AppleTV going the way of the cube?

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
Prior to the launch of the AppleTV I predicted that this was their next "cube" in that it wouldn't last. Despite my own prediction I found one (and I do mean ONLY ONE) feature that was of enough use to me to warrant purchasing the AppleTV. In case you're wondering, the ONE feature is the ability to RIP my DVDs and encode them so that I can stream them from my computer to my big screen TV anytime I want.



Other than the announcement of the extra storage, not much has happened with AppleTV (no real software updates) to make the ATV any more useful than I expected it to be. Since that initial launch, Apple really hasn't said much about it, so I wonder if overall the sales are not as great as they hoped, and if possibly by this time next year we'll be saying "Remember the AppleTV?"



As for myself, my one use is still worthwhile, but there is rumor that Tivo may add this one feature to their box that would render my ATV redundant, as overall my Tivo does more, and if it adds that one feature, well, my ATV will be on eBay faster than it took me to type this



Thoughts anyone?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    AppleTV needs both a price reduction and an update big time...



    Cable companies are killing TIVO. Apple will not be including this functionality in the next ATV update (think about their business model...).



    Apple will not include a DVD player (neither standard, HD, or Blu-Ray). Physical media is dead.



    Don't sell yours just yet.



    Wait until after Leopard...



    Dave
  • Reply 2 of 33
    I figure Apple will move to a SoC design and reduce the price to $199 eventually. At this price point there will be a significant bump.



    They will also move the core OS to Leopard which will enable some new features and I eventually expect them add multi ATV networking to Front Row.



    Apple never said the ATV would be a big hit ..in fact they pre-announced it to get it out of the ay. But it does indeed factor into their strategy for online music and movie distribution.
  • Reply 3 of 33
    Apple TV is still waiting for the killer "app" - movie and TV rentals, accessible from your couch.



    This could be done both through iTunes and content providers in-house systems (eg BBC's iPlayer, when it's OS X version is released).



    When these come, and they are inevitable, the Apple TV will become a very useful product.
  • Reply 4 of 33
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    Physical media is dead.



    Physical media isn't even sick, much less dead.
  • Reply 5 of 33
    nevenneven Posts: 54member
    Physical media are dead to Apple, whatever else one has to say about that.



    AppleTVs are probably being sold at a very healthy margin so it's unlikely that money is being lost on them. Still, the whole enterprise should have blossomed a bit more this year.



    I'm getting the feeling that Apple went into this and iPhone a little cocky, and they didn't expect this sort of resistance from content providers. I can't think of any other reason why we don't have content purchasing and streaming on AppleTV.
  • Reply 6 of 33
    pt123pt123 Posts: 696member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by neven View Post


    Physical media are dead to Apple, whatever else one has to say about that.



    Without physical media, how would we store the movies we download? Wouldn't we have to go buy DVD's and burn the movie onto disc's? And isn't Leopard being sold as physical media? Don't Leopard have an updated DVD application?
  • Reply 7 of 33
    crentistcrentist Posts: 204member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by neven View Post


    AppleTVs are probably being sold at a very healthy margin so it's unlikely that money is being lost on them. Still, the whole enterprise should have blossomed a bit more this year.



    I'm getting the feeling that Apple went into this and iPhone a little cocky, and they didn't expect this sort of resistance from content providers. I can't think of any other reason why we don't have content purchasing and streaming on AppleTV.



    I tend to agree. In my opinion, the Apple TV was preannounced for two reasons. 1) As stated slightly above, the Apple TV was announced to get it out into the open so the media's palette could be cleared in time for the iPhone. 2) I believe that the Apple TV was preannounced in an effort to gain support of the major studios so that they could officially see where Apple is trying to go with the iTunes Store. Steve Jobs basically said this in not so many words when the Apple TV was introduced. He made a comment about wanting "everyone" to see where we are going with their expanding iTunes market.



    Although the major studios may not be quite on board at this point (who really knows?) If Apple can get Blockbuster or some other rental service to partner to provide rental content in the mean time, a lot more Apple TVs will be sold, and that just might buy Apple some more time/and or negotiating power with the studios.



    My guess is Macworld 2008. this announcement has less to do with Macs and Leopard, and more to do with consumers and the press-hype only a Macworld can generate.
  • Reply 8 of 33
    kennywrxkennywrx Posts: 141member
    Don't you get it? Pay once to watch the movie once... pay twice and you can move it to either ipod you choose, pay for the third time and you get the right to burn the movie to media. lol... j/k



    I don't even like the fact that Apple got into the whole content provider business. I still can't believe so many people are OK paying $1/song for music in a compressed audio format... much less another $1/song to make them ringtones. Ridiculous.
  • Reply 9 of 33
    Well I just got an Apple TV last month and frankly am thrilled with it.

    I used to use a Mac mini in the theater rack to be able to watch my output from Final Cut.

    Copying things to the mini and having to drag out KB and mouse just was not cool.



    Enter tv.



    It can play 720p but Apple is pushing 540i and honestly it looks OK on my 46" Sharp (1080).

    Overall the ease of keeping it synced and not having a KB and mouse to use it makes it a win.

    Ripping movies via Handbrake is a piece of cake, I have all the Pixar cartoons ripped for the kids.



    Sure I want iTunes movie stores and everything else, but frankly if tv was EOL today I would not be that upset. It fills a great niche for me.
  • Reply 10 of 33
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KennyWRX View Post


    I don't even like the fact that Apple got into the whole content provider business. I still can't believe so many people are OK paying $1/song for music in a compressed audio format... much less another $1/song to make them ringtones. Ridiculous.



    Why dont you like that fact? If you were a shareholder you would like it. And as a consumer of Apple hardware you should like it too because as more people buy iTMS junk, more people buy things like ipods, and eventually maybe iMacs and Macbooks too. This drives prices down slightly and leads to more Mac applications. So you should be happy!



    And regarding the sound quality, I agree that 128k is not very good. I personally not not buy very often on iTMS because i have higher-end consumer components (Onkyo and Polk) and 128k sounds like crap. But the majority of people listen to this stuff on white earbuds via an MP3 player. Any difference between uncompressed AIFF and 128k gets drowned out by the low quality headphones and ambient noise (plane, train and automobile). Most consumers are happy if they just have good of highs-lows and something that resembles Left and Right balance. Mid is not a concern for most rock, pop, hip-hop and R&B listeners.



    Just like you cant put iTMS music on a high-end stereo, you also cant put iTMS movies/TV shows on a high-end home theater. But purchasers are obviously not concerned, maybe because they're watching it on a tiny window on their desktop and using little white earbuds.
  • Reply 11 of 33
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mullman View Post


    Well I just got an Apple TV last month and frankly am thrilled with it.

    I used to use a Mac mini in the theater rack to be able to watch my output from Final Cut.

    Copying things to the mini and having to drag out KB and mouse just was not cool.



    Enter tv.



    It can play 720p but Apple is pushing 540i and honestly it looks OK on my 46" Sharp (1080).

    Overall the ease of keeping it synced and not having a KB and mouse to use it makes it a win.

    Ripping movies via Handbrake is a piece of cake, I have all the Pixar cartoons ripped for the kids.



    Sure I want iTunes movie stores and everything else, but frankly if tv was EOL today I would not be that upset. It fills a great niche for me.



    Thats cool... i always figured the Apple TV was a great niche product for families. If I had kids I would do the same exact thing. How does the FCP material compare with the material purchased on the iTMS? How about against the material converted with handbrake?
  • Reply 12 of 33
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bg_nyc View Post


    Thats cool... i always figured the Apple TV was a great niche product for families. If I had kids I would do the same exact thing. How does the FCP material compare with the material purchased on the iTMS? How about against the material converted with handbrake?



    Well I output 720 or 1080 from FCP (from 1080 HDV or AVCHD cams as source).



    A mini (or my MBP) will crank out 1080 in all its glory and it looks awesome.

    Think DiscoveryHD.



    720 looks very good on the tv.



    iTMS movies vary, 480, 360, depending on widescreen format and they are acceptable, but not great. Handbrake looks the same, IMHO. Very acceptable. It is the convenience that gets you, not the quality. I mean you just cannot compare a 25gb-50gb 2 hr high-def movie to a compressed and resized 2gb version of same...
  • Reply 13 of 33
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Thanks for the response.



    Why dont you also stream your FCP out put via Apple TV? I know it will downconvert 1080p material to 720p, but i thought it would still look great. Or at least much better than the TMS and handbrake content.
  • Reply 14 of 33
    I still think AppleTV is an 'interim' product. Until they have DVR-like recording and integration with cable or satellite companies, AppleTV is, quite bluntly, an abortion.
  • Reply 15 of 33
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    I still think AppleTV is an 'interim' product. Until they have DVR-like recording and integration with cable or satellite companies, AppleTV is, quite bluntly, an abortion.



    But as mentioned by many others, theres a niche market of folks with a ton of home video that they would like to easily stream to their TV. AppleTV does this for them very cleanly and efficiently.



    Also, there are a ton of folks who are buidling digital databases of their DVDs. It takes time and disc space, but you can achieve DVD quality via handbrake. And its a hell of a lot cheaper than buying a dedicated DVD server like Kaleidescape.



    And I think lots of folks have purchased Airport express for $129 over the last few years just so they can stream music to their main stereo. I have been using it for 3 years now.



    For those planning on using it for all three of those things, its a solid value proposition IMHO. Its not everything to everbody, but certainly not an abortion!!



    Dont get me wrong... adding a cable card, a nice OSX-like onscreen TV guide, 1080p, and DVR functionality would be killer... CNET, Macworld, Sound and Vision, and CES gadget of the decade. I think they could do it, and it would be awesome. And believe me, i would be among the first to buy! But the current version is a good solution for many folks.
  • Reply 16 of 33
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bg_nyc View Post


    But as mentioned by many others, theres a niche market of folks with a ton of home video that they would like to easily stream to their TV. AppleTV does this for them very cleanly and efficiently.



    Also, there are a ton of folks who are buidling digital databases of their DVDs. It takes time and disc space, but you can achieve DVD quality via handbrake. And its a hell of a lot cheaper than buying a dedicated DVD server like Kaleidescape.



    And I think lots of folks have purchased Airport express for $129 over the last few years just so they can stream music to their main stereo. I have been using it for 3 years now.



    For those planning on using it for all three of those things, its a solid value proposition IMHO. Its not everything to everbody, but certainly not an abortion!!



    Dont get me wrong... adding a cable card, a nice OSX-like onscreen TV guide, 1080p, and DVR functionality would be killer... CNET, Macworld, Sound and Vision, and CES gadget of the decade. I think they could do it, and it would be awesome. And believe me, i would be among the first to buy! But the current version is a good solution for many folks.



    I'm sorry, but the entire premise of AppleTV is idiotic. DVDs answer all of the 'problems' that exist in the AppleTV solution. It's a complicated (and comparatively expensive) answer to a problem that does not exist.
  • Reply 17 of 33
    filburtfilburt Posts: 398member
    As much as I want to love Apple TV, it's got beta written all over it. No video rental, no iTunes Store, no multi-channel surround sound, no subtitles, no 1080p, no HD (720p) contents (not counting trailers and podcasts), etc. On the positive side, all but 1080p can be addressed via software and there are lots of hacks out there. The bad news is that since one and only 1.1 "YouTube" update, Apple hasn't provided a single update.
  • Reply 18 of 33
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by filburt View Post


    As much as I want to love Apple TV, it's got beta written all over it. No video rental, no iTunes Store, no multi-channel surround sound, no subtitles, no 1080p, no HD (720p) contents (not counting trailers and podcasts), etc. On the positive side, all but 1080p can be addressed via software and there are lots of hacks out there. The bad news is that since one and only 1.1 "YouTube" update, Apple hasn't provided a single update.



    Steve has stated that it is a work in progress. There was a hopeful signs that rentals are coming. It's hard to believe that 720p is not coming. The YouTube deal points to the possibility of other streaming sources being supported. The problem is not necessarily Apple because they are not the copyright holders on the content and cannot move beyond what their contracts stipulate on what and how they can distribute the content that they have available, so Apple has to negotiate deals with the content owners.



    The two things that Apple needs to update in their software are surround sound support and a DRM that allows time limited viewing for rentals. Both of these mean an update to QuickTime and may be coming with Leopard. A hardware update would be needed for 1080p but then again the disk space, bandwidth, and time required for downloading these files would potentially limit their appeal of these files in a time when the majority of HD sets being sold are still limited to 720p.
  • Reply 19 of 33
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    "A work in progress"... "a hobby"... these are not the comments of anyone committed to growing the product line.
  • Reply 20 of 33
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    "A work in progress"... "a hobby"... these are not the comments of anyone committed to growing the product line.



    You nailed it perfectly...
Sign In or Register to comment.