Mac PVR strategy - What's the best approach? [Archive]

Nordstrodamus

03-01-2006, 07:36 PM

I can see four strategies-

1. Mac mini TV edition - 2 ghz duo (necessary for 1080p), integrated tuner, PVR added to front row

2. iTV peripheral - adds PVR functions to any mac, PVR features added to front row (sort of like el gato eyeTV), shaped to compliment mac mini

3. Open up front row APIs to third parties like el gato.

4. Continue to ignore the relentless, plaintive cries of millions of consumers and industry analysts hoping that Jobs will finally awake from his TV-less fantasy world and integrate the single most popular form of media into what he claims to be a media hub for the dual reason of keeping apple rumor monger web sites in business and making me look like a fool everytime an Apple event comes along and I have a pre-event waking dream where a shiny, happy mac icon whispers in my ear that a Mac PVR will soon be here, prompting me to advise all my family and friends to forestall their home entertainment center purchases on the mere possibility that Apple might bring their design excellence in ease of use to the perplexing task of managing the myriad forms media we are both blessed and cursed with in the modern era, thus bringing harmony and peace to the universe.

BRussell

03-01-2006, 07:44 PM

First I don't think this is nearly as big of a market as you think, and second, I think Apple is going all-out on downloads rather than recording live TV.

bitemymac

03-01-2006, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by Nordstrodamus
I can see four strategies-

1. Mac mini TV edition - 2 ghz duo (necessary for 1080p), integrated tuner, PVR added to front row

2. iTV peripheral - adds PVR functions to any mac, PVR features added to front row (sort of like el gato eyeTV), shaped to compliment mac mini

3. Open up front row APIs to third parties like el gato.

4. Continue to ignore the relentless, plaintive cries of millions of consumers and industry analysts hoping that Jobs will finally awake from his TV-less fantasy world and integrate the single most popular form of media into what he claims to be a media hub for the dual reason of keeping apple rumor monger web sites in business and making me look like a fool everytime an Apple event comes along and I have a pre-event waking dream where a shiny, happy mac icon whispers in my ear that a Mac PVR will soon be here, prompting me to advise all my family and friends to forestall their home entertainment center purchases on the mere possibility that Apple might bring their design excellence in ease of use to the perplexing task of managing the myriad forms media we are both blessed and cursed with in the modern era, thus bringing harmony and peace to the universe.

This will only happen when macmini gets a real GPU that can scale and deinterlace MPEG2/MPEG4 formats at a acceptable level. Macmini isn't there yet and will never be if apple keeps using cheapo intel IGP.

Xool

03-01-2006, 09:30 PM

I think Apple needs to open up its Bonjour/iTunes media sharing frameworks. If my TiVo will let me playback shows in iTunes/Front Row and vice-versa, I'd be happy as a clam.

THT

03-01-2006, 10:45 PM

The best approach is to not enter the market. Why? The cable and satellite companies "rent" a machine for $5/month as part of their services. It's a "no brainer" decision for subscribers: getting a DVR from the cable company is simply easier than getting it from a 3rd party. The service is free! Plus, it's part of your cable box! TIVO's hardware business is dying because of this, and there is no reason for anyone outside of a cable and satellite companies to enter the market anymore.

These companies are a lot like the wireless carriers. Once the capital spending on infrastructure is built, they become the 800 lb gorilla and no one will be touching them because the capital expenditure necessary to compete is too huge to even contemplete.

Apple is doing an end-run around the satillete and cable companies with the ITMS. Luckily, broadband cable service is just as expensive as cable TV, for the most part, and the cable companies don't feel that Apple is encroaching on their turf yet. They still get money out of it, so who knows, maybe they'll allow it.

mzaslove

03-01-2006, 11:02 PM

Isn't Murdoch & DirecTV working with one other satellite company (name escapes me), each putting in a billion dollars for infastructure in order to allow internet accessing without piggybacking someone ground-based? They were looking for a third partner to throw in another billion. Hey, throw in a billion, or just use all the Apple Stores as infrastucture. With Disnar providing content and their own satellite distribution system, would be kinda cool. But boy would that be a long-shot... but it'd be better than Tivo.

Just my 1 cent.

kupan787

03-02-2006, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by THT
The best approach is to not enter the market. Why? The cable and satellite companies "rent" a machine for $5/month as part of their services. It's a "no brainer" decision for subscribers: getting a DVR from the cable company is simply easier than getting it from a 3rd party. The service is free! Plus, it's part of your cable box! TIVO's hardware business is dying because of this, and there is no reason for anyone outside of a cable and satellite companies to enter the market anymore.

True, but my Comcast cable DVR sucks. Not only does it have a shitty interface, and horrible control mechanism, but I can't stream my music or photos on my network to it. My Series 2 TiVO does this. I would only use the TiVO, but it doesn't do HD. So I have to use both currently. I wouldn't mind picking up a refurbished mac mini in 6 months or so to replace my tivo. But boy would I love a single box to handle this, and one with a nice interface and controls like my TiVO.

Like you said, the Cable companies will never add the kind of "home media" options that I (and others) would like (music, video, photo, etc). So it is up to other venders to push forward in this market. If CableCard 2.0 (and the successor, can't recall the name now) actually make it to market, companies like TiVO and Apple could have a fighting chance in the home DVR market.

But I am not under the illusion that Apple would go this route with the mac mini. It is too expensive to be a set top box. Plus it has things that a set top box doesn't need. But targeting it as a home media machine isn't a bad idea.

Apple is doing an end-run around the satillete and cable companies with the ITMS.

And how long before they start to offer 480p or 720p content on the ITMS. Then wouldn't it be nice to stream that to your mac mini home media machine connected to your HDTV? I know Apple is not stupid, and they are watching this emerging market. And if they can supply the content, I am sure they would love to sell you the hardware to play it on as well. Perhaps a slimed down box, that is a little cheaper, and doesn't act as a full computer? I dunno, but I bet Apple is thinking about all of their options.

gregmightdothat

03-03-2006, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by bitemymac
This will only happen when macmini gets a real GPU that can scale and deinterlace MPEG2/MPEG4 formats at a acceptable level. Macmini isn't there yet and will never be if apple keeps using cheapo intel IGP.

Um... any GPU can scale and deinterlace MPEG2/MPEG4.

It's not hard.

edit: I take that back. It only handles MPEG2. That's pretty lame...

Xool

03-03-2006, 04:15 AM

Originally posted by kupan787
True, but my Comcast cable DVR sucks. Not only does it have a shitty interface, and horrible control mechanism, but I can't stream my music or photos on my network to it. My Series 2 TiVO does this. I would only use the TiVO, but it doesn't do HD. So I have to use both currently. I wouldn't mind picking up a refurbished mac mini in 6 months or so to replace my tivo. But boy would I love a single box to handle this, and one with a nice interface and controls like my TiVO.

Yes Yes! Comcast's DVR sucks so much, but its practically the only HD device in town. Too bad too.

At this point I'm considering replacing my DVD player with a Mac mini once Blu-Ray is out. If the Mac won't merge with TiVo I'll flip the equation and merge it with the simple disc player. People already think they'll get a PS3 just for Blu-Ray and I'd rather use it as an excuse for a living room Mac.

Apple probably realized that a Mac mini in the living room is far more lucrative than an simple AirPort Express A/V, but who knows what will come. FrontRow's advantage of being able to browse your media is huge. Have it show your PVR content and it is win-win.

Anyhow, expect HDMI/HDCP in the next system revisions. PCs too. You want HD output, don'tcha?!

Kishan

03-03-2006, 05:36 AM

DirectTV's DVR (http://www.directtv.com/DTVAPP/imagine/TiVo_HD.jsp) is by TIVO and it does dual tuner HD. This is the system I plan on having in a few months. For the NFL, I think DirectTV is the only company that has the Direct Ticket to watch all the games in HD.

backtomac

03-03-2006, 08:01 AM

kupan787

03-03-2006, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Kishan
DirectTV's DVR (http://www.directtv.com/DTVAPP/imagine/TiVo_HD.jsp) is by TIVO and it does dual tuner HD. This is the system I plan on having in a few months. For the NFL, I think DirectTV is the only company that has the Direct Ticket to watch all the games in HD.

Unfortunately DirectTV is moving away from TiVO, and going to their own home grown service. The new satellites they launched all broadcast HD in H.264, something the current TiVO boxes don't support. I think if you look on the DirectTV website now even, all the DVRs they sell don't include TiVO (if you read the description, TiVO isn't mentioned anywhere). I don't know what the service will be like, if it will be better or worse, but we shall see.

The only good news is that Comcast and TiVO made an agreement, and will begin loading TiVO on all of their current DVRs for free. I have heard time frames from March all the way to Fall of 06. I can't wait for my crappy comcast interface to be replaced with the tivo one. I only hope that some how they allow for streaming music on the box, and I can junk my series 2 box!

onlooker

03-03-2006, 10:45 PM

The best approach is the approach that no one is offering. And the one that no one has mentioned. All I seem to read is where you all find faults in the current systems, but no one is offering a real answer to the question. If Apple were to do it they should design a new box, or even use the cube. (*I prefer the cube for reasons you'll see later) but don't limit the unit to merely a PVR. You'll want internet connectivity, and iTunes access. You should be able to plug your iPod into it, and have your shows that you click selected in your personal menu (fast user switching for families) uploaded into your video iPod, and your iTunes playlist updated. It should also have Airtunes connectivity to your stereo.
Rather than making a computer - make something else. Windows media centers I am not really familiar with, but I imagine they do it all in one machine, but it's a computer with all your crappy Microsoft computer apps in it as well. Apple should remove the iLife the apps, and the majority of the OS. Sure you could include mail, and video iChat or something so you can do those that from your easy chair, but if they want to use iLife, and regular apps. They should use a computer, or get a next gen Mac Mini that is designed to be compatible with it. *You could design these two things as a stackable unit if that's what the user wants in the end. They are roughly the same size. But back to what I was saying was these should be distinctly different. One a computer, and the other a home media appliance. I think that is what scares people from the media center of Microsoft if what it is is essentially a computer with home media features. If you let people check it out out one step at a time they will have a chance to absorb, and appreciate what you have created. Let them know it's not a computer in their living room. It's an appliance that is part of the new digital life.

kupan787

03-03-2006, 11:48 PM

A cube design is not the way to go. I want to be able to stack it with my other equipment. This means, I want it like the size of a DVD player, Audio Receiver, or TiVO. Like Onlooker said, it doesn't need a full OS X setup, nor all the same default applications. It needs Front Row (so iPhoto, iTunes, DVD Player), Safari and Mail (for a WebTV like experience if you have a wireless keyboard), maybe a few others. The hardware needs to have DVI, Ethernet, Airport, Bluetooth, CableCard 2, OTA Antenna connector, and a USB port. It should record to H.264 (or MPEG2 if the channel is an HD MPEG2 stream). It will have a hard drive (for the DVR functionality), but you can also off load songs form your iPod, or photos from your digital camera. Strip out what you don't need (no need for firewire, or for 3 additional USB ports, or for 90% of the applications/printer drivers/etc that OS X installs by default), to lower the price.

All I want is a box that performs as good as my TiVO (DVR wise, and HMO wise), but has the ability to record HD as well (CableCard 2!). Throw in the ability to stream my videos as well, and I would be a happy camper.

Xool

03-04-2006, 01:07 AM

You could flatten the mini out like pancake and it could be wide and thin. Hell, take a MacBook Pro and take off the screen and you're practically there.

Thing is, it has to be cheap or people won't buy it. Also, if its a TV centric device, it has to be simpler than the Mac.

The mini still is a computer. The TV device would have to be iPod. Its already "+ iTunes".

kupan787

03-04-2006, 01:51 AM

Originally posted by Xool
You could flatten the mini out like pancake and it could be wide and thin. Hell, take a MacBook Pro and take off the screen and you're practically there.

It doesn't have to be that thin. Remember, 3.5" HDs are cheaper (and hold more), and would want to be used in a box like this.

Thing is, it has to be cheap or people won't buy it. Also, if its a TV centric device, it has to be simpler than the Mac.

And that is where stripping out fluff comes into play. Not including OS X, but instead a simplified UI would save on cost. Using dedicated H.264 processors, rather than a powerful CPU would help lower costs as well. It can be done, just the question is will it be done by Apple.

The mini still is a computer. The TV device would have to be iPod. Its already "+ iTunes".

I agree. The mini is too much of a computer to fill this space. It needs to be less computer, and extremely simple to use.

Xool

03-04-2006, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by kupan787
It doesn't have to be that thin. Remember, 3.5" HDs are cheaper (and hold more), and would want to be used in a box like this.

Absolutely.

Unless its portable.

kupan787

03-04-2006, 02:39 AM

Originally posted by Xool
Absolutely.

Unless its portable.

I dunno about that. Having to get behind my cabinet to unplug all the cables (going to my TV, stereo receiver, ethernet, power, etc) to transport my DVR around. And why would I want to? I could just burn any thing I wanted to take with onto to a DVD, or zap over the shows on to my MacBook. I don't see a real advantage to making this DVR device portable.

ak1808

03-04-2006, 04:33 AM

I haven't watched TV in years!
I don't miss it a bit, on-demand downloads are the future of television. Many people around me have abandonded their TV set. When I zap through TV at my parents place I feel sorry for them.
To brainlessly broadcast media data 24hours a day is the crudest, rudest and most primitive thing I have ever seen. This only worked as long as it was necessary.

Keda

03-04-2006, 07:48 AM

People are fixating on the Mac Mini as the product that will/might become Apple's entertainment solution. I disagree for two reasons: 1) cost and 2) brand.

1) Cost
The Mac Mini is Apple's intro-level machine. This means that it needs to run the Mac OS, popular apps, etc. To accomplish this, the Mini must use a certain level of components. The pricing of the Mini will always be bound by those component costs, and I believe Apple will continue to offer the Mini at approximately the same prices that it has today. At these levels, the Mini would not be a viable alternative to the existing solutions (TiVo, Cable DVR, etc). A device that can successfully compete in this area must sell for less that $300.

2) Brand
Let's face it, many people have negative associations with the Mac brand. In order for Apple to increase market share, the company must change this, and positioning a Mac as an entertainment device could have the opposite effect by dilluting the brand. If Apple met the cost requirements for a DVR, then it would need to make major sacrafices in the the components/capabilities of the machine. It is doubtful that these compromises would allow the user to enjoy the full Mac experience (specifiaclly the Mac OS).

My solution
If Apple decides to enter this market, I believe that they will do so with a product from the iPod family, not the Mac. Although the iPod is an Apple computer, it does not run the Mac OS...or is it expected too. A device from this family of products could be made with a more limited set of capabilites (no Finder, MS Office, Web Surfing, etc) that are focused on achieving one goal--media delivery.

Also, iPod devices are platform agnostic. Apple would need to Windows users to adopt a DVR product (I'll call it the iDVR for fun). By positioning the iDVR as a brand extension of the iPod, Apple would be able to build on the brand equity that the iPod already has.

It is much more likely that the iPod Boom Box is a precursor to the iDVR, than the Mac Mini. In fact, the product might not be introduced as ultra-revolutionary. Apple already sells video that can be downloaded to an iPod, and they already make docks for the iPod (including the Boom Box). So why not make the iDVR a dock that can play/download/store your iPod media?

In effect, you would be removing the computer from the equation entirely. Apple's iDVR could have broadband capabilities built-in, so that it could connect to the iTMS and find shared media on your computers. If your interest were simply music and video, then you would not need to interact with a Mac or PC at all. Also, this gives Apple a competetive advantage, because other media players will not be able to duplicate this approach.

wwsj

03-04-2006, 09:12 AM

COST - My Sony stereo receiver dates back to the 1980's and could be replaced with an appropriate quality device. What if this Apple component came in and replaced multiple components? Instead of communicating with a stereo system, how about replacing the core of the system? Cable or satellite TV & internet inputs, plus all of your other peripherals (wouldn't need a Cd or DVD player, might sell a separate device to talk to your older format appliances). No doubt Apple already developed everything they need to drive a good set of external speakers... How much would you pay for a good quality system?

The Front row type of interface could be used for a majority of the work, but if you could just press a button and get to all of the power of the Mac OSX system running underneath... Just a thought.

aresee

03-04-2006, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by kupan787
A cube design is not the way to go. I want to be able to stack it with my other equipment. This means, I want it like the size of a DVD player, Audio Receiver, or TiVO. Like Onlooker said, it doesn't need a full OS X setup, nor all the same default applications. It needs Front Row (so iPhoto, iTunes, DVD Player), Safari and Mail (for a WebTV like experience if you have a wireless keyboard), maybe a few others. The hardware needs to have DVI, Ethernet, Airport, Bluetooth, CableCard 2, OTA Antenna connector, and a USB port. It should record to H.264 (or MPEG2 if the channel is an HD MPEG2 stream). It will have a hard drive (for the DVR functionality), but you can also off load songs form your iPod, or photos from your digital camera. Strip out what you don't need (no need for firewire, or for 3 additional USB ports, or for 90% of the applications/printer drivers/etc that OS X installs by default), to lower the price.

This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.

kupan787

03-04-2006, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by aresee
This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.

I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.

aresee

03-04-2006, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by kupan787
I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.

So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.

Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.

NOFEER

03-04-2006, 03:08 PM

cable card comes from your cable provider(you pay them), it's so you don't have to have a box, and operate from your TV BUT many cable don't have it , i've tried, i think it's a bust, why tv's have them and cable (adelphia) doesn't offer it. why then put them in the TV to begin with.... i think it's a bust i can see it saving money since they get the same price for the card as the box, but what about DVR. for 10$ i get both a dvr and features, sure it's another box but hey. now if i had a plasma on my wall i wouldn't want another box hanging around.

kupan787

03-04-2006, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by aresee
So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.

The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.

Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.

Um, yes I did. CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues. CableCARD 2.0 is not delayed. It is, and always has been, scheduled for a 2006 rollout, and thats when it is coming. It is FCC mandated, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. TiVO has already committed to it with their Series 3 boxes, as has Microsoft with Windows Vista.

See this (http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/1469/multistream_cablecard_status) :

The National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) has provided a CableCARD status report to the Federal Communications Comission...However, the more interesting news is the status of CableCARD 2.0 on track for 2006 deployment.

See CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification OC-SP-CCIF2.0-I02-050708, http://www.opencable.com/specifications/. Pre-Qualified samples of the multistream CableCARD will be submitted to CableLabs for preliminary testing in the fourth quarter of 2005, with the expectation of full testing and qualification early in 2006. It is expected that multistream CableCARDs will be widely available for use in commercially available commercial devices by mid-2006.

So as you can see, no delays at all!

The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.

onlooker

03-04-2006, 03:40 PM

I have to disagree with the post that said it needed to have safari, and all that crap for it to be a webtv like experience. I think that is the last thing you would want to do. If you wanted to connect a compatible Mac to an Apple home media unit that is another thing, but putting everything all in one box is what they should try and differentiate from. Don't make a computer experience. You need a new one. Start with some basics. Earlier I said have Mail, and Video iChat included, but I think that may have been too much. Stick with the PVR, and iTunes Music store connectivity, an iPod dock, and playback to your stereo through airtunes. That is not going to seem like a computer. If you want the other features (update, and change front row) use Front row equipped Macs as compatible units. I just don't think selling a computer for the TV has been very successful, and Apple should keep expanding on their other hardware.

I also agree that it doesn't have to look like a cube., or a Mac Mini, but it would be neat to make a new set of them fit together that were stackable. They could look really cool. It doesn't necessarily have to be designed to the same size as your DVD player, and various components either. Unique equipment is all over the place in electronic components right now. Many are like pieces of art.

aresee

03-04-2006, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by kupan787
The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.

CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues.

The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.

Is this $10 the same for a non-DVR box? The reason I ask is that DISH Network does have a "Monthly $5.98 DISH Network DVR Service fee". (from the fine print on http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/products/dvr/index.shtml)

We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.

I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.

onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.

And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.

kupan787

03-04-2006, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by aresee
We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.

That is something that is up to the box maker I would imagine. Currently TiVO Series 2 boxes have TiVO2GO, which allows to to transmit your shows from the TiVO to your PC via ethernet or wifi.

I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.

Um...the broadcast flag is non-existant right now. The MPAA was trying to get it brought in via the FCC, but it was shot down. They have tried to get it in by piggy backing it on other bills, but so far no good. As it stands there is currently no broadcast flag. See here for some info (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/003555.php)

onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.

Ya, I only listed adding Safari and Mail for the above average user. Believe it or not there are WebTV users out there, and there are people that would like to browse the web on their TV. But I agree, this DVR box shouldn't be a full blown computer. Mail and Safari aren't needed, and maybe could be included in some kind of a value added extra (the $299 DVR doesn't include it, but the $399 with a bluetooth keyboard does).

And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.

I think the mini now will be a good media center pc, minus the DVR capabilities. I am very tempted to get one, once they get to the refurbished stages (and come down in price a bit).

Nordstrodamus

03-04-2006, 09:53 PM

It should not be stripped down. This is not about turning a mac into a tivo. Its about bringing the flexibility and potential of the mac platform into the central media focus of the home.

Apple should embrace and champion HAVI, allowing me to access custom interfaces for my Amp, DVHS, TIVO, and all other AV equipment. Sound processing should be handled in software, ending the need to buy a new receiver everytime a new codec is introduced. Apple could sell a whole new line of AV products that provide the flexibility people want - Airport Extreme AV for streaming to multiple tvs, mac mini Amp, etc...

Hobbiests should see enough potential to start writing shareware that will extend the macs capabilities into those areas that lawyers fear to tread- Archiving DVD images onto the mini (or an external hard drive) to have a central home media jukebox. Distributed p2p programs to share recorded shows. Word would spread that the mac mini can get the job done with a few downloads.