[turtle]

I'm looking at getting a BD-ROM for my wanna be Mac Pro and wondering how well it plays with SL? If I get the drive will it work at playing my BluRay movies without much add on software. Like in FrontRow? Or will I be forced to use third party software?

[Robo]

Originally Posted by turtle2472 I'm looking at getting a BD-ROM for my wanna be Mac Pro and wondering how well it plays with SL? If I get the drive will it work at playing my BluRay movies without much add on software. Like in FrontRow? Or will I be forced to use third party software?

You need to use third party software. Front Row, DVD Player, iTunes...none of them play Blu-ray...yet.

[turtle]

So is there at least good third party software to watch movies with then?

[Brad]

VLC?

My guess is probably not.

[Robo]

I knew somebody who would boot into Windows to play BDs, but that was a while ago. No clue if there's OS X playback software or not.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by turtle2472 I'm looking at getting a BD-ROM for my wanna be Mac Pro and wondering how well it plays with SL? If I get the drive will it work at playing my BluRay movies without much add on software. Like in FrontRow? Or will I be forced to use third party software?

There's no problem with Blu-Ray and SL, but none of the Apple default apps (Front Row, DVD Player, Quicktime, et cetera) will playback Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

Originally Posted by Brad VLC? My guess is probably not.

VLC doesn't support Blu-Ray at the moment. AFAIK there aren't any reasonable Blu-Ray software solutions for OS X. Why would anybody want it? You can download digital copies of high definition movies from enough online sources now to not really need it.

[turtle]

Originally Posted by Iago ... VLC doesn't support Blu-Ray at the moment. AFAIK there aren't any reasonable Blu-Ray software solutions for OS X. Why would anybody want it? You can download digital copies of high definition movies from enough online sources now to not really need it.

What I'm looking to do is make my Hackintosh my main computer for my man cave. Then it will serve as a work horse and a media system. When I want to watch a BluRay movie I could just pop in the disk and watch it without booting into Windows. Basically, one more reason not to have a PC. I'd have a media center Mac if it could support all of my media needs but this isn't one that tseems to be supported. I don't mind downloading, but those don't play well with my PS3.

[MBHockey]

You can use Plex once the disc has been decrypted. I used to do this all the time. I would decrypt the Blu-ray disc with AnyDVD HD via Parallels and then watch the resulting file through Plex.

It's not the most elegant solution, but it's the only way I know of to watch Blu-ray directly in MacOS X:

http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/27302/plex

[Robo]

It really is stupid that the most media-friendly computers around - the computers that much of that media is made on - can't play a f'ing Blu-ray Disc. We get it, Apple, you think overpriced 720p downloads are the bizz-omb. Some of us don't.

Walmart has a discount rack of shitty Blu-rays for under $10. Blu-ray is not some special, videophile-only thing any more. If I'm shelling out $1,500+ for a 24-inch iMac, it really should have a Blu-ray drive, no matter how awesome Apple thinks iTunes is. I buy products to meet my needs and wants, not to further some corporation's goals.

It's like, Apple knows that Windows sucks, so that means they get to do whatever they want and not meet our needs and we won't switch, as long as they're still better than Windows. I really, really wish they had some actual competition, sometime.

Rant over.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman Walmart has a discount rack of shitty Blu-rays for under $10. Blu-ray is not some special, videophile-only thing any more. If I'm shelling out $1,500+ for a 24-inch iMac, it really should have a Blu-ray drive, no matter how awesome Apple thinks iTunes is. I buy products to meet my needs and wants, not to further some corporation's goals.

I understand your frustration, but Apple skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is. Next year's computer at this year's price is their mantra with iMac. It's clear that physical media formats of all kinds are going to become more and more marginalised because of the pervasiveness of high-speed internet access and cross-over devices like AppleTV. In a year, maybe two, you'll have competition for iTunes driving prices down and quality up. Better that Apple invest its R&D dollars in finding ways to be ahead for the next generation of computers than cater to the final throes of the current generation when licensing is a pain, the hardware still costs too much, and consumer uptake has been insanely slow.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Iago I understand your frustration, but Apple skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is.

I know, but it's not like Blu-ray is going to up and disappear tomorrow. It's not like, come January 1, people are going to suddenly stop purchasing movies in stores, come on.

I don't deny that digital distribution is the eventual future. But let's be real, that's still years away. iTunes still lags in quality, the storage isn't there, &c. And even then, some people will still buy movies on BDs. People still by music on CDs. iTunes still supports CD importing, so that "iMacs are just too futuristic" logic is sort of mud. The only difference is that, when iTunes came out, Apple wasn't in the position to tell everybody how they should get their media. Now, they think they are.

It goes back to the "Apple knows better than their users!" thing. The fact that we're having this conversation proves that some people do want Blu-ray, even if that's against Apple's wishes. (The fact that it happens so frequently here would seem to suggest that lots of people want Blu-ray.)

BTW, the licensing mess (which Apple has cited as the reason Blu-ray was a bag of hurt) has been streamlined, the cost of hardware has dropped, and consumer uptake was "insanely slow" for the first three or four years of DVD's lifespan, too.

[Brad]

I imagine Apple will eventually go "oops" like they did with the looong delay in adopting CD burners. Until then, though, you're SOL.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Brad I imagine Apple will eventually go "oops" like they did with the looong delay in adopting CD burners. Until then, though, you're SOL.

That's what I'm thinking. I don't think it's that Apple has some sort of vendetta against physical media, at least not any moreso than any forward-looking company. They may want to sell movie downloads, but they (oh yeah!) also have to sell Macs, too. It's just that they're always behind on this sort of thing. The Mac is more like "tomorrow's software, on yesterday's hardware, today."

That said, I think it's coming sooner rather than later, I really do. The cost has come down, the licensing has been streamlined, The Dark Knight was pretty much Blu-ray's The Matrix, and the $299 PS3 is shaping up to be Blu-ray's $299 PS2. In short, Blu-ray is a lot like DVD, nine years later. (In that respect, Blu-ray is about a year ahead of where DVD was, since DVD was introduced a decade ahead of Blu-ray.)

I wouldn't be surprised to see Blu-ray hit the desktops, at least as a BTO option, before the year is out. (FCS can burn to BDs, after all.) Unless we're in for another bizarre "let's let the desktops go eighteen months without an update" thing...

[turtle]

I think one of the things that surprises me most is that there isn't much third party support either. If someone makes a good player it will stick for sure. At least then there would be support without having to "make things work".

It would just be nice for people like me who use a PC for the media center.

[Is it 1981?]

Originally Posted by Roboman Walmart has a discount rack of shitty Blu-rays for under $10. Blu-ray is not some special, videophile-only thing any more. If I'm shelling out $1,500+ for a 24-inch iMac, it really should have a Blu-ray drive, no matter how awesome Apple thinks iTunes is. I buy products to meet my needs and wants, not to further some corporation's goals. Rant over.

Seconded, thirded, fourthed to infinity and beyond. I have no pressing need for a Blu-Ray player right now but it's not unreasonable to expect one when throwing a four-figure amount of cash on a computer.

Originally Posted by turtle2472 I think one of the things that surprises me most is that there isn't much third party support either.

Wow, I was under the impression that at least VLC was BD-capable. This might be a dumb question but there's nothing inherent about Mac OS X that might partially explain the lack of third-party support?

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Is it 1981? Wow, I was under the impression that at least VLC was BD-capable. This might be a dumb question but there's nothing inherent about Mac OS X that might partially explain the lack of third-party support?

There's the problem of "plugging the analog hole" since older Macs don't have HDCP video hardware, which AACS compliance requires, but conceivably a third-party Blu-ray player could simply drop support for all but the latest hardware.

There may be other DRM and hardware interaction issues I'm not recalling, but I am in no way an expert on Blu-ray.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by turtle2472 I think one of the things that surprises me most is that there isn't much third party support either. If someone makes a good player it will stick for sure. At least then there would be support without having to "make things work".

While very disappointing to consumers, it isn't so surprising.

Implementing Blu-ray playback doesn't just have technical hurdles (for example, it is mandatory to include a full Java VM, as well as codecs for MPEG-2, H.264 and VC-1), but also legal ones. So you have three codecs, a VM (including language and framework), two DRM schemes, and so on.

So why would people working on projects like VLC largely in their spare time would bother with such an effort while risking litigation for doing so? Only because the format would be popular enough to make it worthwhile. But, so far, has far more mindshare than it does market share. As the interest grows larger, players will eventually appear. Commercial ones will be viable because enough people will actually want to spend money for this, and community-based ones will as well. If the interest does grow larger, that is — I'm not so sure it will, since digital distribution is definitely on the rise (consider that iTunes is the single biggest music store in the world now).

At the risk of sounding like parroting Mr. Jobs, I find that, with Blu-ray, the middle finger sticking out from the industry is far greater than the enrichment of entertainment experience.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad There's the problem of "plugging the analog hole" since older Macs don't have HDCP video hardware, which AACS compliance requires, but conceivably a third-party Blu-ray player could simply drop support for all but the latest hardware.

That, and the fact that Apple doesn't offer an mDP-HDMI adapter. Monoprice offering one just doesn't have the same clout.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman I know, but it's not like Blu-ray is going to up and disappear tomorrow. It's not like, come January 1, people are going to suddenly stop purchasing movies in stores, come on.

Of course.

Originally Posted by Roboman I don't deny that digital distribution is the eventual future. But let's be real, that's still years away. iTunes still lags in quality, the storage isn't there, &c. And even then, some people will still buy movies on BDs. People still by music on CDs. iTunes still supports CD importing, so that "iMacs are just too futuristic" logic is sort of mud.

Years away as the preferred method, sure. Years away as a viable alternative to physical media? Are you sure? Not only can you download through services like iTunes, you can stream in High-Definition as well through some services. It's already a lot more convenient than buying the discs, and streaming means the storage issue oughtn't be a problem. And people do still buy CDs, but in greatly diminished numbers. Apple isn't deliberately catering for the minority who have been left behind, they're catering for the majority of users who already have vast CD collections and want to preserve them on their Macs.

I'm interested in how TiVo and Sky+ HD are impacting Blu-Ray uptake too. My parents have a Blu-Ray player, but they don't own a single Blu-Ray disc that isn't still in its packaging. They don't even buy them any more. They just record movies on Sky+ HD. The quality is just as good, the range of movies is great and it's seamless. No second remote control, no licensing information you can't fast forward; perfect.

Originally Posted by Roboman The only difference is that, when iTunes came out, Apple wasn't in the position to tell everybody how they should get their media. Now, they think they are.

Another difference is that when DVD came out it was an advantage to developers. 700MB isn't an awful lot of space, so the ~4GB of space on a DVD was great. It wasn't solely about films. I think Apple sees Blu-Ray as chiefly an entertainment thing. The extra capacity doesn't mean that much to developers right now. That and the fact that I can't remember the last time I bought a piece of actual, off the shelf software before Snow Leopard. That's going the way of the download too. Here's an interesting quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Yang Cost is given nearly all the blame for the poor reception to Blu-ray. In spite of major price reductions, Blu-ray readers and burners are still normally priced much higher than DVD drives, which often cost as little as $30. Since many users don't have a large library of Blu-ray movies and have little to no programs that would require the extra storage, the average user has no reason to spend extra for the privilege, senior analyst Michael Yang said.

That's from three weeks ago. Yang predicted that by 2013 we'll see Blu-Ray on 16% of PCs.

Originally Posted by Roboman It goes back to the "Apple knows better than their users!" thing.

The number of quotes related to how wrong it is to think that customers know better than the company is almost limitless, so I'll just include my two favourites:

Originally Posted by Scoble My former boss, Jim Fawcette, used to say that if you asked a group of Porsche owners what they wanted they’d tell you things like “smoother ride, more trunk space, more leg room, etc.” He’d then say “well, they just designed a Volvo.” His words were meant to get us out of letting the customers run our business mode we often found ourselves falling into.

Originally Posted by Henry Ford If I’d asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said a faster horse.

Blu-Ray is definitely a faster horse.

Originally Posted by Roboman The fact that we're having this conversation proves that some people do want Blu-ray, even if that's against Apple's wishes. (The fact that it happens so frequently here would seem to suggest that lots of people want Blu-ray.)

A lot of people on the internet want it. I don't think that's symptomatic of widespread demand for people who don't use online discussion forums Apple will almost certainly eventually offer it as an option, and I think on the MacBook Pros it would be a useful addition, but it's not something I'd like to see as standard on all machines.

Originally Posted by Roboman BTW, the licensing mess (which Apple has cited as the reason Blu-ray was a bag of hurt) has been streamlined, the cost of hardware has dropped, and consumer uptake was "insanely slow" for the first three or four years of DVD's lifespan, too.

I can't vouch for the licensing, but I know the hardware is still expensive (it's dropping but not enough to be included in anything but ultra-premium PCs), and the uptake is far slower than DVD, in terms of discs sold. They've sold more Blu-Ray players in the third year of its lifespan than DVD did in its lifespan, but the actual number of discs shipped is infinitesimal. People are looking at the DVDs they bought to replace their VHS tapes as little as nine or ten years ago, and wondering what the advantage is.

Originally Posted by Brad I imagine Apple will eventually go "oops" like they did with the looong delay in adopting CD burners. Until then, though, you're SOL.

Hopefully as a BTO.

Originally Posted by Roboman That said, I think it's coming sooner rather than later, I really do. The cost has come down, the licensing has been streamlined, The Dark Knight was pretty much Blu-ray's The Matrix, and the $299 PS3 is shaping up to be Blu-ray's $299 PS2. In short, Blu-ray is a lot like DVD, nine years later.

Except with slower disc sales and a poorer back catalogue.

Originally Posted by Roboman (In that respect, Blu-ray is about a year ahead of where DVD was, since DVD was introduced a decade ahead of Blu-ray.)

Originally Posted by Roboman I wouldn't be surprised to see Blu-ray hit the desktops, at least as a BTO option, before the year is out. (FCS can burn to BDs, after all.) Unless we're in for another bizarre "let's let the desktops go eighteen months without an update" thing...

It would make sense for Apple to include it as an option on machines for holiday season, but I don't think will.

[Robo]

Iago, what I meant is this:

Ask most people - normal people - when DVD came out. They'll think for a minute, and then say 1999 or 2000. (That was actually one of the gripes I heard about Blu-ray - "I just bought a DVD player a few years ago!") But DVD came out in 1996. It was just really expensive at first and took several years to get to the point of mass-market acceptance.

As of the cost of hardware, I would not say than an $800 laptop is "ultra-premium." And that's moot, anyway, because much of Apple's hardware is ultra-premium, and should thus...have...one?

As for the "faster horse" thing: I'm totally against customers steering a company, for the reasons you describe. But a company selling a product has to make that product appealing to customers. Swapping out the SuperDrive for a Blu-ray drive would not in any way "steer" Apple away from downloads, and if downloads are so much better/more convenient/more awesome they'll win out anyway, so what's Apple afraid of?

"Our customers choose iTunes for HD movies!" doesn't mean much if they have no other choices.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman Ask most people - normal people - when DVD came out. They'll think for a minute, and then say 1999 or 2000. (That was actually one of the gripes I heard about Blu-ray - "I just bought a DVD player a few years ago!") But DVD came out in 1996. It was just really expensive at first and took several years to get to the point of mass-market acceptance.

Wikipedia says August 1997 before it was in-stores, but I see your point. But why would Apple put something in their computers which isn't at a point of mass-market acceptance? Like, it's not even close according to analysts? Surely uptake is at least somewhat indicative of demand.

Originally Posted by Roboman As of the cost of hardware, I would not say than an $800 laptop is "ultra-premium." And that's moot, anyway, because much of Apple's hardware is ultra-premium, and should thus...have...one?

The cost of hardware refers to the cost of a Blu-Ray drive versus the cost of a DVD drive. DVD drives are, what, $30 wholesale? When I said it was ultra-premium...

Originally Posted by Iago (it's dropping but not enough to be included in anything but ultra-premium PCs)

I meant that it wasn't viable to put in all Apple's products. You couldn't put it in a MacBook and keep the cost the same. You couldn't put it in an iMac and keep the cost the same. I'm not saying Apple isn't ultra-premium, I'm saying that the price would have to be adjusted upwards to accommodate what isn't a popular technology at this point. In the midst of a recession that's not good business sense.

Originally Posted by Roboman As for the "faster horse" thing: I'm totally against customers steering a company, for the reasons you describe. But a company selling a product has to make that product appealing to customers.

And when Blu-Ray becomes popular, maybe Apple will include it I'm not saying "as popular as DVD is now", but there has to be some tipping point for Apple in this. At the moment it's a niche for the reasons I've described.

Originally Posted by Roboman Swapping out the SuperDrive for a Blu-ray drive would not in any way "steer" Apple away from downloads, and if downloads are so much better/more convenient/more awesome they'll win out anyway, so what's Apple afraid of?

It's not about steering people away from downloads. If Apple introduces Blu-Ray it costs a lot of money. That gets transferred to the buyer of every Mac, unless Apple has some way to recoup its R&D dollars and split manufacturing (since they abandoned Combo-drives for SuperDrive they've consolidated their manufacturing process considerably) solely through the sale of CTO Blu-Ray, which is unlikely.

The fact that downloads/streaming are the future of consumables is just happy coincidence. But it's also here now and viable now for most consumers.

Originally Posted by Roboman "Our customers choose iTunes for HD movies!" doesn't mean much if they have no other choices.

But there are other choices! Hulu, Amazon and Netflix all have streaming HD services. Amazon has HD downloads (Netflix may? I'm unfamiliar with their model) There are also plenty of handsome external Blu-Ray drives catering for the minority of users who are actively seeking them for their Macs (but, of course, no playback software), so it's not as if Apple is forcing iTunes HD as the only choice for high-definition movies on the Mac. It's just making a prudent choice as a hardware manufacturer.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Iago But why would Apple put something in their computers which isn't at a point of mass-market acceptance?

Like the GUI, mouse, LaserWriter, touchpad, CD-ROM, USB, Firewire.... Yeah, Apple's all about following market trends, not anticipating them.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Iago I meant that it wasn't viable to put in all Apple's products. You couldn't put it in a MacBook and keep the cost the same. You couldn't put it in an iMac and keep the cost the same. I'm not saying Apple isn't ultra-premium, I'm saying that the price would have to be adjusted upwards to accommodate what isn't a popular technology at this point. In the midst of a recession that's not good business sense. [snip] If Apple introduces Blu-Ray it costs a lot of money. That gets transferred to the buyer of every Mac...

That logic could be used against any other sort of upgrade to the iMac during this recession - processors, RAM, &c. But they keep on making the iMac better, and why? Because technology marches on, and they need to stay competitive.

Did they have to raise the price of the iPod nanos to accommodate the cameras (also not a "popular technology" in media players, but I think Brad's already covered that "anticipating trends" point). Of course they didn't - because the price of everything else came down, allowing them to add a new feature and keep the price the same.

I never suggested that Apple would put Blu-ray in all their products, at least not yet. (They just finally made SuperDrives standard this year, for heaven's sake!) In fact, I specifically only mentioned desktops. I think we'll see them first in the Mac Pro, for...obvious reasons. But I think we could also see them in the higher-end iMacs at the same time. (The Mac Pro isn't usually updated "by itself," anyway.)

Think about it: the next iMac design will likely make the 24-inch display "standard," from ~$1,299 on up. They'll keep the old 20" design around for a while at $999 (hooray recession!) but I don't think they're going to bother with developing the new iMac around a new LED-lit 20" screen - the 24" iMac gives them a lot more lateral space to work with, which should allow the new design to be thinner and sleeker and all those things that Jobs loves. But with an (essentially) one-screen-fits-all new iMac line-up, they're going to need some higher-end features to differentiate the $1,500+ models, and a Blu-ray drive would fit the bill nicely.*

In fact, I could even see Apple building a Blu-ray drive into the higher-end Mac mini, sooner rather than later (though not necessarily this year). They're not stupid, they know that lots of people use Mac minis as media centers. Currently the higher-end Mac mini is differentiated only by RAM and a larger hard drive, and I can't imagine lots of people are that keen on dropping $200 for 200GB. Swap that hard drive upgrade out for a Blu-ray upgrade, though, and I think they'd get more takers. (The drive could certainly be had for under $230. It'd represent a large increase in value, of course, but if nobody's buying the $799 Mac mini, don't they need to make it a more attractive option?)

*After this week's "now the iPod nano comes with a free camera!" event, I could totally see them spinning the new iMac as "now the iMac comes with a free HDTV!" I'm not saying they'll include a TV tuner - though the iPod now comes with an FM tuner, so I guess anything's possible - but with iTunes, Blu-ray, and maybe a video input, would Apple really need to include a TV tuner? There's a lot of "value" Apple could add there, for very little cost - and getting people to think of their iMacs as more of a "media center" would actually further Apple's iTunes goals.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Brad Like the GUI, mouse, LaserWriter, touchpad, CD-ROM, USB, Firewire.... Yeah, Apple's all about following market trends, not anticipating them.

I should have qualified that better, but the point was meant in concurrence with the rest of the post: it's of debatable worth to the user to include Blu-Ray (unlike, say, the mouse, or USB, or CD-ROM), it's expensive and so far unpopular. It's also unclear how popular it will become. Plenty of analysts still say that downloads will become the norm before Blu-Ray does. You're right that Apple is all about anticipating trends. They've clearly anticipated that Blu-Ray is the final hurrah for physical media, they're just not quite sure how soon it's going to die!

Originally Posted by Roboman That logic could be used against any other sort of upgrade to the iMac during this recession - processors, RAM, &c. But they keep on making the iMac better, and why? Because technology marches on, and they need to stay competitive.

But Blu-Ray is different from introducing RAM or a new processor. There's the licensing, which smoothed out or not is going to take resources to address. There's the sourcing of the components. Maybe they'll use Matshuitsa and their other Superdrive suppliers, but who knows. They'll certainly need more than one supplier and they'll need to even out the price point. Then they have to build it and test it. It's not quite the same as popping some new RAM into a Mac Pro.

I agree with you that it's more likely it'll happen on the desktop machines first. I just can't see it happening soon or as anything other than an expensive CTO. I think Apple is still going for volume at the moment, cutting manufacturing costs and looking for ways to get the most out of what they already have in place. I'll be interested to see what they do for Calendar Q4 this year, though.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Iago I'll be interested to see what they do for Calendar Q4 this year, though.

Yeah...I'm hoping for an iMac redesign with the first mobile Nehalems but who knows, at this point?

I'm not saying I think Blu-ray is likely - just that it's increasingly possible, which we couldn't say a year ago.

But we'll see.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Iago it's of debatable worth to the user to include Blu-Ray (unlike, say, the mouse, or USB, or CD-ROM), it's expensive and so far unpopular.

How is it different from the mouse, USB, and CD-ROM? At the time when Apple introduced them to the Mac, almost no other computer vendors included them as standard options. I distinctly remember the "pain" of the USB transition, for example, when peripheral vendors lacked USB interfaces on just about anything and the ones that did were far more expensive (even today USB keyboards are still generally more expensive than their PS2 counterparts!). The same could be said about "It's also unclear how popular it will become" since Apple was blazing the trails then.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Brad How is it different from the mouse, USB, and CD-ROM? At the time when Apple introduced them to the Mac, almost no other computer vendors included them as standard options. I distinctly remember the "pain" of the USB transition, for example, when peripheral vendors lacked USB interfaces on just about anything and the ones that did were far more expensive (even today USB keyboards are still generally more expensive than their PS2 counterparts!). The same could be said about "It's also unclear how popular it will become" since Apple was blazing the trails then.

I still can't believe that PS/2 keyboard and mice are still around. I hate all the legacy crap built into PCs.

I'm not sure. If the iMacs go Nehalem (which would make sense if they're doing a new design, right?) that's already a fairly substantial (expensive?) upgrade, so they might just pop that in and let that "carry" the iMac line for a while. If the iMacs don't go Nehalem, then they'll need some other attention-getting update, since they're basically at the end of the line with C2Ds. A price drop would work on the low-end and Blu-ray would work on the high-end. Even if the iMacs do go Nehalem, though, I imagine they'd want to have some sort of new feature, too...faster processors on the inside are nice, but don't mean much to people who aren't geeks. New media features are more tangible, even if they're only on the very high-end, $1,999 models (for now).

I'm so excited! I'll be really sad if we don't see a new iMac this fall though

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Roboman I still can't believe that PS/2 keyboard and mice are still around. I hate all the legacy crap built into PCs.

Ditto. Too many still ship with PS/2 by default.

[PB PM]

I know some PC users who like having PS/2 because it means they can use the USB ports for other purposes, without having to buy a hub or a PCI card.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM I know some PC users who like having PS/2 because it means they can use the USB ports for other purposes, without having to buy a hub or a PCI card.

Wonder how they feel about that "convenience" when they fry their mainboard by accidentally unplugging their keyboard while the computer is running. PS/2 is a laughably bad design by today's standards, and has no place anywhere.