New iMac's likely soon (1 Viewer)

[DaveF]

You know what prevented me from buying a new Mac Pro this week?

The absence of Blu-ray[/quoteIt's almost embarrassing to ask this, but why does Blu Ray on a computer matter?

Software isn't distributed on Blu Ray. I would never watch a Blu Ray movie on a computer. Is Blu Ray rippable yet, for HTPC? Backup to discs is dead; harddrives are too large and cheap.

I guess iDVD authoring to Blu Ray could be cool. Watching Blu Ray on a laptop when traveling might be good. I don't see a use for BR in my personal use; I'm curious how others would use it.

New hardware's out...now I'm doubly eager for 10.6 so I can upgrade my wife's Mac. She gets a new 24" iMac this year (and I get her 20" LCD for my MBP)

 

[Carlo_M]

Support BD? Shoot, they aren't even supporting HDMI yet!

Someone needs to tell Apple there's a recession. Of course, Macs are luxuries and not necessities, I get that, but if they want to sell, they need to make their pricing more palatable.

They struck out on me as a purchaser across the product line:
1. Mac Pro - I was teetering on buying one to run Pro Tools, but I built a similar machine to the quad core Pro for less than half that cost. Since the entry level Pro doesn't allow for a second processor added in later, I'll just make do with what I have.

2. iMac - I need a second monitor to run Pro Tools (mix and edit windows need their own screen) so I figured if I'm in for a second monitor, why not consider an iMac? Well, the fact that it's still Core 2 instead of Quad is why. Now I'm just going to buy a second monitor for the PC.

3. Mac Mini - HTPC/media center needs. Nice little update, but it can't for me be a true "HTPC" because I'm now fully invested in Blu. The $600 I was going to spend on this will instead go to an Oppo.

So for now it looks like I'm standing pat with my 2.33 C2D MBP and my Vista machine. Shame I was really looking forward to a dedicated Pro Tools Mac but the pricing and feature set just aren't right for me.

 

[ErichH]

Strange - guess they think some people will choose the small board for looks? I'm guessing many will not notice until they open the box and have a lovely WTF moment before they call and complain.
In spite of that, the new entry 24 is still the best bang on a Mac. A bump in processor, drive & memory for less.
This might be the last time we get firewire before USB 3.0 takes over.

 

[Craig S]

I'm with you on this Dave, for the same reasons. I have no need for Blu on my computers either.

That said, I'm surprised it's not offered as an option for the Mac Pro line, as that is indeed for "professionals". However, there are numerous third-party options for internal and external BD drives (and burning software), so those folks that really need to burn Blu-Rays can do so - just not with an Apple logo.

 

[Christian Behrens]

And you won't find them going to, since DisplayPort is the successor to DVI in the computer world and supports audio/video/DRM in one connection just like HDMI does. One only needs a miniDP to HDMI adapter:
For only $12.00 each when QTY 50+ purchased - Mini Display Port to HDMI Adapter | Mini Display Port to DVI / VGA Adapter

As for BD, don't count on playback functionality in the current QuickTime architecture; if they'll support it (and that's a HUGE "if"), then in QuickTime X, i.e. Snow Leopard, but frankly I wouldn't hold my breath.

Just for burning and reading data you don't really need anything but a BR drive (internal/external).

-Christian

 

[Carlo_M]

You know, we can go back and forth on BD as a "necessity" all day. But when most new PCs and laptops, many costing half or less what a Mac costs, have the ability to at least read and play back BDs (and anything that remotely approaches a Mac in cost usually has a BD writer), it's just a glaring discrepancy given the price.

We all know that Apple's profit margins are high, and we also know they buy in such bulk that adding at least a BD read drive would not add that much cost. Now it's more about corporate greed. And maybe that's a good thing. While every other company seems to be tanking in this recession, Apple keeps posting profits.

Well, having been a faithful Mac user for several years, they can make their money without my revenue this year, until they put out something whose specs justify the pricing for me.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I agree with the BD camp.

If you want to side with the studios, they are all heralding Blu-ray
as a huge success and are very optimistic about software sales.

With the exorbitant prices Apple charges for their hardware, I agree
that the inclusion of a BD drive would not only be a nominal expense
but a huge factor for people like myself who are sitting on the fence
waiting to buy their next Mac computer.

It's wonderful that Mac offers all this great movie making software but
no way to archive it on high definition disc. Why wouldn't someone this
technology not want to make copies of their home movies on Blu-ray?

There's also the natural progression from storing files on a floppy,
to CD and now DVD. I would love the storage capacity of Blu-ray.

The omission of Blu-ray in Apple products is a huge setback to
Windows laptops that include it on models at a $1k pricepoint. My
brother just bought a 17" Sony Vaio laptop with BD burning capability
for $1k and you mean to tell me Apple can't do that on their $2k 17"
models?

 

[Christian Behrens]

Please keep in mind that BD playback on Windows is only possible because MS implemented what is called a "Protected Media Path", meaning a completely secure signal path from the HD source (HD-DVD and BluRay) all the way through the OS, graphics chip drivers, through HDMI with HDCP to an HDCP enabled display.

Without all this in place, BD playback cannot happen. Macs until recently didn't have HDCP enabled ports; only now with miniDP is that hardware pre-requisite fullfilled.

However, that does not yet take care of everything else that needs to be implemented in the OS *on a very core level* to protect the studios' video and audio streams on those shiny BD discs. That's a huge deal and likely covers everything that deals with graphics on the Mac (Quartz, Quartz Extreme, QT, etc.)

Can you imagine the backlash if Apple just added BD drives to their Macs without having software to play back BD movies? It would be nothing compared to the small group of people who are currently lambasting Apple for not having BD options, because let's face it, only a very small percentage of computer users need a BD drive today. No, I think the Internet would explode the day BD drives are sold by Apple, without BD playback software in existence.

Of course, the fact that they are competing in the HD arena through iTunes doesn't really help matters here.

-Christian

 

[DaveF]

I think the natural progression is dead. Removeable media is too small. Even my now-modest MBP's 160 GB drive with perhaps 80 GB used is much too large too large for Blu Ray discs. I'm no longer a student with time and interest to rummage through my files and do selective backups across multiple discs.

With Time Machine, SuperDuper and $100 Terabyte drives, why hassle with removable media, even Blu Ray? Backup has become plug-and-play-and-forget. I've got spindles of CD backups from grad school. Never touch 'em. But a live hard drive fueling Time Machine saves me from dumb mistakes weekly.

If a new Mac came with a Blu Ray player, it would be fun. And it's a loss from the specs-sheet. But I think it's not really a loss to Joe Consumer (which I consider myself on this matter).


Like others, I see a PC in my future. After my wife's iMac, I want a netbook and Apple has nothing to offer. I can't justify a $1300 MacBook (or a $2000 Air!) when a $500 MSI Wind will do the job.

 

[Carlo_M]

As soon as your backup and regular hard drive die concurrently, you'll know the answer.

Seriously, HDs are good for, what 5-10 years? Whereas discs [from reputable makers] live for 25+ years [some claim 100 but I've not had any that long]. Sure, you can do a mirror RAID backup solution to be double sure of maximum uptime for your backup HDs, but who wants to put up the costs for that?

Finally, for those of us who are music/movie/photo connoisseurs, who deal with massive files that we want preserved but don't need to be living on a HD or backup HD constantly (wasting space), BD-Rs are the answer.

For example: my Canon XSi 10MP DSLR yields 15MB RAW files. I take hundreds of shots a year. I don't want those always living natively on my HD. I'd like to shoot, retouch, convert to JPG and email them to friends, then archive the RAW files. I've only had my camera a year so for now they're fine living on my HD, but in another 2-3 years, even a TB isn't going to be enough.

Couple that with my Pro Tools setup, and when I create a 4 minute song with 12-18 tracks, I'm already at 9GB for the files. I'd like to do a final mix, downmix to WAV, then archive my raw PT song files so I can revisit and re-edit years down the line.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Apple's refusal to cut prices in the US market (and indeed, hike prices in other markets) seems poorly timed. With the razor-thin margins the PC manufacturers are running these days, you can get a fully-featured desktop with significantly better specs for the price of a Mac Mini. Making the Mini greener is a nice sound byte, but customers that are really hurting would probably rather they'd just cut the price instead. Likewise, iMacs running only Core 2 Duo processors starting above $1k is going to be a non-starter for a lot of people that were holding off for this announcement.

 

[Ted Todorov]

I haven't studied the prices but I thought some were cut -- $200 lower on the 24" iMac for instance. So far as the Mini is concerned, time and again I've done such comparisons and it is simply not true. There are no machines that match the form factor, quiet operation and full specs of the Mini. When Sony released one a year or two back, it was $2000(!) more than the Mini.

Now if you are happy with a huge, loud econobox, of course you can get more bang for your buck. But if you are interested in applications where quiet operation and a small form factor matter, the Mini wins -- be it for HTPC, music server, headless server where space etc. is a factor (see MacMiniColo.net), a portable that's lighter than a laptop, etc. etc.

To me the MacMini + EyeTV, iTunes, iPhoto, Front Row makes the perfect HTPC.

 

[DaveF]

I'd like to see the background on that. All I've heard in recent years is that discs -- consumer grade rewritable -- have an expected life of under a decade. If they really last a quarter of a century, then that's a horse of a different color. But conversely, my experience is that hard drives last a decade, easily.

As for two completely different hard drives dying simultaneously is about as likely as my hard drive and my disc dying at the same time -- it's a moot argument.

I'll have to start another thread on long-term backups. It's an important and non-trivial concern.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Until yesterday I certainly would have been on the hard disk side -- I have discovered DVD-Rs/CD-Rs to be unreliable time and again. That was before my Drobo bit the dust -- I sure hope I manage to rescue my data, cause I'll be mighty unhappy otherwise -- all sorts of irreplaceable stuff is on there.

But before I started depending on proprietary raids, my strategy served me very well -- copy my data onto ever larger HDs, but don't get rid of the old small ones until the data is copied again onto an even larger HD, at which point I have my two copies and can recycle my ancient machines. Moore's law has served me well in that approach. It also makes it more likely that the data stays readable. It still have a bunch of LPs and floppies, but nothing that can red/play them. Eventually CDs and DVDs will go that way -- on the other hand your latest & greatest HD is by definition readable.

 

[DaveF]

Did the Drobo enclosure itself fail? And it corrupted the drives contained? (!) Hopefully it's "merely" an enclosure failure with no actual data loss.

What's the word on GPU acceleration for OS X or applications, especially Adobe? As I budget for the next Mac, I'm wondering if about video card options.

 

[Sam Posten]

For those of you who missed it, those of us with recent Mac Pros can upgrade to the new hotness for $349. It supports DisplayPort and DVI, 1 each. I'm VERY interested in seeing how this gets benchmarked by people other than Apple itself

Mac Pro refresh brings high-end graphics to the Mac

Ted: Don't forget you need offsite backups too! I take mine to my parents house, but since that is only a few miles away it is still geographically risky. I need to get my backups to Australia until such time as we can safely put our backups into space or, better yet, off-world.... =p

 

[Ted Todorov]

It was a combination of a drive failure and the Drobo itself hanging.

The good news: pulling the Drobo (power) plug and reconnecting it via USB did the trick. All my data is visible, and It is recovering right now. Bad news it will take 51 hours before it is back "in drives are allowed to fail mode".

Spoke to Drobo tech support, they answered immediately and were very professional -- said it should be first not last in the firewire chain, so that along with the drive failure may have caused the issue. Said "don't use Seagate drives, use Western Digital" -- I did get a WD as my replacement -- unfortunately I have 3 more Seagate drives waiting to fail -- hopefully not in the next 51 hours...

And yes, off site backups, I do have one in a different state, but is way old by now.

 

[Carlo_M]

As someone who just bought a 1.5 TB Seagate Barraccuda let me just say "well sheeeeeeeeyaaaaat..." This damned thing better not crap out on me. Wish Vista had something like Time Machine...oh wait it does (Shadow Copy aka "15% of your HD is lost to it"). Except that too lives on the main HD so if that dies, so does the shadow copy. :rolleyes

 

[DaveF]

That's surprising. Seagate has the better warranty. And two years ago after a WD drive failed, a rep at a data recovery firm told me the opposite.

 

[Carlo_M]

I think Seagate's overall historical reputation has been superior. WD took some big hits in the early 2000s as far as quality control. However with the 7200.11 Barracuda series, there was some faulty firmware in the first batches that caused the drives to fail at a high rate. I think this more than anything has really caused a black eye on Seagate's previously stellar reputation.

The problems were primarily on the OEM versions of the 1TB and 1.5TB drives released in mid/late 2008. Supposedly all the newer drives have had this addressed, and I bought the retail kit which, according to Seagate's serial number lookup does not need the firmware update, so I'm hoping for good luck on mine. I'll start regularly backing up, just in case.