jdw

mpantone said:

...Apple knows all about the pros and cons of Blu-ray technology. And you don't need to explain this ancient tech to AppleInsider readers either. It's not like it's cutting edge. 

"ancient"? 
This is what my previous post was trying to address.  So I shall clarify further.

I realize that some (including the article author) prefer to label optical media "ancient" tech.  The term "ancient" is most often used to drive a point home which says "it's so old we cannot possibly consider using it now in modern times."  But that would be totally and utterly wrong!  The only thing closely resembling "ancient" is the fact that "optical media" has been around since the Sony/Philips design collaboration in 1979.  That's when it all started.  I was born in 1971 and don't consider myself "ancient" by any stretch of the imagination.  Okay, okay... LaserDisc hit a year prior in 1978, but that was a different sort of optical disc that didn't gain widespread adoption like CD sized discs due to high cost and the sheer size of the things.

Sony's CDP-101 audio CD player went on sale in Japan in 1982, and by the mid-1980's (a bit after the release of the Macintosh 128K), CD Audio was gaining a bit of traction in the US. CDs really started to give audio tape and vinyl a run for the money in the 90's though, which is when I bought most of my current CD audio collection.

DVD wasn't released until 1996, two years after I graduated from college.  Affordability came around 1998. 

Blu-ray didn't hit the scene until 2006, gaining traction in the market around 2009.  "Ancient"?  Hardly!

Now consider that the first 4K UHD Blu-ray player didn't hit the market until 2015, gaining market traction around 2017.

So while optical media itself originated in the late 70's (a good number of years after I was born mind you, and I am NOT "ancient," still with relative few gray hairs too), the tech itself has advanced considerably through the years in terms of what you can store on it and the drive tech used to read/play/burn it. 

"Ancient"?  LOL. No!
"Ideal"?  Absolutely not!

But the terms "ancient" and "not ideal" should not be confused here.  You may not like certain technology.  You may prefer other tech instead.  But treating modern optical media tech flippantly by suggesting it is so "ancient" as to be laughably worthless amounts to little more than emotionally charged hyperbole.

What I wrote in my earlier post pertain to the USER EXPERIENCE.  It is a fact that UHD 4K Blu-ray beats 4K streaming.  

Would it be nice if streaming could match or beat Blu-ray 4K?  You bet!  
Will streaming ever match Blu-ray?  Maybe, but I don't see evidence that streaming services care about that, and without public outcry, I doubt they will.

Some people may liken this to a compressed MP3 vs. AIFF debate, but I think many people cannot discern between those two audio formats mainly because so many people listen to highly compressed audio and few these days listen to lossless.  But I would argue that more people would probably notice the improved quality of a Blu-ray over 4K streaming on a reasonably good 4K TV.  Add to that the fact you need to pay MORE to your streaming service for 4K.  Netflix being one.  So you pay more for less, when compared to Blu-ray 4K.

With that said, I am NOT trying to excessively defend OPTICAL MEDIA.  In many ways, I think it's just plain stupid.  Slow.  Easy to scratch.  Don't get me started on how triple-layer 4K discs can be rendered dead.  The real problem is there is no public outcry.  Many just silently watch what streamers feed them and leave it at that.  

Few people are demanding movies sell on USB thumb drives, which I think would be outstanding, especially because TVs these days have USB ports!  No scratching to worry about, and your can keep your "physical media" collection in a much smaller area. Movies on thumb drives all the way, I say!  (Yeah, yeah...  "cost of media" and "DRM" concerns are there, but I'd still love movies on tiny, unscratchable media nonetheless.)

People are pretty funny.  Glad I am not going with the flow.  I just recently ordered a Panasonic UB820 region-free 4K Blu-ray player from 220 Electronics. 4K streaming can't touch the quality of a 4K Blu-ray, and when you've got lots of DVD and Blu-ray content on disk, a fair amount that isn't streaming anywhere, you still have a need for a good player.  I purchased it because I recently purchased a new LG C3 48" TV (WOLED).

Speaking of which, Apple really needs to consider how to get more involved in the home theater market.  Two Homepods operated by an Apple TV 4K has a lot of promise to unseat sill soundbars from their lofty thrones, but the cost is two homepods plus Apple TV 4K is too high, and add to that it doesn't support DTS formats, which are big on physical media.  Yeah, Apple is into streaming, but like I said, there's a lot of content that isn't streaming yet, and the fact remains a lot of us in our 50's have a good amount of content already purchased on disc as it is.

The only thing I am glad about is that our DATA isn't on disc formats at all anymore.  Optical drives are plainfully slow when it comes to that. But playback for audio or video stuff is still perfectly acceptable.

And if your wondering about the UB820, yeah, it's top notch, especially for upscaling DVD and 1080p Blu-ray content to 4K.

Just as I thought, I arrive here in the comments and see a lot of mindlessness taking place.  "Oh, it's Google.  Google isn't Apple.  Google is bad.  Go DOJ!"  Then we see these same folks comment under a different article about the DOJ and Apple trashing the DOJ and hoping Apple will pull through. 

MAKES. ZERO. SENSE.

Democrats on the Left want more DOJ anti-trust action.  Its current Biden Admin policy.  Millions of Americans with 401Ks and investments in big tech, and yet that party doesn't care less. They are going after the big and successful to cater to the demands of their base.  It really doesn't help anybody and only stands to hurt America's home-grown success stories and all those who invest their hard earned dollars in them.

If you're going to defend Apple from the DOJ anti-trust suit, you sure as darned well better defend Google too.

And if you want the DOJ to take down Apple too, in light of the fact you are commenting in a forum named AppleInsider, you're either in the wrong place or you're here to troll.

Pema said:

This idiot probably... 

“By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others’ work and belittle their motivations?”
—Steve Jobs

LOL.  I knew what I'd find here in the comments.

True thinkers will no doubt enjoy this:
https://www.amazon.com/Politically-Correct-Bedtime-Stories-Modern/dp/002542730X/

A friend gave me a copy in 1994.  Yes, even back then, we had the "PC" madness.  It was as laughable back then as it is today.  

I can't help but muse when I see defenders of Political Correctness not recognizing that their own objectives actually seek to "rewire the brain."  It seeks to change language for what they deem is "the greater good."

The definition of the English word "pistol" pertains to a real gun, not a squirt gun.  Only those with extremely delicate sensibilities hop aboard the PC bandwagon to redefine what a "pistol" is.  If it is a toy, you can say "Water Pistol," but the word "water" in that word pair really establishes what the thing is all about.

It doesn't matter if you like or dislike firearms.  It doesn't matter if guns are good or bad.  It's a matter of language and word meanings.  "Pistol" doesn't mean a kiddy squirt gun, even if squirt guns are often made in the shape of a pistol.  If I want an emoji for "squirt gun" those should be the two words which define it.

Imagine people who dislike Lions because they often kill others animals seeking to replace a Lion emoji with something more fluffy, kind and totally disconnected to the actual animal!  That sort of lunacy is what using a squirt gun emoji is when someone is searching for a pistol firearm emoji.

I think there are times when people may want one emoji or the other.  But my freedom to choose shouldn't be limited by the PC police.  Give me both choices.