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?
Consider the source.
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.
0. http://www.pricegrabber.com/blu-ray-external/products/?sort=...
And you can send audio over USB. You can't possibly have more than 10 Gbps of audio?
> I never understood the incentive for getting rid of them.
Can't be that much of a mystery? Less weight, less space, less cost, less clunky mechanical stuff - given almost nobody would ever use them it's a no-brainer.
Don't you think that's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy? DVDs are absolutely not obsolete, and are still manufactured. Lots of content exists on DVD but not streaming. We get movies and shows at the library all the time that are not on any streaming platform.
Sure, everybody has a computer built only to stream, so streaming is the default for anybody who doesn't want to carry an external drive in their laptop bag. Design decisions influence how your product is used. Surprise, people who have phones without headphones jacks are less likely to use wired headphones.
But I already have an external blu-ray drive that connects via USB, and I don't ever need audio beyond the headphone jack. Those who do can use the USB-C ports for that.
Maximum flexibility via USB, without a bunch of ports and parts that will be unused by most people, please.
... and 2000 $
For this price a Bluray drive and some audio I/O would have been nice.