Why are Apple being so stubborn of not embracing BD?

[PandJonB]

Originally Posted by Galley

Apple TV supports HDCP.

This may be true, but the MacPros of the world don't and won't for some time and they're the ones doing HD video editing these days for many projects. The latest update for QT to the new alumnium PBs which are HDCP compliant for iTunes CP is 7.5.7, but on the MacPro it is still 7.5.5. You can place partial blame on bootleggers dying to duplicate Blu-ray discs on their macs for Apple's reluctance to support Bluray. They have much more at stake with the film industry, and will be held accountable for any FUs.This is also one of the reasons that you will never see an HDMI PCI card that is compliant for HDCP. The licensing and logistical implementation issues still need to be worked out.

Some PCI video cards for PCs handle HDCP but won't work with Macs. Besides, HDCP implementation as a piece of integrated hardware in a MacPro would reduce CPU overhead. (HDCP on an HDMI PCI card. I'm wishing as I'm typing.)

As far as PC vs Mac, I use whatever is necessary whether PC or Mac, for projects that I am involved in.

[Sirandar]

Originally Posted by dadkins

I don't know... works quite well on both of my Windows machines.

Then why you need 3 players ? @ 60-80$ each


Truth be told, the latest version of Arcsoft TMT plays all the Blu-rays I have BUT I only have about 10. I don't buy or rent Blu-rays anymore, escpecially NEW RELEASES ..... the frustration is too great when they don't play on the PC. My experience with newly released Blu-rays is that the don't play more often than they do.

That said, Arcsoft TMT probably has the best chance of playing any given New Release Blu-Ray. Corel WinDVD probably has the least chance because they update their software so infrequently. I have been waiting more than 2 months to play Wall-E on WinDVD 9. Arcsoft plays it.

A telling policy that some and maybe all media retailers have ===> if you have a problematic Blu-ray, they won't exchange it for a regular DVD even when I was willing to absorb the cost difference.


AND when you buy or rent that new release Blu-ray home for your kids birthday party, if you are not afraid ..... you should be Pop the disk into your PC and pray ....... or get a PS3 ...... Sony has the inside edge

[dadkins]

Originally Posted by Sirandar

Then why you need 3 players ? @ 60-80$ each


Truth be told, the latest version of Arcsoft TMT plays all the Blu-rays I have BUT I only have about 10. I don't buy or rent Blu-rays anymore, escpecially NEW RELEASES ..... the frustration is too great when they don't play on the PC. My experience with newly released Blu-rays is that the don't play more often than they do.

That said, Arcsoft TMT probably has the best chance of playing any given New Release Blu-Ray. Corel WinDVD probably has the least chance because they update their software so infrequently. I have been waiting more than 2 months to play Wall-E on WinDVD 9. Arcsoft plays it.

A telling policy that some and maybe all media retailers have ===> if you have a problematic Blu-ray, they won't exchange it for a regular DVD even when I was willing to absorb the cost difference.


AND when you buy or rent that new release Blu-ray home for your kids birthday party, if you are not afraid ..... you should be Pop the disk into your PC and pray ....... or get a PS3 ...... Sony has the inside edge

Uhm, because I can?
Because I'm a software junkie.
Because no matter what, something has got to play the disc.

All of my limited library has played.
WinDVD balked at WALL-E... PowerDVD 8 played it fine, so did ArcSoft.

I have the "items" required to play any Blu-ray Disc on these machines.

Pray? LMAO!
No "pray" to it! YMMV.
Yes, Sony does have the edge - these are Sony VAIOs.

I just wish Apple would get off the stick and stop with the piss-poor excuses and make with Blu-Ray!
My neighbor is going to have an Aneurysm soon if they don't.

[jmkoch]

Wake up, folks. Apple, Nintendo, and Western Digital will have the last laugh.

Even if you don't agree with Prophet of BD Doom Robin Harris, the simple truth is that BD makers are lost money in 2008 and may lose more in 2009. Consider the financial disaster Sony reports.
BD is a bigger drag on Sony's future than Jobs' health is to Apple.

If Sony wants to stop losing money, it may decide to drop Blu-ray from the next PlayStation to compete price-wise with Wii in the game market. In the HD video market, it may join the tide now favoring video downloads to players that store on hard drives or the coming generation of 2TB SDXC cards and thumb drives (Sony will call them MS-X), which will also pair with iPod type devices. Optical discs will migrate to kitchen cupboards and face an after-life as coasters.

I can imagine some BD fans won't like this. But please, if you disagree, cite one BD-vested company whose BD products are really making an acceptable return on investment. The fact that 2009 will be hard for many products is no mitigant. It merely means that the BD outlook is all the more difficult.

IMHO, the only salvation is to cut prices. Even then, it will be tough. But not even price-cuts have been pursued to the necessary extent. A bare bones BD player ought to cost no more than about $125. Otherwise, most frugal buyers will not consider it worth the cost. For the same price or less, they can get a plain DVD player with HDMI or a DVR that mates with mini hard drives or thumb drives whose cost per gigabyte is lower.

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by jmkoch

Wake up, folks. Apple, Nintendo, and Western Digital will have the last laugh.

Even if you don't agree with Profit of BD Doom Robin Harris, the simple truth is that BD makers are lost money in 2008 and may lose more in 2009. Consider the financial disaster Sony reports.
BD is a bigger drag on Sony's future than Jobs' health is to Apple.

If Sony wants to stop losing money, it may decide to drop Blu-ray from the next PlayStation to compete price-wise with Wii in the game market. In the HD video market, it may join the tide now favoring video downloads to players that store on hard drives or the coming generation of 2TB SDXC cards and thumb drives (Sony will call them MS-X), which will also pair with iPod type devices. Optical discs will migrate to kitchen cupboards and face an after-life as coasters.

I can imagine some BD fans won't like this. But please, if you disagree, cite one BD-vested company whose BD products are really making an acceptable return on investment. The fact that 2009 will be hard for many products is no mitigant. It merely means that the BD outlook is all the more difficult.

IMHO, the only salvation is to cut prices. Even then, it will be tough. But not even price-cuts have been pursued to the necessary extent. A bare bones BD player ought to cost no more than about $125. Otherwise, most frugal buyers will not consider it worth the cost. For the same price or less, they can get a plain DVD player with HDMI or a DVR that mates with mini hard drives or thumb drives whose cost per gigabyte is lower.

Yes off course, but tell me that those company will sell those 2TB drive at 24.99$ or lower and it won't happen for now.

The worst thing you can have is centralized everything on 1 central HDD. Coming from the PC, and having LOT of HDD die on me, this is the WORST decision that someone can make. It's practical and that's it.

Off course now with the internet provider going to pay per GB route (it's coming, already happening in N/A right now), all those download only dream will get shattered soon enought..

[saprano]

Originally Posted by jmkoch

Wake up, folks. Apple, Nintendo, and Western Digital will have the last laugh.

Even if you don't agree with Profit of BD Doom Robin Harris, the simple truth is that BD makers are lost money in 2008 and may lose more in 2009. Consider the financial disaster Sony reports.
BD is a bigger drag on Sony's future than Jobs' health is to Apple.

If Sony wants to stop losing money, it may decide to drop Blu-ray from the next PlayStation to compete price-wise with Wii in the game market. In the HD video market, it may join the tide now favoring video downloads to players that store on hard drives or the coming generation of 2TB SDXC cards and thumb drives (Sony will call them MS-X), which will also pair with iPod type devices. Optical discs will migrate to kitchen cupboards and face an after-life as coasters.

I can imagine some BD fans won't like this. But please, if you disagree, cite one BD-vested company whose BD products are really making an acceptable return on investment. The fact that 2009 will be hard for many products is no mitigant. It merely means that the BD outlook is all the more difficult.

IMHO, the only salvation is to cut prices. Even then, it will be tough. But not even price-cuts have been pursued to the necessary extent. A bare bones BD player ought to cost no more than about $125. Otherwise, most frugal buyers will not consider it worth the cost. For the same price or less, they can get a plain DVD player with HDMI or a DVR that mates with mini hard drives or thumb drives whose cost per gigabyte is lower.

I dont have anything deep for you, maby someone else will.

But i will say disc aren't going anywhere. that DD argument is getting old.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by ryoohki

Yes off course, but tell me that those company will sell those 2TB drive at 24.99$ or lower and it won't happen for now.

The worst thing you can have is centralized everything on 1 central HDD. Coming from the PC, and having LOT of HDD die on me, this is the WORST decision that someone can make. It's practical and that's it.

Off course now with the internet provider going to pay per GB route (it's coming, already happening in N/A right now), all those download only dream will get shattered soon enought..

Are all ISP's going that way? mine currently is not like that. i have IO.

[ObiTrentKenobi]

Originally Posted by jmkoch

Wake up, folks. Apple, Nintendo, and Western Digital will have the last laugh.

Even if you don't agree with Profit of BD Doom Robin Harris, the simple truth is that BD makers are lost money in 2008 and may lose more in 2009. Consider the financial disaster Sony reports.
BD is a bigger drag on Sony's future than Jobs' health is to Apple.

If Sony wants to stop losing money, it may decide to drop Blu-ray from the next PlayStation to compete price-wise with Wii in the game market. In the HD video market, it may join the tide now favoring video downloads to players that store on hard drives or the coming generation of 2TB SDXC cards and thumb drives (Sony will call them MS-X), which will also pair with iPod type devices. Optical discs will migrate to kitchen cupboards and face an after-life as coasters.

I can imagine some BD fans won't like this. But please, if you disagree, cite one BD-vested company whose BD products are really making an acceptable return on investment. The fact that 2009 will be hard for many products is no mitigant. It merely means that the BD outlook is all the more difficult.

IMHO, the only salvation is to cut prices. Even then, it will be tough. But not even price-cuts have been pursued to the necessary extent. A bare bones BD player ought to cost no more than about $125. Otherwise, most frugal buyers will not consider it worth the cost. For the same price or less, they can get a plain DVD player with HDMI or a DVR that mates with mini hard drives or thumb drives whose cost per gigabyte is lower.

HAHA. The funny this is how wrong this all is...

ISP's aren't even close to supporting the bandwidth needed for HD downloads/streaming to the general public. Most (if not all, actually) have a bandwidth cap on their customers.

Also, you can't cut prices below manufacturing cost (DUH!). The only reason Sony has lost any money in the bluray market, is it's PS3 manufacturing to sales cost ratio. Sony is practically giving the PS3's away at the prices they are. Nintendo Wii?? No thanks. The gimmick has worn off on me already. Nintendo doesn't take risks, that's why it sucks. When has nintendo ever put even a dvd player in it's systems? Never ago.

And what do you mean by Apple will get a last laugh? If they even survive at all in 5 years... where was apple between '92 and 99'? nowhere, they're nothing without Jobs, which is bad for a company. Their stocks dropped 7% the day after Jobs announced his sick leave. And they still have less than 4% of the market in terms of Computers in consumers/businesses hands. They have the lead on mp3 players ONLY, nothing else. But that is quickly evaporating also...

Physical Media (and Windows) will survive longer you and I.

[fdm]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

And what do you mean by Apple will get a last laugh? If they even survive at all in 5 years... where was apple between '92 and 99'? nowhere, they're nothing without Jobs, which is bad for a company. Their stocks dropped 7% the day after Jobs announced his sick leave. And they still have less than 4% of the market in terms of Computers in consumers/businesses hands. They have the lead on mp3 players ONLY, nothing else. But that is quickly evaporating also...

Physical Media (and Windows) will survive longer you and I.

Well at least the physical media part in the last sentence has a remote chance of coming true.

[X-Ninja]

I've read 2 pages of comments here, and although i agree with it for the most part- some of the things being said are TOTALLY incorrect.
First of all, downloading an HD movie off iTunes takes only about 10 minutes on my high speed connection. Second of all, you can start watching it seconds after you begin downloading without any issues at all. Third of all, The best tech choice i believe i have ever made in my life is buying this iMac after having Windows all my life. Yes, i would trade my TV, PS3, and Onkyo 605 for my iMac. And last but not least - no, us apple fans do NOT only buy Apple products. I also have Windows XP on my mac. ...Due to Vista's sheer amount of failure in it.

I've completely lost a lot of respect for some of the people in this thread now. Please, do some research... Damn.

EDIT: That was harsh. But i definitely wont be fully trusting of their opinions anymore. Im pretty sure most people in this thread have never even touched a mac.

[Blu-ray Neo]

...........................

[ObiTrentKenobi]

Originally Posted by X-Ninja

I've read 2 pages of comments here, and although i agree with it for the most part- some of the things being said are TOTALLY incorrect.
First of all, downloading an HD movie off iTunes takes only about 10 minutes on my high speed connection. Second of all, you can start watching it seconds after you begin downloading without any issues at all. Third of all, The best tech choice i believe i have ever made in my life is buying this iMac after having Windows all my life. Yes, i would trade my TV, PS3, and Onkyo 605 for my iMac. And last but not least - no, us apple fans do NOT only buy Apple products. I also have Windows XP on my mac. ...Due to Vista's sheer amount of failure in it.

I've completely lost a lot of respect for some of the people in this thread now. Please, do some research... Damn.

EDIT: That was harsh. But i definitely wont be fully trusting of their opinions anymore. Im pretty sure most people in this thread have never even touched a mac.

Issues with Vista are user-error...

there's no real "issues" with vista.

Name 1... Even name 1 thing you can do with your imac that you spent at least 1200$ on that i can't do with my pc i spent 650$ on.

HAHA! i sold my imac last year (after 1.5 years of use). I found it's compatability frustratingly disqusting and the entire system useless.

HD downloads on itunes are fine. have fun watching it on your computer monitor...

[brett_day]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

Issues with Vista are user-error...

there's no real "issues" with vista.

Name 1...

apart from some driver support on vista 64 there are no flaws i can think of! Awesome OS

[JamesKurtovich]

I'm getting sick of Vista.. IE crashes every day, my sound stops working (until I reformat the HD), and its resource-hungry. I need to downgrade to XP.

[aesnakes]

I do agree with you that vista is a resource hog. Its OS is bloated and I have my hard drives partitioned so my work is on another and my OS is on one by itself......Vista is taking up 76.8 gigs so far. Mind you that i have lots of Creative apps on there but this same install took only 36 gigs in XP. I tried switching back but I need the 64 bit 8Gigs of Ram support....and you don't get support with XP64.

I will admit vista has out of the blue made permissions on certain hard drives so I no longer have write access of permission to delete files. ( I had to format the whole drive and replace the media on it) Vista has out of the blue started to do one of its scheduled Defragmenting operations while I was trying to move some Film renders over to an external hard drive over night and I woke up to a black screen and my computer would not boot to the OS again. Microsoft office 2003 will not install properly in Vista and every time you try to open a document it starts an installation process and then opens the document.......But you work with it lol Ive installed Open office, ive bought some 1TB WD Mybook back up drives......I like Mac as well but some of my software is not on that platform, its not 64bit, and as for the download thing tell me about it when its at 1080P and streaming over to my TV using Apple TV.

[lch]

you must have installed craps.
my system drive is only 65gb which i install vista and all my applications and there still 22gb free.
my system after installing vista rarely crash anymore.

mac of cos works, bcos they control it so tightly that you don't easily get free crap apps that you download from the internet to test. they forced you to buy everything from their store.

open office ? it's these type of crapware that causing the problems.

[aesnakes]

Look at my specs man and what i do, trust me there is no crap on my system, Avid Media Composer, Maya, Nuke, Adobe Creative Suite, Office..etc...if you are not pushing your system you probably wont have any problems with it......If you only have a 65 gig hard drive....you probably dont need as much space as space or applications as someone.....

oh im just clearing it up, i don't have crap or games off of cereal boxes on my system lol

[dadkins]

76GB?
What the hell are you doing?
Vista is not taking up 76GB - at least it shouldn't be.
This is my C drive on my Vista laptop - Windows *AND* a few software items.
25.8GB for the whole drive.




Shot at 2009-01-24

Vista Home Premium SP1
Maybe my VAIO is magic...

[xtop]

Originally Posted by aesnakes

Look at my specs man and what i do, trust me there is no crap on my system, Avid Media Composer, Maya, Nuke, Adobe Creative Suite, Office..etc...if you are not pushing your system you probably wont have any problems with it......If you only have a 65 gig hard drive....you probably dont need as much space as space or applications as someone.....

oh im just clearing it up, i don't have crap or games off of cereal boxes on my system lol

so why are you trying to claim vista takes 76gb?

[aesnakes]

Come on, you just answered your question in your own post......You have windows and a few software items....I have windows Vista 64 Ultimate and alot of software for work. im a vfx artist working in film...I probably push my professional workstation a bit more then your Vista home laptop.