDD's any longer, and SD cards are too slow to record video in real time. A lot of equipment is out there to support CF, and most pro camcorders have CF slots.
This is one reason why I've been lobbying unsuccessfully for a number of years with Apple to integrate a CF card reader into MacBooks and MacBook Pros. One less thing to schlep around...
But Apple's trailing the market substantially in even DVD burning, SD or HD, so, I don't think they're anywhere ready to hurdle forward and offer native CF card support on their laptop line... but we can dream, can't we?
Wouldn't you prefer a Blue Ray burner?
Wouldn't you prefer a Blue Ray burner?
Do you realize how much slower a BR burner would be? And then there is a much larger chance for the burn to be bad. And there is a lot more power consumption for burning, as well as reading, over CF.
Do you realize how much slower a BR burner would be? And then there is a much larger chance for the burn to be bad. And there is a lot more power consumption for burning, as well as reading, over CF.
Yeah and a 16 gb CF card compares favorably to a 25 gb blue ray disk at $8.00. ... NOT.
Sorry but I don't buy that BD is going to just fade away.
Yeah and a 16 gb CF card compares favorably to a 25 gb blue ray disk at $8.00. ... NOT.
Sorry but I don't buy that BD is going to just fade away.
And how much does the drive cost? How much would Apple charge for a 12.7mm drive? Or do you think Apple would make their cases thicker and use a tray-loading drive so they can offer a $500 12.7mm tray-loading drive like in the Sony that was recently linked to in one of these posts.
If you next argument is that you only have to buy the drive once, then you need to consider how the price of this overly expensive, slow reading, slower burning drive that will inevitably create some failed discs thereby wasting $8 a pop, be better than using a 2.5" HDD, which is faster to read, faster to burn, cheaper and smaller than a BRD and easier to transport than a bunch of BR discs.
The CF cards are expensive, but they are fast, small, and use little power. Blu-ray can't compete with that so CF has its place. Blu-ray has it's place, too, but the stats show that it's a poor option for most needs. Again, I think Apple should fully support it in their OS and apps for the few people to use with an external BRD, but making it internal when optical drives are being less-and-less used is not forward thinking by any means.
1) Do you think that Apple has silenced Panasonic so they can be the only ones getting the 9.5mm drives they announced back in 12/2007?
2) Do you think Apple will thicken there notebooks just so they can add BRDs as an option that far exceeds the expense of most other OEMs.
3) Do you think that Apple will move to tray-loading drives to lessen the BRD cost?
4) Do you think that a $500+ option for a 12.7mm BRD is going to be popular?
PS: i never said it's going to "go away". I said that it makes little sense for Apple to design its entire notebook business model for a relatively undesirably option. With $150 BRD appliances and DRD-Video costing as much as DVD-Video, in some cases it's amazing that the up take is still so low.