Blu-ray and Apple - Page 4

You forgot the most important one tho:  The quality of the original source material.

Yes and No.. the 5 steps don't really have much to do with quality, in so much as the ability to render it.  If a terrible quality movie is still encoded at 44Mb/s, the output will be crap because the source is crap, but the workload required is just as high as a really great source material encoded at 44Mb/s. 

All I'm really talking about there is what it takes to pitch it out to a screen, not so much whether or not the source figures in. .. in fact, poor sources often equal higher bitrates because of the extra analog noise that is then reproduced in digital, taking up bandwidth

Well, guess I found my Christmas present to myself:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/14/pioneer-ships-200-bdr-206mbk-bxdl-writer-dares-you-to-afford-r/

Marco says it's all but forgotten...

http://www.marco.org/4012540846

Adequate essay. I've never understood "Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt. [...] but the licensing of the tech is so complex" when every two-bit $400 notebook maker seems to be able to navigate the licensing. I would agree that "Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt because using the tech by consumers is so complex" -- a terrible design for home use.

 

As for iTunes: given its poor selection and high prices, I remain unimpressed with it as an alternative to Blu-ray watching.

 

I still don't think Blu-ray in a computer is a big deal (except content creators), but Apple's not really getting it done either as a movie-viewing alternative.

I am not nearly as bothered by it's lack of existance as a watching media as much as a production media.   Whether Apple likes it or not, they worked hard to come up big in the video production world.   Now, people want their videos in HD.   Even low end ($100 FlipHD) cameras save in 720P/1080P.  People in basic production want BD output capability; it is becoming essential.   I don't mean this for some punter on a weekend, but real base line production.   Businesses now look to output commercials for networks on BD so they can have them in HD presentation.   Wedding Photographers are now more routinely offering HD copies of wedding footage - on BD.   Prom?   etc.. all want BD production capabilities.    Because Apple has held out, it means people have to go through multiple steps and external drives to do that, which is turning the tables.

 

While Final Cut Pro has been THE choice for a lot of Wedding photogs in my area for a while, more and more are switching up and grabbing a PC and basic BD tools.    They aren't doing it because they think Bluray is a bag of hurt or because Apple does; they do it because it's what sells... customers aren't as happy with just a DVD of their wedding.   They now want it in the highest quality available.   Graduations?  Prom?  Homecoming?   A local high school produces each game in HD.   

 

Because HD camera technology has come down, it is the viable output method.   With BD writers now below $90, it's not a dealbreaker cost for people looking to get into it.

 

I understand what they are saying, but digital copy just doesn't do it for me.   It is nowhere near the quality of BD, far more compressed with audio that isn't even in the same boat.   Plus, because iTunes is iTunes, it doesn't offer a cost competition.  I mean, they had "The Tourist" for $17.99 in HD.  No extras, stripped audio.  "The Tourist" is at Walmart in full BD for $19.   I save one dollar and get an inferior copy with no extras at all .. I still can't figure out how anyone sees that as any sort of "good deal"  Hell, the BD comes with a "digital" copy, so in effect it's like getting the SD version at 0, which is really a savings of $12, since Itunes wants another $14 for that.

 

Apple is convinced that eventually everything will go discless.   Maybe they are right, at some point.   But somethings won't because the need to share them is higher then their perceived value.  IE, there is no space at iTunes for "Dick and Jane's Wedding 03/12/2011" or "Little Timmie's HS Graduation 5/18/2011"   And while digital sharing of those through facebook and other media happen, there is always a value to them otherwise.   It's the reason why years after digital cameras, there is still a market for printed photos at stores, and stores who have moved to print those digital photos.. :)

Yep. I agree with all that, particularly on the HD viewing side.

 

And having read about Adobe's improvements on the PC side, I've talked with my wife about switching her work from Mac to PC. She's deeply in grained in her ways, so I don't see that happening, but I do think Apple faces threats of its own making in what used to be its core professional market.

NAB is going to be very interesting this year.  I suspect we will see a MONSTER upgrade of Final Cut Pro released and if it doesn't specifically and adequately ratchet up BluRay support that will be very telling.

 

http://www.nabshow.com/2011/index.asp

 

Word is hitting the web that potential iMac refreshes are 4-6 weeks away (supposedly shipments are already "on a boat from China"). Changes indicate Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt, as expected, but no other major changes. I'm going to assume that still means no Blu. However if they have an attractively priced SSD option, I may go for it, though I'm wary of the SSD that Apple use, which apparently don't do wear leveling and overprovisioning like the better 3rd party SSDs out there. However I think even their in-house SSD would probably prove more durable than a traditional HD, and even after speed decreases over time it should still be faster than a traditional HD.

 

Now I just need those announced external RAID Thunderbolt solutions to start hitting the market!

TRIM support is in Lion for the drives Apple uses and 'rumored' to be available for general use drives down the road...

 

http://paulstamatiou.com/mac-osx-lion-ssd-trim-support

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/25/apple_adds_ssd_trim_support_to_mac_os_x_10_7_lion_beta.html

 

 

No, I'm not.   I specifically addressed this exact point.   Yes, people can even put 1080P on Youtube.. at a low-ass bitrate.   But many of the bigger moments are things people look to archive and expect quality from.   I've used wedding photographers as my example as I know many.   When they put out DVDs in the past, they were nice, menu designed DVDs with custom print tops, pretty look, etc.

Now that quick cameras are available at HD, people expect archival quality from these productions.   A good wedding photographer can make good money.   People expect from that something better then a "I posted it on Youtube" or "Here's a file on a pen drive"   That would simply be unacceptable..   Do a google search for "Wedding Photography Bluray" or "Prom Photography Bluray" TONS of hits. 

What people do on their own with HD media is one thing.   But Apple has always sold the Mac Pro and high end mac workstations as great video output terminals.   And in those markets they have traditionally done a really fantastic job, a near monopoly actually as I've pointed out.  

But making the burn oriented process a multi-step one (there are ways now, using Final Cut, Roxio, an external burner, etc.) is an annoying pain in the ass, especially when FCP doesn't do BD menu support correct, considering numerous on the other side do.

 

I think Apple's attitude of "we'll skip BD, everything is just sent media" works fine for most end consumers who are publishing to the internet as their prime target.   But for those in production, in sucks. 

That's all :)
 

 

The thing that doesn't pass the "smell" test for Apple's stance on BD is how even cheap Windows laptops now have BD. For a company that prides itself on being a superior experience to Windows, this is the one area that sticks out like a sore thumb. Steve is basically saying "BD is a bag of hurt...but somehow the Windows team has successfully navigated it and we aren't going to bother."

Remember Apple is allabout CONTROL. That new bluray that needs a firmware update put out to everydevice or it sucks? That doesn't fly with them. It's not about the cost or the difficulty of the licensing but the -experience-

Remember the old commercial: Can we see the dinosaurs now dad?

But it's not what he said and not what he meant, but any straight reading of his words. His emphasis was on the complexity of licensing. And as Carlo and I said, that's belied by the Windows notebooks that do Blu-ray. Even my $90 living room Blu-ray player can do it.

 

As Sam says, I think it's more easily understood as being not really about customers, but about Apple's control over their technology and about pushing iTunes.

 

I think we're mixing formats.. yes, Youtube, etc. is just another form of media.   Yes, BD is a form of media... what I'm saying is that BD, as a form of media has one set of transport goals that is very different from say Youtube..  it's not that neither is 1080P, they both could be, it's just the goals are very easy.

 

 

I tend to agree with the other; Apple seems to be deciding to wave a nice "goodbye" to the high end video editing market as they are just not making it a friendly production platform.   This might be part of their new method, and with iOS making up a larger part of the pie, it makes sense.. but it is such an weird contrast to adopting Thunderbolt that they now have means to quickly transfer and edit tons of video and production data; and yet the output format and management support - which has to include on board testing of final product - is just totally non-existent.  Just strange.
 

 

From Sam

 

 

 

Yeah, I don't think there is any question about this now.  If BD was available on Apple why in the world would anyone pay for a low-bit rate "HD" copy with inferior quality at the exact same price of the BD disc (and sometimes more) through iTunes?  If licensing was supposed to hurt the consumers by making things costly, then it's crazy that frequently I can buy the BD of a movie CHEAPER then I can buy it on iTunes and just get it stripped down with no extras, lossless soundtracks, etc.  *shrug* so seeing BD as a "bag of hurt" for consumers seems to be mostly hype, not real.

Is this true? I admit I didn't do a full search (and am not going to bother doing one) but looking at iTunes movies I see all of the new releases I'm looking for that hit BD as well this week.

 

Are there some high-profile examples you can give of movies that are being withheld from iTunes for this reason?
 

 

Singles.

Vast, vast difference.   Realize, here the reason why MP3/AAC prevails over CD is for three different points:

 

(1) People view it as a price advantage, as often they will buy one single track vs. an entire CD

(2) Access to day-and-date changing content; which allows for distributors to put out exclusives which seperate (realize, this is the COMPLETE inverse of a BD vs. HD on Itunes argument, whereas BD provides exclusives, Itunes provides none)

(3) At the time that iTunes really hit a boom was when CD prices were holding at an unrealistic high; places like Sam Goodies were selling CDs at around $17 a pop.  Apple wanted $10.   Again, this is the inverse of BD vs. HD on Itunes, where HD on BD is often cheaper.

 

I don't think in any way Apple is worried about it burying iTunes.   I think there are tons who will still buy things through iTunes.   Netflix streaming doesn't even come into this in any meaningful way because it's a full rental service, not a buy service.  

 

See, I see what you are saying as almost a "damn bluray!  The very existance of BD keeps things off of iTunes!" to which I say: yes.  :)  Competition of media, formats and means is in the end good.   Just my opinion, but I definitely feel that way.  But you go from "if you think BD is a threat to iTunes" to in the next paragraph saying exactly that.   I don't think it is a threat.  Lots of people will still buy on iTunes.  I'm just saying the cost effectiveness is stupid.  Let me use this as an example:

Toy Story 3 Bluray is $18.96 at Nebraska Furniture Mart (local)

The HD on iTunes is $19.

 

In the Bluray, I can play it on my PS3, etc. and if I have an iPod/etc. it comes with the DVD and digital copy for my ipod/iphone/ipad.

With the iTunes I can play on AppleTV.

 

The installed base of BD players is significantly larger then the installed base of AppleTV.   To the point it's not even a comparison. 

 

But if the two aren't in competition in any meaningful way, then what is the negative of providing BD as an available media type to Apple users?   Like I said, tons of professionals have always used apple, and a media they want to be able to produce on is one they would like to see playback on.   No one is wanting to burn up an unknown image to race across to a set top BD to test.

 

Whether BD and iTunes are in competition is really not so much the point (because while they both exist, they attract different crowds).  And I think it's fair to argue the actual value of HD sales on itunes, just as I think it's fair to debate whether or not any software is "worth" what it costs.   I think every consumer has to evaluate whether or not a product is worth what it costs, no matter who the provider is.

 

It is pretty clear at this point that Apple has pretty much written off BD and won't participate.   I don't see it having a big negative impact on them, and the decision like I said will help drive the over inflated HD video sales at their stores, so good for them all the way around.

 

I think sometimes it's easy to say those who are skeptical are just anti-apple. That really isn't the case.  My wife is happy with her brand spanking new 15" Macbook Pro.   She carries the iPhone4, we both carry iPod touches, and I have an iPad I snagged on the cheap this week ;)  

 

But I treat everyone with a bit of cynicism until I can figure out whether or not it's a philosophy I like or not.   I realize Apple's closed ecosystem works for them.  And frankly, in comparison to the pit that is Android tablets and the rudderless philosophy that pretty well tanked Zune, they've had the right call.

But it doesn't mean that every decision they make is one I have to like.   The decision to pretty much write off BD has been a big negative to people who have long valued apple for their ability to be a production level graphics station.    

 

I don't view this as an attack on apple the way fanbois attack Microsoft or attack Apple or attack google.   I don't really care.   I tend to find the product I like for what I do most, and thats what I go with.   But I think anyone holding out hope for BD on Apple is wasting their time right now.  And Apple's argument of "it's so difficult" is preposterous considering I can pick up a $429 laptop that has BD, right now.  It's their decision and they've made it as a matter of money and philosophy.   That's OK.   I disagree with it.   I don't think it's a good value to the consumer, but it's obvious that isn't going to happen *shrug*

I think Ted captured what I wanted to say above. I'm not so sure iTunes lags installed base of Bluray tho.

Apple has 200 million credit cards on file. How many bluray decks are there world wide?

The # of Credit Cards on file never really gets me (example: my wife and I have at least 5 cards that they 'list' for us, as they keep hers, mine, and a few that are expired that we have since replaced).. and again, we're way off point; what does this really matter if itunes succeeds or not, because all of it basically substantiates that the entire "bag of hurt" claim is primarily just an artificial roadblock rather then any real issue, which is the point of the argument.

 

In regards to BD players, as of 3/1, Sony has shipped 50M PS3s.   The total other sales, based on estimates, is roughly 80M, so about 130M+ (or so), and there is an anticipated 62.5M stand alone players (not counting PS3s) being shipped this year alone, and about 32M of those into the US... so that would be ~200M.  If you count BDRom drives, then based on LiteOn and LG's figures, there are more then 300 Million BDrom capable devices out there (counting drives installed in laptops, desktops, etc.) ... so, the per household viability is actually very good right now.

That having been said,  and getting back to the point:  Apple has basically decided to say no to BD.   I think we are all agreed on that.   It isn't a cost issue, it isn't a functionality issue, as all of these have been adequately addressed repeatedly in other ways.   There isn't a "bag of hurt" over using it, there is a "bag of hurt" in that they really don't want to.   That's all.  

 

I'm not saying good or bad, I'm just saying, it's hard to come up with any viable means by which you would say "oh, it's just almost impossible or so expensive".   LiteON tells distribution partners right now that they will ship record number of BD-ROM/DVDRW combo drives, which have become the standard on HP lines - primarily because the drive itself is $50 in the retail channel.. so who knows what HP is paying, but I bet not much.

 

So, putting all that aside, and all the debate on iTunes aside, the end point just doesn't change: if you are waiting for BD on Apple, you're pretty much wasting your time.    They are pretty well committed to a stalemate of seeing which method triumphs.

Huh? That doesn't make any sense. What does # of credit cards have to do with how people watch movies on the living room TV? (Apple's got 2 cc #s from me and I've got 50 Blu-ray discs and no iTunes movies)

 

Or, as I chronically ask, Who watches movies, HD or otherwise, on a 24" computer monitor at a computer desk?

I'm just saying ALL of those have the capability to easily buy or rent HD films on about 12 different devices

Macs

PCs

Apple TVs

iPods

iPads

iPhones

 

Just cause you have it in your head that people are only watching iTunes films on a Mac doesn't make it true. 

All those credit cards may be buying Angry Birds, not The Birds.

Credit Card count is meaningless as a tally of iTunes market strength as a movie store.

We're saying the same thing bud.  Bluray drive sales are great and all but they are only a part of the picture on how many people are actively buying and renting these films.  Lets put it this way, digital rentals are big enough that Amazon wants into the crowded market already by bundling it in with Prime, and that HAS to be going to hurt their media sales, no?