3 ms·
MacOS never supported Blu-ray, and Steve Jobs described the licensing of it as "a bag of hurt." This was still ~2008 when the licensing of H.264, VC1, MPEG-2, B
by gjsman-1000 4y ago
MacOS never supported Blu-ray, and Steve Jobs described the licensing of it as "a bag of hurt." This was still ~2008 when the licensing of H.264, VC1, MPEG-2, Blu-ray Patents, AACS, BD+, Cinavia, and all the stuff that makes it work was still in the air. Arguably it never came down[1].
However, I would still beg Apple to reconsider this, even a decade later, at least for desktop professional use. Blu-ray discs come in 25GB, 50GB, 100GB, and even (rare) 128GB disc sizes. It's still a really cheap, portable, distributable, long-term (as long as you check every ~5 years) storage medium.
[1]Blu-ray discs for movies were pretty shamefully designed. Do we seriously need 3 different codecs? Or 3 different copy-protection mechanisms?
- salawat 4y ago>Or 3 different copy-protection mechanisms? Consider the source.
- barelysapient 4y agoI’d suggest that an SSD makes a far better option. For the price of a burner and blank media, you can buy a whole bunch of cheap 128gb ssds. They’re re-writeable, durable and easy to connect with a twenty dollar usb dongle.
- gjsman-1000 4y agoThe catch with SSDs is they are not long-term reliable when left without power. If left as little as 12 months without energy, data degradation can occur. SSDs need power regularly to automatically refresh their memory cells. No power, no refresh, slow loss. They are almost like RAM in that regard, just with a really slow discharge. Compared to good quality writable media which is designed for storage without power. This, and the write-once versions (no ransomware), are great for backups of faster modern media.
- pwinnski 4y agoFortunately, external USB-connected Blu-ray drives are pretty cheap[0]! 0. http://www.pricegrabber.com/blu-ray-external/products/?sort=5# http://www.pricegrabber.com/blu-ray-external/products/?sort=...