Rumor: Steve Jobs likens Blu-Ray to the mafia, ashamed that Apple joined

In 2006 the battle for physical high definition media was starting, with some tech giants like Toshiba, Microsoft and Intel taking the side of HD DVD and others like Sony, Samsung, and Apple taking Blu-ray’s side.

It’s been three years since Warner Brothers dropped HD DVD right before CES and tipped the balance to Blu-ray, yet Apple has yet to include Blu-ray players on their computers despite being on the Blu-ray Disc Association. Their stance has always been that the DRM included in Blu-ray is simply too restrictive to consumers, although many people believe that it’s because the format could eat into the iTunes machine.

Now Hardmac is reporting that in an internal meeting, Steve Jobs confirmed his dislike of the format and that the Blu-ray Disc Association looks more like the Mafia than a regulating board due to the high fees required for authoring. He allegedly went on to say that he was embarrassed that Apple was a member of the association’s board of directors. Although these statements can’t be confirmed, it follows past reports from Apple and easily explains the lack of Blu-ray support on the platform.

Also in the list of rumors is a report that new versions of Final Cut will be announced in March or early April.  In addition, it sounds like many customers of Apple’s Xserve have complained about the product being discontinued so the product may see continued life.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

TechSpot: Silverstone Raven 2 Evolution ATX Case Review

Next Story

Amazon's Android Appstore opens to developers

159 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.


Now Hardmac is reporting that in an internal meeting, Steve Jobs confirmed his dislike of the format and that the Blu-ray Disc Association looks more like the Mafia than a regulating board due to the high fees required for authoring.

Now if there's one thing Steve Jobs knows a lot about, it's high fees!

I never understand why people that embrace a capitalistic society are so surprised when their own leaders of industry make such statements. If a person still believes that "the more money I have, the happier I will be" ideal then such statements are to be expected.

The situation is that Blurays are in the whild. They are selling... and if they stop the primary users from generating content or having this option after the cat is out of the bag... they risk alienating them an having them run into the arms of the competition.

Some people like to store their HD content on HD or stream and others want a compact disk. We just want choice in the end and content creators want and should have the ability to produce content for all avaible markets whether Apple likes it or not. You have to ride the market conditions of the now... I seriouly doubt anything beyond something hardware backward compat or cheaper to replace immediatly can derail bluray... too much money was invested in the while setup...

Download quality suck even Apple vs Blu-ray.. of course Apple don't like it, they like their own standard so it's free to them. Like the Ipod connector that is CHEAP to them but ultra premium to vendors, not only that but they CHANGE the freaking connector between generation (same form factor, different pins) so it doesn't work anymore.. anyway i hate apple..

Once upon a time Steve had sense enough to join blu ray. which was the better format. Glad we didn't go HDDVD. horrible format. Software might have been better but seeing it had no physical upgrade over dvd's, I never would have bought it. HDDVD's still crack and far easier to scratch. So it would have been expensive and I would have had to replace them. Clearly AnyDVD wanted HDDVD. More disks to backup. with blu ray it's pointless to backup because it's hard to break a blu ray disc. and steve like netflix has a notion that streaming is where it's at. Well eventually at a heavy price. Streaming will eventually kill cable, but don't think it's anywhere near replacing anything else.

Sorry Steve, then you should've backed HD-DVD, the more consumer friendly format. Re-use of existing production lines (with minor modifications) and lower licensing costs, end result being cheaper end product and more consumer uptake. Blu-Ray only won because studios dropped it (shady deals anyone?), and because of the PS3 giving the format and established install base.

TCLN Ryster said,
Sorry Steve, then you should've backed HD-DVD, the more consumer friendly format. Re-use of existing production lines (with minor modifications) and lower licensing costs, end result being cheaper end product and more consumer uptake. Blu-Ray only won because studios dropped it (shady deals anyone?), and because of the PS3 giving the format and established install base.

Are we still using these tired excuses?

HD DVD was the one making shady deals (Paramount/DreamWorks). Warner, the largest home video company, was the one who dropped HD DVD due to BD titles outselling HD DVD 5-1 during the 2007 holiday season.

PS: any "payoffs" to publicly held companies have to be reported in their earnings. Only Paramount and DreamWorks reported such payoffs.

HD DVD also had no support hardware wise outside of Toshiba and buggy combo players from Samsung and LG. BD had pretty much *every* major electronics company supporting it, despite the ignorant fanboy "Sony format" mantra (Panasonic owns the majority of patents in BD, Pioneer & Philips have additional patents along with Sony making up the rest).

Your "reuse" cost the format bandwith and storage space. Buggy "flipper" discs, lack of lossless audio on the vast majority of titles, and the format reached the capacity limit less than 6 months after launch.

In India, an internal Blu-ray Reader (NOT Writer) costs Rs. 7,000 ($140) , an internal Combo drive (still NOT Writer) Rs. 10,000 ($200) and a Writer the stratosphere...

How can Blu-ray succeed...?

Samir Shah said,
In India, an internal Blu-ray Reader (NOT Writer) costs Rs. 7,000 ($140) , an internal Combo drive (still NOT Writer) Rs. 10,000 ($200) and a Writer the stratosphere...

How can Blu-ray succeed...?

cheapest I've seen is $80 for a writer. but don't have the specs to run it. Brother might.

It is really a shame he doesn't allow this but he has several point unfortunately as I've said before time and time again... I have to have a hard copy. Mainly because I have kids and do not feel like have duplicate copies of a file all of the place. (yes I know I can stream) but that takes away bandwidth from my gaming experience when they are streaming 24/7 ;0)

Anyway, beside the fact that with each physical copy I purchase I also get a digital and dvd version I'm sold as long as it stays like that. Now if only these darn digital versions would actually work on an android phone without me having to rip apart the DRM I would be satisfied. Honestly is my only gripe right now on that platform makes me want to switch to iOS

SaltLife said,
It is really a shame he doesn't allow this but he has several point unfortunately as I've said before time and time again... I have to have a hard copy. Mainly because I have kids and do not feel like have duplicate copies of a file all of the place. (yes I know I can stream) but that takes away bandwidth from my gaming experience when they are streaming 24/7 ;0)

Anyway, beside the fact that with each physical copy I purchase I also get a digital and dvd version I'm sold as long as it stays like that. Now if only these darn digital versions would actually work on an android phone without me having to rip apart the DRM I would be satisfied. Honestly is my only gripe right now on that platform makes me want to switch to iOS

One thing I didn't realize until last night...the codes for the digital copy editions actually expire after a certain date. I was loading a handful of movies onto my Mac to transfer to my ipod, and the digital copy of 'District 9' I have has a code that expired in 2010. So it's useless now. =/

brominated said,

One thing I didn't realize until last night...the codes for the digital copy editions actually expire after a certain date. I was loading a handful of movies onto my Mac to transfer to my ipod, and the digital copy of 'District 9' I have has a code that expired in 2010. So it's useless now. =/

The expiration dates are printed on the packaging, its no one's fault but your own that you didn't pay attention.

How can you really be against a product that can do so much, and has future proof technology (some at least) that will enable you to watch videos in ways that have yet to fully be optimized?
First, A blu-ray player does not make you "rebuy" all your dvds.... It will work with them as well, upscaling them to a better quality *gasp*
Second, Those of us with good tv's, dont want to see all the crappy stuff that we can on non-hd titles. We paid good money (some) for these TV's, and I would like to use it to the fullest, if possible. Avatar, Horton Hears a Who, Batman Dark Knight, all on bluray, look almost like another dimension you could jump into on my TV, so crystal clear , vivid, and amazing depth. No DVD can produce that image, and same with digital downloads ( i am very well aware of it all ).
Third, They are not expensive.... You can get a decent player for around $100 now, and a awesome one for $199. Hell, get the ps3 for $299, and you have yourself a full media center. The blu-ray disc themselves are not expensive .... http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Kni...-Live-Blu-ray/dp/B001GZ6QEC - If you think those prices are expensive, you really are nuts....

PeterTHX said,
He wants to sell AppleTV. Or whatever it's called.

BD threatens his iTunes monopoly.

Monopoly how, again? Wrong company, the one you're thinking about has a flag symbol, not an apple.

brominated said,
Monopoly how, again? Wrong company, the one you're thinking about has a flag symbol, not an apple.

DOJ is looking into iTunes, look it up.

PeterTHX said,

DOJ is looking into iTunes, look it up.

Hasn't progressed past the inquiry stage since May. Doubt it will go anywhere, as Apple doesn't have a stranglehold on any market.

i have to agree with jobs on this one. this whole blu-ray thing is undeniably fail in my book. its so expensive nobody bothered with it anymore, even my well-off friends.

3rd impact said,
i have to agree with jobs on this one. this whole blu-ray thing is undeniably fail in my book. its so expensive nobody bothered with it anymore, even my well-off friends.

Doesn't matter, the format is being rammed down our throats. The local best-buys and targets where I live have all but removed their DVD sections in favor of more blu-ray space. Which is resulting in more higher-priced combo-packs which include both dvd and blu-ray media...in addition to a digital copy that ties into iTunes/WMP. Either way, you're stuck with a bunch of discs sitting around somewhere.

3rd impact said,
i have to agree with jobs on this one. this whole blu-ray thing is undeniably fail in my book. its so expensive nobody bothered with it anymore, even my well-off friends.

That was definitely true a few years ago, but nowadays? Not so much... You can buy a player for $100-$150, and movies are frequently on sale at Best Buy for $9.99 (I just bought Marley and Me, Wrestler, and the last Final Destination flick for $9.99/ea).

Yeah, the players are a little more expensive than a regular DVD player, but far cheaper than DVD players were back in the day. If you have a 47"+ TV and are still watching regular DVDs, you're missing out (IMHO).

Magallanes said,
Steve Jobs:I don't like Blu-ray... i profit from it (Disney) but still, i don't like.

Seems perfectly logical to me.

Just another example of Steve being a tool.....

I don't like Blu Ray so you can't have it on Apple products.....
I don't like Flash so you can't have it.....

Talk about being lead around like sheep!

And he wonders why OSX can't hit double digits lol

If Apple are that much against the format, why not stand down from the board of directors?

Oh wait, that'd be giving up a little too much power, wouldn't it?

Their stance has always been that the DRM included in Blu-ray is simply too restrictive to consumers
Liars.

Wait so Steve jobs is complaining about high prices, I would liken his company to the mafia with their high apple taxes.

Gaffney said,
Wait so Steve jobs is complaining about high prices, I would liken his company to the mafia with their high apple taxes.

Last time I checked, no one forced you to buy anything from Apple.

brominated said,

Last time I checked, no one forced you to buy anything from Apple.

Exactly. Where for movies bought in store you're kinda stuck with BluRay if you want HD content (for better or worse)

Smigit said,
Exactly. Where for movies bought in store you're kinda stuck with BluRay if you want HD content (for better or worse)

You can buy BD from dozens of providers. I don't see people complaining that they were "stuck" with DVD all those years.

PeterTHX said,

You can buy BD from dozens of providers. I don't see people complaining that they were "stuck" with DVD all those years.

Before that, it was VHS, and everyone said the same thing. Hell, there are some movies I've purchased 3 damn times now, in different formats. I honestly think I have 5 different copies of 'Blade Runner' around here. But really, people complained about the transition to DVD the same way. The exception there being that it really was a necessary transition from VHS, since VHS tapes have a finite lifespan. Blu-ray...eh, just looks/sounds better, but ultimately not that drastic of an improvement over DVD.

brominated said,

Last time I checked, no one forced you to buy anything from Apple.


You need Apple if you want the nice design or OSX unless you get custom. So if you want HD movies without downloading you need to pay extra even though it's just a little thing.

Steve jobs is complaining about a Blu Ray which are basically the same thing as apple, charging a lot of cash for something small and popular.

brominated said,

Before that, it was VHS, and everyone said the same thing. Hell, there are some movies I've purchased 3 damn times now, in different formats. I honestly think I have 5 different copies of 'Blade Runner' around here. But really, people complained about the transition to DVD the same way. The exception there being that it really was a necessary transition from VHS, since VHS tapes have a finite lifespan. Blu-ray...eh, just looks/sounds better, but ultimately not that drastic of an improvement over DVD.

I think a lot of people fail to realize something about a Blu-ray player and DVD's.... they still work together, and the upscaling they can do is just amazing. Don't purchase a 2nd copy if you don't really have to. Just watch a upscaled DVD on your blu-ray player, and get what blu-rays you really want....
It's not like you have to replace your whole damn library like you would with VHS to DVD. You just add on to it, with now much better quality videos. If you feel a DVD is not giving enough justice to the film, get the Blu-ray. If you are ok with the DVD, well then, win win huh?

shakey said,

I think a lot of people fail to realize something about a Blu-ray player and DVD's.... they still work together, and the upscaling they can do is just amazing. Don't purchase a 2nd copy if you don't really have to. Just watch a upscaled DVD on your blu-ray player, and get what blu-rays you really want....
It's not like you have to replace your whole damn library like you would with VHS to DVD. You just add on to it, with now much better quality videos. If you feel a DVD is not giving enough justice to the film, get the Blu-ray. If you are ok with the DVD, well then, win win huh?

A lot of places where I live are starting to stock less and less titles in DVD at all. I don't actually have a problem with it, since quite honestly 1.) I watch a lot of stuff on Netflix 2.) most newer movies are crap or remakes 3.) I've been buying less movies regardless.

brominated said,

Blu-ray...eh, just looks/sounds better, but ultimately not that drastic of an improvement over DVD.

The difference in Blu-ray over DVD is much more of an improvement than DVD was over VHS. People trying to watch BDs on a 19" Magnavox CRT using composite video shouldn't comment on the quality of the format as a whole.

Miuku said,
I don't actually see him dissing BD as a FORMAT, he's dissing the people behind it.

He has in the past, apparenly because his little iDrones would rather have destructively compressed, low bitrate, lossy audio 'digital' formats instead of Blu-ray.

cRuNcHiE said,
how is drm on bluray any different to the drm on video from iTunes?

Because you can't right click a bluray and convert to a format that doesn't have drm? Right click any song in iTunes and there is a convert item there. If you change your default settings to rip music as MP3's, you will be able to convert to an MP3 file. People need to stop repeating what they read somewhere if they don't actually have experience using a product.

cRuNcHiE said,
how is drm on bluray any different to the drm on video from iTunes?

this. I'd say the DRM on the itunes video is worse since you can only play it on apple hardware and software, whereas blu-rays can be played on any non-apple machine (Linux through wine iirc) and various manufacturer's standalone players.

9point6 said,

this. I'd say the DRM on the itunes video is worse since you can only play it on apple hardware and software, whereas blu-rays can be played on any non-apple machine (Linux through wine iirc) and various manufacturer's standalone players.


Last time I checked, which was 2 seconds ago when my song switched, I had iTunes on installed on my work PC which happens to be Windows on a Dell. Spread your lies somewhere else.

ILikeTobacco said,

Last time I checked, which was 2 seconds ago when my song switched, I had iTunes on installed on my work PC which happens to be Windows on a Dell. Spread your lies somewhere else.

I said _apple software_ as well,

try playing it in VLC or something and see how far you get

9point6 said,

I said _apple software_ as well,

try playing it in VLC or something and see how far you get

my fault i read it "only play it on apple hardware and software" as needing both. didn't have any issues. of course i burn all my videos to dvd's anyway and VLC reads dvd's just fine.

i think in the end the point is, if you choose to buy movies from itunes store, thats on you. if you don't like the drm, buy from another store. they all offer the exact same content. if you don't like the drm from blurays, where do you get the same content from?

ILikeTobacco said,

my fault i read it "only play it on apple hardware and software" as needing both. didn't have any issues. of course i burn all my videos to dvd's anyway and VLC reads dvd's just fine.

i think in the end the point is, if you choose to buy movies from itunes store, thats on you. if you don't like the drm, buy from another store. they all offer the exact same content. if you don't like the drm from blurays, where do you get the same content from?

That's the unfortunate thing though, afaik there isn't any (legal) DRM free movie download services that carry mainstream content (let alone at a high definition quality). Blu-ray is the best bet at the moment imo, because yes, it has DRM, but it's already been broken and if I wanted to liberate my media from the disk, I could do so with relative ease. I don't think it's possible to rip a DRM free copy from an iTunes bought video.

9point6 said,

That's the unfortunate thing though, afaik there isn't any (legal) DRM free movie download services that carry mainstream content (let alone at a high definition quality). Blu-ray is the best bet at the moment imo, because yes, it has DRM, but it's already been broken and if I wanted to liberate my media from the disk, I could do so with relative ease. I don't think it's possible to rip a DRM free copy from an iTunes bought video.

not gonna link here for obvious reasons but google it and youll find plenty of software that burns from itunes videos to a dvd.

ILikeTobacco said,

not gonna link here for obvious reasons but google it and youll find plenty of software that burns from itunes videos to a dvd.


I stand corrected. But still the itunes video bitrate is really low (~4mbps for their 'hd' offering iirc), so imo even with drm removed it's a pretty poor alternative to a blu-ray disk.

cheers for letting me know though, I was unaware you could liberate itunes video.

9point6 said,

I stand corrected. But still the itunes video bitrate is really low (~4mbps for their 'hd' offering iirc), so imo even with drm removed it's a pretty poor alternative to a blu-ray disk.

cheers for letting me know though, I was unaware you could liberate itunes video.

The bitrate is low but that will not change until there is a bigger market for it. In the city I live in, I have the faster possible internet with a 6.0 Mbps connection. Most people in this city have a 1.2Mbps connection or less. The infrastructure just isn't there yet to support streaming of high bit rates in the USA on a massive scale. One of the biggest streaming companies, netflix operates mainly in the USA so they have no reason to upgrade while the infrastructure can't handle it anyway.

ILikeTobacco said,

The bitrate is low but that will not change until there is a bigger market for it. In the city I live in, I have the faster possible internet with a 6.0 Mbps connection. Most people in this city have a 1.2Mbps connection or less. The infrastructure just isn't there yet to support streaming of high bit rates in the USA on a massive scale. One of the biggest streaming companies, netflix operates mainly in the USA so they have no reason to upgrade while the infrastructure can't handle it anyway.

I guess that's it. In the UK I have a 22mbps DSL connection and know people with >50mbps Cable connections. Until the US gets it's act together with the broadband infrastructure, mainstream digital distribution services will remain stunted.

9point6 said,

I guess that's it. In the UK I have a 22mbps DSL connection and know people with >50mbps Cable connections. Until the US gets it's act together with the broadband infrastructure, mainstream digital distribution services will remain stunted.

This is exactly why Digital Distribution will not take off fully. I'm in Texas, and my speed is roughly 30mbps down and 5mbps up. That is fast compared to what most people get around here. There are also some companies who limit how much data you can download, which will affect everything even more. So until ISPs start giving more of what is needed to their consumers, the DD war will always be on the losing side.

Blah. Blu-Ray was announced long before HDDVD. From my perspective, HDDVD was nothing but an imitator that arrived late to the party, banked on having "DVD" in its name to gather the sheeple, and still failed. I almost threw a party when I found out they lost the "war," and frankly at the time I expected both formats would have been competing for quite some time so it was a bit of a surprise it was over so quickly. Still, I never cared for either as a medium for delivering movies; I was looking at how much data the recordables could store. Steve Jobs doesn't like Blu-Ray? Somehow I can't bring myself to care.

Darrian said,
Blah. Blu-Ray was announced long before HDDVD. From my perspective, HDDVD was nothing but an imitator that arrived late to the party, banked on having "DVD" in its name to gather the sheeple, and still failed. I almost threw a party when I found out they lost the "war," and frankly at the time I expected both formats would have been competing for quite some time so it was a bit of a surprise it was over so quickly. Still, I never cared for either as a medium for delivering movies; I was looking at how much data the recordables could store. Steve Jobs doesn't like Blu-Ray? Somehow I can't bring myself to care.

Microsoft also backed HD-DVD so that also means that their consumers are sheeple aswell?. HD-DVD was a better format for consumers, it allowed users to download a copy to watch digitally and had many other benefits. I much preferred HD-DVD and was saddened when it lost the race, i have switched over to bluray as i do like HD movies.

Seriously? There were DVDs that allowed you to download digital copies (in 1080p), too. Of course they were DRM'd in MS's crappy WMV format. Sorry, but HDDVD wasn't better for anybody except the people who tried to make a quick buck by pushing it. The only significant difference between Blu-Ray and HDDVD is that Blu-Ray can hold twice as much data. They both have DRM, and both have been cracked; if you want a digital copy (wait, that's redundant, DVDs, BDs and HDDVDs are all digital) of a Blu-Ray just rip it.

Darrian said,
Blah. Blu-Ray was announced long before HDDVD. From my perspective, HDDVD was nothing but an imitator that arrived late to the party, banked on having "DVD" in its name to gather the sheeple, and still failed. I almost threw a party when I found out they lost the "war," and frankly at the time I expected both formats would have been competing for quite some time so it was a bit of a surprise it was over so quickly. Still, I never cared for either as a medium for delivering movies; I was looking at how much data the recordables could store. Steve Jobs doesn't like Blu-Ray? Somehow I can't bring myself to care.

You're forgetting that HD DVD was the better format of the two, it had more features than Blu-Ray, such as, the ability to access content on the internet directly from the disk (yes Blu-Ray has that feature now but HD DVD had it first), menus that pop up over the movie, none of that horrible DRM that Sony loves so much and no region lockouts. Just a bit of copy protection on the disk, that's all.

Well, again, I was looking more at how much data I could back up on the recordables more than anything else. If Blu-Ray had died then BD-Rs would have disappeared along with it. Plus, if I remember correctly, HDDVD used MPEG2, which is a big minus to me, when Blu-Ray usually uses AVC or VC-1 (I prefer AVC, though).

Darrian said,
Well, again, I was looking more at how much data I could back up on the recordables more than anything else. If Blu-Ray had died then BD-Rs would have disappeared along with it. Plus, if I remember correctly, HDDVD used MPEG2, which is a big minus to me, when Blu-Ray usually uses AVC or VC-1 (I prefer AVC, though).

HD DVDs could be encoded using AVC, VC-1 or MPEG2 with the vast majority encoded as VC-1 with a few encoded as AVC.

Which is another reason why HD DVD was the better format.

Darrian said,
Seriously? There were DVDs that allowed you to download digital copies (in 1080p), too. Of course they were DRM'd in MS's crappy WMV format. Sorry, but HDDVD wasn't better for anybody except the people who tried to make a quick buck by pushing it. The only significant difference between Blu-Ray and HDDVD is that Blu-Ray can hold twice as much data. They both have DRM, and both have been cracked; if you want a digital copy (wait, that's redundant, DVDs, BDs and HDDVDs are all digital) of a Blu-Ray just rip it.

What I liked best about HD-DVD was that there was stuff in the spec to allow the publisher to include a DVD layer on the same side as the HD-DVD layers, so people could ease into HD video without actually owning all the hardware yet, (and it would also allow them to use the DVD part in say a bedroom DVD player instead of the home theatre). They never really capitalised on that though, so no-one really knew about it.

I guess they've started doing the double-play and triple-play blurays now anyway, so there's a low-tech solution to the problem

Darrian said,
Well, again, I was looking more at how much data I could back up on the recordables more than anything else.
TBH I don't think many people backup to recordables now anyway. Buying a 1 or 2TB drive is easier and more cost effective for most people. If you have a system where backing up to a HDDVD would be a huge disadvantage over a BluRay then you probably have too much data for optical disks to be a good solution regardless of format.

IMHO, the time the space difference mattered would have been for things you buy, be it games or TV box sets, as then the storage would limit the amount of disk swapping that needed to be done.

The main advantage of HD-DVD was the less expensive players.

I'm sure with HD-DVD softwares to play them would not cost the user 100$ like it is the case now for Blue-ray.

neo158 said,
You're forgetting that HD DVD was the better format of the two, it had more features than Blu-Ray, such as, the ability to access content on the internet directly from the disk (yes Blu-Ray has that feature now but HD DVD had it first)

First with a useless connection? All you could do with that Internet connection was watch commercials for Universal's online store to buy "Evan Almighty" stuffed animals. Even now with BDLive very few studios take advantage of internet access.

HD DVD was inferior in every way: 30GB limit (BD 50GB), 30Mbps limit (BD 48Mbps), lossy audio (extremely few titles had lossless TrueHD)

menus that pop up over the movie, none of that horrible DRM that Sony loves so much and no region lockouts. Just a bit of copy protection on the disk, that's all.

Gawd, the HD DVD truly was the format for the ignorant. BD has "pop-up" menus, many discs are region free: the STUDIOS decide what is region free and what is not, and HD DVD not enforcing it sealed its doom: Disney & Fox want region protection and would not support a format that didn't offer it. DRM has no effect, and it isn't a "Sony" DRM: it's the consortium made up of dozens of companies, unlike HD DVD's monopoly of Toshiba on the hardware side and Microsoft on the other.

LaP said,
The main advantage of HD-DVD was the less expensive players.

I'm sure with HD-DVD softwares to play them would not cost the user 100$ like it is the case now for Blue-ray.

HD DVD's price was artificially low: Toshiba lost well over a BILLION dollars on the format. They ate a $300 loss on every player sold.

neo158 said,
HD DVDs could be encoded using AVC, VC-1 or MPEG2 with the vast majority encoded as VC-1 with a few encoded as AVC.
Which is another reason why HD DVD was the better format.

You seriously have to be trolling here. One: BD supports all those codecs. Two: AVC is a much more feature rich codec over VC-1, which MS has all but abandoned. The new 3-D standard is AVC (MVC). Universal is slowly abandoning VC-1 for AVC, leaving Warner as the only studio to use it regularly.

Smigit said,
If you have a system where backing up to a HDDVD would be a huge disadvantage over a BluRay then you probably have too much data for optical disks to be a good solution regardless of format.

This is my case, and I got to say, that after my full 1 TB External HDD, died, I started using backups on Blu Ray, just to have physical media... in case this happens again.

But yes, I still use External HDD as my principal backup media.

neo158 said,

HD DVDs could be encoded using AVC, VC-1 or MPEG2 with the vast majority encoded as VC-1 with a few encoded as AVC.

Which is another reason why HD DVD was the better format.

How brainwashed are you? VC-1 has almost no advantages over AVC, and the entire argument is meaningless anyway since Blu-ray supports both formats (and both are still being used.)

Why not say HD-DVD was also superior because of the shape of the discs?

Only Smart Person Here said,

How brainwashed are you? VC-1 has almost no advantages over AVC, and the entire argument is meaningless anyway since Blu-ray supports both formats (and both are still being used.)

Why not say HD-DVD was also superior because of the shape of the discs?

Why are you attacking people in a perfectly rational conversation?

brominated said,

Why are you attacking people in a perfectly rational conversation?

It was an irrational statement (an outright lie actually) saying BD didn't support MPEG2, VC-1, and AVC.

REM2000 said,

Microsoft also backed HD-DVD so that also means that their consumers are sheeple aswell?. HD-DVD was a better format for consumers, it allowed users to download a copy to watch digitally and had many other benefits. I much preferred HD-DVD and was saddened when it lost the race, i have switched over to bluray as i do like HD movies.

+1 I was very interested in HD-DVD but BluRay with all its restrictions never intrigued me.

Fritzly said,
+1 I was very interested in HD-DVD but BluRay with all its restrictions never intrigued me.

What restrictions?

Region coding? I told you studios like FOX and Disney would never support a format that didn't have it.

HD DVD never allowed downloaded copy. It's called "Managed Copy" and BD has that too, except studios don't want it, so they're pushing those "Digital Copy" versions.

Spirit Dave said,
If they do release a drive for the iMac, I will buy it
If you REALLY care about it that much why not just buy an external drive?

Rudy said,
If you REALLY care about it that much why not just buy an external drive?

As far as I know, OS X doesn't actually have the capability to playback BD video.

Rudy said,
If you REALLY care about it that much why not just buy an external drive?

Maybe because there is no way to play a bluray movie on a mac even if you have the hardware?

NeoTrunks said,

As far as I know, OS X doesn't actually have the capability to playback BD video.

Doesn't have to. All Macs can boot directly into Windows. Of course rebooting isn't the most practical solution for watching a movie.

NeoTrunks said,

As far as I know, OS X doesn't actually have the capability to playback BD video.

True. But you can rip bluray on OSX.

brominated said,

Any external blu-ray drive will work.

Not if you don't buy an overpriced software player.

You can't play Blu-ray using media player.

LaP said,

Not if you don't buy an overpriced software player.

You can't play Blu-ray using media player.

Yeah...just like on Windows. Neither WMP nor media center will natively play blu-ray.

brominated said,

Yeah...just like on Windows. Neither WMP nor media center will natively play blu-ray.

And that's probably one of the reasons why apple computers don't have a blu-ray drive.

I have one in my pc but never use it with blu-ray disc. I'm using it with dvd disc only.

To use it with blu-ray disc i would need to buy PowerDVD which is close to 100 CAD. There's no way i'm paying that kind of money for a software player.

DVD quality might not be great but it's ok and i can read them with media player classic ...

LaP said,

And that's probably one of the reasons why apple computers don't have a blu-ray drive.

I have one in my pc but never use it with blu-ray disc. I'm using it with dvd disc only.

To use it with blu-ray disc i would need to buy PowerDVD which is close to 100 CAD. There's no way i'm paying that kind of money for a software player.

DVD quality might not be great but it's ok and i can read them with media player classic ...

To be fair, most systems that come with a blu-ray drive preinstalled at least ship with a hobbled version of PowerDVD to enable playback in media center. Half-assed solution, but it works. Although a friend recently brought me his Asus 'stealth-fighter-looking' gaming laptop, because he couldn't get blu-ray to play. Turned out they hadn't included any software for it, which is weak considering he paid almost $2k for that system.

People seem to not realize how many hoops they have to jump through to get functional blu-ray.

yeah i have that crippled version of power dvd. But there's a lot of things it doesn't support. Like Dolby TruHD sound. The HDMI output of ATI cards.

Basically you are stuck with DVD sound quality over an optical output.

This version of PowerDVD can read Blu-Ray but that's it i mean when you sholvel the money for a Blu-ray disc (more expensive than a DVD disc) you want to fully exploit it.

I removed this old half ***** version of powerdvd from my system and i'm back to dvd in media center. Luckily i bought my blu-ray drive at half price so it's not too bad. I might eventually spend the money for PowerDVD ultra but at that price i might buy a standalone physical player instead or even a PS3 i mean 100$ CAD is around 25% of the price of the PS3 ...

With the 27 inch screen on my brand new 2010 iMac, I REALLY want BluRay!!!! Steve, the world isn't stupid ... it's a financial decision, not one that's about the consumer. For crying out loud, BluRay drives can play DVD's so it's not like choices would suddenly be limited.

Manish said,
It's pathetic that they haven't supported Blu-Ray yet. I'd like to see Mac laptops come with Blu-Ray drives.

And what are you going to do with that glorious Blu-ray drive without PowerDVD like software which cost 80$ ****** dollars ?

Last time i did research i could not find an affordable software player for blu-ray.

Spirit Dave said,
With the 27 inch screen on my brand new 2010 iMac, I REALLY want BluRay!!!! Steve, the world isn't stupid ... it's a financial decision, not one that's about the consumer. For crying out loud, BluRay drives can play DVD's so it's not like choices would suddenly be limited.
External Bluray drive and Bootcamp = problem solved. It may not be the solution you want but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for one from Apple.

LaP said,

And what are you going to do with that glorious Blu-ray drive without PowerDVD like software which cost 80$ ****** dollars ?

Last time i did research i could not find an affordable software player for blu-ray.

I bought a $50 Blu-ray SATA drive from Newegg and it was bundled with playback software.

But I guess Apple doesn't let you kids install your own hardware like that...

Only Smart Person Here said,

I bought a $50 Blu-ray SATA drive from Newegg and it was bundled with playback software.

But I guess Apple doesn't let you kids install your own hardware like that...

He's talking about his Windows PC. For the 'Only Smart Person Here' your reading comprehension is woefully lacking.

brominated said,

He's talking about his Windows PC. For the 'Only Smart Person Here' your reading comprehension is woefully lacking.

Spirit Dave's original post was about iMac. Look farther than your own face next time, failed troll.

LaP said,

And what are you going to do with that glorious Blu-ray drive without PowerDVD like software which cost 80$ ****** dollars ?


Last time i did research i could not find an affordable software player for blu-ray.


http://www.digiarty.com/

I don't blame him. It's a pointless format that doesn't offer anything over DVD to me. All I've noticed about Blu-Ray is a higher price and more bundled "extras" than a so-called "high-quality playback experience". Having to gut my entire entertainment center for a new TV, Blu-Ray player, and overpriced audio equipment just to watch a movie is beyond stupid. If DVDs go away, then it's either all digital or all nothing. No movie is worth watching if it costs more than a damn rent/house payment.

Educated Idiot said,
I don't blame him. It's a pointless format that doesn't offer anything over DVD to me. All I've noticed about Blu-Ray is a higher price and more bundled "extras" than a so-called "high-quality playback experience". Having to gut my entire entertainment center for a new TV, Blu-Ray player, and overpriced audio equipment just to watch a movie is beyond stupid. If DVDs go away, then it's either all digital or all nothing. No movie is worth watching if it costs more than a damn rent/house payment.

You're wrong. Sorry, but you are. My Bluray's are much better than your DVD's. Fact. And I'd also like to point out that BluRays from Blockbuster and online are not much more expensive. In fact, most of my BluRay's have cost me £7 - £10 at most.

Educated Idiot said,
I don't blame him. It's a pointless format that doesn't offer anything over DVD to me

Well, if you have a 20" screen then it most likely doesn't, but for example when I sit and watch movies on my 55"'er, there's this "slightly little" noticeable difference between scaled DVD and BD material - not to mention full 7.1 audio.

Of course if you're blind and deaf, it doesn't really change much.

Spirit Dave said,

...My Bluray's are much better than your DVD's. Fact.

Your opinion does not equal fact. My opinion is that most people could care less about the overall quality, they just want to watch the movie.

@Educated Idiot:

So, let me get this straight: you don't think blu-rays have a much higher playback quality than dvds? Clearly you didn't play them correctly.

RangerLG said,

Your opinion does not equal fact. My opinion is that most people could care less about the overall quality, they just want to watch the movie.

What are you talking about?! Blu-Rays are better quality; that is FACT. Whether people actually care or not is another thing completely.

Educated Idiot said,
It's a pointless format that doesn't offer anything over DVD to me. All I've noticed about Blu-Ray is a higher price and more bundled "extras" than a so-called "high-quality playback experience".

Yes they're more expensive than DVD but they're much cheaper than they used to be, and probably around the same price, if not lower, than when DVDs came out. If you've not noticed that they're of higher quality than DVD then your TV or eyesight is at fault (assuming you can watch TV in HD).

Having to gut my entire entertainment center for a new TV, Blu-Ray player, and overpriced audio equipment just to watch a movie is beyond stupid.

A HD TV and Blu-Ray player aren't that expensive either. I'd be hard-pressed to find someone that doesn't already own a HD TV anyway. Without a HD TV, any "entertainment center" would be rubbish and in dire need of "gutting". (Also, you don't need to get new audio equipment.)

No movie is worth watching if it costs more than a damn rent/house payment.

I agree and I recommend anyone who lives in a cardboard box should not buy a Blu-Ray movie.

Educated Idiot said,
I don't blame him. It's a pointless format that doesn't offer anything over DVD to me. All I've noticed about Blu-Ray is a higher price and more bundled "extras" than a so-called "high-quality playback experience". Having to gut my entire entertainment center for a new TV, Blu-Ray player, and overpriced audio equipment just to watch a movie is beyond stupid. If DVDs go away, then it's either all digital or all nothing. No movie is worth watching if it costs more than a damn rent/house payment.

(snipped)DVD was expensive when it was released I would say same as the bluray price.... have you ever watched a bluray movie and a DVD movie. you can see the difference.

Edited by Eric, Jan 6 2011, 7:42pm :

What is this?
A new format war between blu-ray and dvd, because hd-dvd died we try with dvd vs br this time?

j/k
To be honest, as since my only close-to-full-hd screen is my iMac I don't care about blu-rays, it's either DVD or a nice 720p erm... you know!

GS:lin

Spirit Dave said,

You're wrong. Sorry, but you are. My Bluray's are much better than your DVD's.

No, your Blu-ray may push more dots, but it is the same ****ty movie.

carmatic said,
now that's refreshing, apple thinking that something is too restrictive for its consumers...
Apple was one of the only big company pushing for the sale of unprotected music files and in the end they managed to get it for consumers (along with a price hike but that's another story )

Rudy said,
Apple was one of the only big company pushing for the sale of unprotected music files and in the end they managed to get it for consumers (along with a price hike but that's another story )

Didn't itunes had a load of DRM for music in the begining? Also, are their videos DRM-free?

carmatic said,
now that's refreshing, apple thinking that something is too restrictive for its consumers...

It's too restrictive if it cuts into the market of their own 'better' offering

Rudy said,
Apple was one of the only big company pushing for the sale of unprotected music files and in the end they managed to get it for consumers (along with a price hike but that's another story )

As far as I remember, Amazon did it it first, and countless companies did it first. Apple only did it when they started losing profit.

sviola said,

Didn't itunes had a load of DRM for music in the begining? Also, are their videos DRM-free?

They didn't really have a choice, the music industry didn't want to have their files unprotected at first.

To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital

Rudy said,
To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital
You're missing out.

Rudy said,
To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital

When it comes to renting I agree with you, but when comes to owning I'd prefer the physical media.

Ridlas said,
You're missing out.
Not really, sure the quality isn't the same but having my whole collection on one device connected to my TV at all times is very practical.... Plus I'm not sure what I would do with all those blu-ray boxes

Rudy said,
To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital

Same here.

xXTOKERXx said,

On what? if its digital could very well be same resolution...


Resolution does not equal quality. A "HD" movie from a streaming service is often very low bitrate and is rarely better than the DVD copy

DrCheese said,

Resolution does not equal quality. A "HD" movie from a streaming service is often very low bitrate and is rarely better than the DVD copy
And if you're willing to cross some ethical lines someone could download a copy that has the exact same quality...but lets not go there

xXTOKERXx said,

On what? if its digital could very well be same resolution...

Even on a 15MB down connection I still get buffering and have to wait for movies to play/load. With Blu-ray, I pop the disc in, wait about 10 seconds and I'm watching the movie. I happen to like extras, and love PIP movie + commentary. Renting/digital don't offer that last I checked and I highly doubt digital streaming is offering 1080p with 7.1 surround sound. Not without some form of compression, and thus, quality loss.

It really boils down to having physical media that I own in my hands rather than on a harddrive. What if the companies decide I can only download a movie 5 times over the course of the lifetime of my ownership? No such issues with Blu-ray (or physical media). To each their own though.

xXTOKERXx said,

On what? if its digital could very well be same resolution...

You do realize the resolution does not equate the bitrate of the video... Bluray has a very high bitrate.

Elessar said,

Even on a 15MB down connection I still get buffering and have to wait for movies to play/load. With Blu-ray, I pop the disc in, wait about 10 seconds and I'm watching the movie. I happen to like extras, and love PIP movie + commentary. Renting/digital don't offer that last I checked and I highly doubt digital streaming is offering 1080p with 7.1 surround sound. Not without some form of compression, and thus, quality loss.

It really boils down to having physical media that I own in my hands rather than on a harddrive. What if the companies decide I can only download a movie 5 times over the course of the lifetime of my ownership? No such issues with Blu-ray (or physical media). To each their own though.


That's for streaming though, I don't stream anything I download THEN watch. On my 15Mbit connection a movie takes less than 30 min to download (sometimes around 15)....which is less time it would take me to go pick one up at a store

Rudy said,

That's for streaming though, I don't stream anything I download THEN watch. On my 15Mbit connection a movie takes less than 30 min to download (sometimes around 15)....which is less time it would take me to go pick one up at a store

Takes me less than 30 mins to go to a store and get it. Sometimes it only takes me 10 mins.

dismuter said,

As opposed to analog DVDs? Hmm, what does the first D in DVD stand for?

I meant downloaded files, no hard copies

Rudy said,

That's for streaming though, I don't stream anything I download THEN watch. On my 15Mbit connection a movie takes less than 30 min to download (sometimes around 15)....which is less time it would take me to go pick one up at a store

Your 15 Meg connection can download ~30GB in 15 minutes?

I call shenanigans ;D

9point6 said,

Your 15 Meg connection can download ~30GB in 15 minutes?

I call shenanigans ;D


A 15 Mbps connection can pull down at most 3.375GB in 30 minutes assuming it's maxed the entire time. I call shenanigans too.

dismuter said,

As opposed to analog DVDs? Hmm, what does the first D in DVD stand for?


Yeah, you know the nitpicking? It makes you look like an ass.

Renting/digital don't offer that last I checked and I highly doubt digital streaming is offering 1080p with 7.1 surround sound. Not without some form of compression, and thus, quality loss.

Digital downloads offer the same video and usually at least 5.1 surround sound. And let's face it, who the hell actually has a full 7.1 surround setup with the right boxes in the right places? A lot of people, but still a very small minority.

mikecel79 said,

A 15 Mbps connection can pull down at most 3.375GB in 30 minutes assuming it's maxed the entire time. I call shenanigans too.
Downloaded copies are never that large. Hell I bet the ones on a Disc aren't 30gigs either once you strip out extra content, commentaries and the like.

While the quality may not be as good, a 4 or 8GB rip still looks pretty damn alright. I still prefer to buy Blu Rays too, but certainly digital ones aren't bad.

Smigit said,
Downloaded copies are never that large. Hell I bet the ones on a Disc aren't 30gigs either once you strip out extra content, commentaries and the like.

While the quality may not be as good, a 4 or 8GB rip still looks pretty damn alright. I still prefer to buy Blu Rays too, but certainly digital ones aren't bad.

The point was that blu ray was irrelevant because downloadable copies are just as good. I just worked out that say and hour and a half of blu ray video (not even including audio) at the standard 30mbps, comes to 20GB.

Yeah, it's obviously a bit stupid jumping from say 15mbps to 30mbps, but the fact is, there is a difference in quality.

9point6 said,

Your 15 Meg connection can download ~30GB in 15 minutes?

I call shenanigans ;D

When did I say I was downloading blu-ray quality files?

Rudy said,
When did I say I was downloading blu-ray quality files?
In a discussion of bluray movies, this is a requirement. For goodness sake, I could download a 150x100px version of a movie in a minute, but that doesn't mean it's valid in this discussion.

Well done, you can download standard definition movies in that time. Meanwhile, the others are watching it in HD in a similar timeframe. I know what I prefer.

AtriusNY said,

When it comes to renting I agree with you, but when comes to owning I'd prefer the physical media.

Saw a few similar comments on "owning physical media". The RIAA and MPAA don't allow you to own the media in the same way you might own a hammer or a loaf of bread. Instead, much like software, they assert that you simply own a license to play the media from *their* physical media. Unlike software (that warns you of the terms via some kind of seal you break to access the media) this "license" from media producers is not easy to find.

This attitude of media companies controlling what you do with the stuff you bought from them is evident in their lobbying efforts against fair use in legislatures around the globe. If you own a license, then it should be possible to transfer the license to better technologies as they come about - perhaps at the cost of the new media. So, for example, if you really owned a license to The Beatles's "Sgt. Pepper" album on vinyl then when CD's came out you should have been able to upgrade at the cost of new media - not pay for the license over again. Same situation with Blue Ray versions of DVD's you merely own a license to view. And if your media is stolen or destroyed, they charge you (and your insurance company the full cost of a new license - not just replacement cost for the media).

So in brief, when it's convenient for them that you really own physical media - like if it's scratched or stolen then you suffer the drawbacks of physical media. And when it's conveinent for them to treat it as a license, then that's how it's treated and you're not allowed to do what you wish with your own physical media.

This is why I don't buy physical media anymore. I'm not going to get scewed both ways. When I use streaming media or services like Netflix or Zunepass it reminds me that the content isn't really "mine" and I have a more realistic view of my relationship with big media.

I think my ideal would be a system of artist subscriptions (almost like a magazine subscription) where I can directly fund artists I like with a monthly payment until I get tired of them. Or, for dealings with larger holding companies, buying licenses to access content any time I want - kind of like Zunepass - except with all media.

Rudy said,
To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital

same here, and i have a blu ray player (ps3)

Smigit said,
Downloaded copies are never that large. Hell I bet the ones on a Disc aren't 30gigs either once you strip out extra content, commentaries and the like.

Iv ripped a few of blu rays and i can confirm that pretty much all of them, the main movie (with no extras) are 30gb+ some 40 ish, and then extras between 5-10gb on top of that.
As for video quality iv watched a 1080p downloaded film and compared it with the blu ray version and you can notice the difference on a 40"+ tv, as you can notice all the artifacts

Also as for sounds quality, remember blu ray is lossless sound either 5.1 or 7.1 (true hd/dts hd ma) while downloaded is lossy (dolby digital or dts) and while some people claim they can't tell the difference, when you listen to both for me i can easily tell.

For me unitl you can buy digital versions of films with bluray video and sound quality, and be able to play bk the sound in hd, (and also have a 20mb+ connection) im sticking with bluray

Chemaz said,

For me unitl you can buy digital versions of films with bluray video and sound quality, and be able to play bk the sound in hd, (and also have a 20mb+ connection) im sticking with bluray

Understood, but you are part of an ever dwindling minority. Most consumers under 30 (and ALL under 20) don't use physical media for anything anymore.

As broadband speeds creep up and subscription services like Netflix gain traction (and more and more HD content), it's clear that physical media is already dying and soon to be deader than VHS.

Only the studios and advertisers refuse to acknowledge this inevitability and adjust their business models NOW, before it's too late.

DrCheese said,

Resolution does not equal quality. A "HD" movie from a streaming service is often very low bitrate and is rarely better than the DVD copy

you must only have tried some REALLy **** streaming services.

Rudy said,
To be honest I have NEVER ever played a single blu-ray and I don't really plan on either After DVD I moved to digital

Same. I understand that some people get enjoyment from having the best quality that is available (and I'm not questioning that Blu-ray is better). I'm just not one of those people who gives a flying **** about a few extra pixels.

Shadrack said,

Same. I understand that some people get enjoyment from having the best quality that is available (and I'm not questioning that Blu-ray is better). I'm just not one of those people who gives a flying **** about a few extra pixels.

+1

To each their own. Physical media and maximum quality does nothing for me.