or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Report: Next Apple TV to be renamed iTV, drop 1080p
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Report: Next Apple TV to be renamed iTV, drop 1080p - Page 2

post #41 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandrakeTheMagician View Post

... all your considerations about 1080p are untrue.

In Europe we have NOTHING coming in 720p. Everything is in 1080p.
The only videos we could get in 720p come from the US.

If you're talking about the idea of streaming in 720p, nobody there will buy any streaming in 720p except the US HDTV series.

For real cinema, Apple won't sell anything in Europe because we know the difference between 720p and 1080p when you get at least a 40" screen..

Well... broadcast HDTV in the UK is 1080i. The UK PSN marketplace is 720p. iTunes UK is occasionally 720p but usually 480p or lower with massive amounts of compression. BBC iPlayer is 720p in Flash or 1080i through Video on Demand via Virgin cable.

To my knowledge the only 1080p sources of video in the UK are the Zune marketplace, and of course those lovely blu-ray discs.
post #42 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandrakeTheMagician View Post

Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????

Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....

The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, but I disagree. I can tell the difference between LCD vs. Plasma 1080p, and I can tell the difference on 720p and 1080p settings for my video games. But on my 55" LG LCD it is tough to tell the difference between my Panasonic Blu-ray at 24 FPS 1080p and my Mac Mini running a downloaded 720p movie.

And don't even ask the wife. She claims there is no difference between the 55", the 720p 32" vizio upstairs and the old 32" tube JVC we used to have.
post #43 of 231
Don't worry, 1080p/i will be coming next year along with a slightly faster processor and a little more memory so all you fan boys can shell out for the same product twice in 12 months!!! Yay iFun !!
post #44 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

And it will make no difference to 90%+ of users, and increase usability by increasing streaming speeds.
When the pipes are up to it, 1080p will make a marginally better experience. Until then responsiveness is more important.
Apple knows that.

You fail to understand how modern streaming can work. Microsoft will stream up to 1080p through the Xbox 360. If you lack the bandwidth you get 720p, or 480p, or lower. It scales smoothly and without user interaction.
post #45 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by gem View Post

Im sorry but I disagree that recent experience suggests Apple will be able to use the name iTV. The issue is that whilst the others are names which were no longer used, ITV is one of the 5 main TV stations in the UK and as it is a product effectively forming your own TV station I highly doubt they will allow usage of the name. There would be too much confusion for everyone in the UK who knows ITV as a TV station that has been around for decades, its like if they released a product called NBC. Its just a bit ridiculous.

Apple could just buy the UK and solve that issue.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #46 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by pats View Post

The A4 video encoder is based on the VXD 370 and Apple will not need to worry about power consumption so if they limit to 720p it is to reduce file size of the stream.

Don't forget that online streaming will be from iTunes only, which does not offer 1080p anyways.
post #47 of 231
Daniel. Just wondering if one would be able to connect to a new iTV for FaceTime calling. Perhaps not everybody would be into it at
the start. But I think it would be a great Home phone, just to stay in
touch with the most important people in our life.
It would also be great if Apple could offer it up as a WiFi Hotspot
upgrade.
post #48 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

The same gripes come up every time Apple uses the 'i*' convention, and every time, it becomes a non-issue.
Branding is REALLY important, whether people like it or not. And Apple has made good use of iBrands.

iPod
iPod Shuffle
iPod nano
iPod classic
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iMac
iOS
iTunes
iCal
iSync
iPad
iWork
iLife

Off the top of my head- see, it must work!
post #49 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandrakeTheMagician View Post


The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!

Didn't you read the article? all the experts agree that under a 55 inch TV, nobody can even tell the difference. The number of people with 55 inch tvs is tiny. 720p is better for the vast majority of people.
post #50 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

I didn't say that I couldn't tell the difference. I said most consumers.

The problems with 1080p is:

-The cost of streaming 1080p is too high
-Most don't have 1080p sets
-It may cost more
-Many people in the US have lousy bandwidth. A household full of iTV all streaming 1080p content is probably not even possible
-It won't be true 1080p because they will lower the bitrate which makes it essentially pointless

I totally agree with you on your 4th point. The VAST majority of US households are living on slow, crappy DSL or worse (shudder at my parents), DIAL UP. I've got 20 mbps max via Midcontinent, and there are times my netflix 1080 streaming gets choppy. Meanwhile, the rest of the modern world has access to 40 mbps speed at prices less then we pay!

Most consumers could very well love this product (like they love the iPad) and purchase it in droves as the dumping sat. and cable trend continues.
post #51 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

Didn't you read the article? all the experts agree that under a 55 inch TV, nobody can even tell the difference. The number of people with 55 inch tvs is tiny. 720p is better for the vast majority of people.

So if I can tell at 30", that makes me nobody does it?
post #52 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

the problems with 1080p is:

-the cost of streaming 1080p is too high
-most don't have 1080p sets
-it may cost more
-many people in the us have lousy bandwidth. A household full of itv all streaming 1080p content is probably not even possible
-it won't be true 1080p because they will lower the bitrate which makes it essentially pointless



+1 .
post #53 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt_s View Post


I paid extra for my gigantic 60" 1080p HDTV flat panel and I'll be damned if I'm going to spend money on a device - and subsequent download rentals - that can't feed the beast the resolution it deserves.


You are among a tiny, tiny minority who might benefit a slight amount form 1080p. But the normal consumer, of which there are millions, cannot see any difference and does not really care about crazy numbers.
post #54 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Fix View Post

dropping 1080p goes against Apple's philosophy of providing newer, better technologies.

plus, the people that would want an iTV are people with extra money and those people have larger screens and would appreciate the higher quality.

Apple again, driving towards the low end.

Maybe they'll instead increase the bitrate on the 720p videos they sell.

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #55 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormj View Post

Unless they've given it an ok, there is almost no way this passes copyright muster. Even if there weren't source confusion, iTV is a "famous mark."

This report is hard to credit.

ITV is not copyrighted in the United States. sorry.
post #56 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by dillio View Post

And I strongly disagree that most people cannot tell the difference between 720p, and 1080. Anyone with a 40+" TV can tell the difference.


All the best experts agree that under 55 inches, nobody can tell the difference.
post #57 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by gem View Post

Im sorry but I disagree that recent experience suggests Apple will be able to use the name iTV. The issue is that whilst the others are names which were no longer used, ITV is one of the 5 main TV stations in the UK and as it is a product effectively forming your own TV station I highly doubt they will allow usage of the name. There would be too much confusion for everyone in the UK who knows ITV as a TV station that has been around for decades, its like if they released a product called NBC. Its just a bit ridiculous.

So they can call it iTV everywhere but the UK. and call it something else in UK only. not a big deal in the global scheme of things.
post #58 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

You fail to understand how modern streaming can work. Microsoft will stream up to 1080p through the Xbox 360. If you lack the bandwidth you get 720p, or 480p, or lower. It scales smoothly and without user interaction.

It really doesn't matter what iTunes quality is at anyway. The big deal about this is third party apps like Netflix & Hulu which can stream at the bitrate of their choosing.

The average US home bandwidth is about 4MB/s download 1MB/s upload. It would be hard for me to believe that all of Europe is drastically better in this regard.

With a Slingbox HD you need anywhere from 2-3MB/sec just to stream 720p. One can only imagine how much 1080p uses. Some of the movie can be cached but I don't feel like waiting a half hour for my movie to start.
post #59 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

So if I can tell at 30", that makes me nobody does it?

No, it means that you sit too close to the TV. We're talking about normal viewing distances.
post #60 of 231
And just to muddy the waters

http://www.i.tv/
post #61 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by YodaMac View Post

For the vast majority of HDTV owners, 720p is just great. (most HD on cable is 720 anyways) and since streaming is an important part of the Apple TV, 720p makes good bandwidth sense too. ...

Agreed.

People are forgetting also that most HD content is highly compressed. Most HD channels on TV are not even 720p or they are double letter-boxed 720p which is even worse than regular broadcast quality. The only time the average viewer will even come across 1080p or 1080i material is if they buy a BluRay disc of a recent movie and have a very good player and the latest TV.

True 720p, uncompressed looks fantastic and most people will be happy with that if it turns out to be the case.
post #62 of 231
Almost all HD broadcasters broadcast at 720p...

1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.
post #63 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

No, it means that you sit too close to the TV. We're talking about normal viewing distances.

Define "normal"
post #64 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new report says the next update to Apple TV will adopt the name iTV, while also dropping support for 1080p video output to standardize on 720p HDTV.

The iTV name change seems possible but it would cause confusion in the UK since they have an iTV channel. Maybe it would stay Apple TV in the UK? That doesn't seem likely.

Dropping 1080p doesn't seem like big a deal since the iTunes Store doesn't sell 1080p video. I've had an Apple TV from day one and didn't even know the format was supported.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.

This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.

What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

For Apple's mass market users, a cheaper device that streams easy to buy and view HDTV content makes far more sense than the current Apple TV, which requires syncing with a local iTunes system or downloadable storage for rentals.

Apple TV as it stands today DOES stream easy to buy and view HDTV content. All that's required is a one time entering of a four digit code from iTunes into the Apple TV. All my music, music videos, TV shows and movies stream without incident. I also have the option to sync photos, stream YouTube, listen to internet radio, look at friends Flicker pages. I can even stream content from a visiting friends computer through Apple TV. How is this proposed new Apple TV any different in these regards?

Perhaps what AppleInsider was trying to say is that instead of downloading music and video from the iTunes store you could stream it, therefore bypassing the wait for a download. That would be cool, but why do I need a new AppleTV to do that? Couldn't that functionality be added with a software update? I don't see what difference in hardware is required to make this possible.

This supposedly new Apple TV sounds very similar to what we have today with only slight modifications. None of which would compel me to "upgrade." Am I missing something?
post #65 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

Yep. Nobody can really see 1080p except for a tiny, tiny percentage who have gigantic tv sets.

Apple is smart to get rid of the useless 1080p frmat.

Useless 1080P format? You are such a loser. Go ahead and enjoy your sub par quality video's while the rest of us bask in full 1080p greatness...
post #66 of 231
you know, I'm still waiting for 4,320p
post #67 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

ITV is not copyrighted in the United States. sorry.

Yes, it is. Remember that many ITV programmes end up on US television so they have a US presence.

No matter what it's called, I love my Apple TV. If the new one costs $99, I'll buy one for every TV in the house.
post #68 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by juandl View Post

Daniel. Just wondering if one would be able to connect to a new iTV for FaceTime calling. Perhaps not everybody would be into it at
the start. But I think it would be a great Home phone, just to stay in
touch with the most important people in our life.
It would also be great if Apple could offer it up as a WiFi Hotspot
upgrade.

I've posted about iTV with FaceTime few weeks ago. I think it will happen. I think we will see FaceTime in many Apple products.
post #69 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

All the best experts agree that under 55 inches, nobody can tell the difference.

iTV is not at all aimed at videophiles who care if the picture is 720p or 1080p. so that debate of "can you see it" is irrevlant to THIS product. it's aimed at the 95% of consumers who just want to easily get great digital stuff on their TV without fiddling with computers, DVD's (including BD), and DVR's. calling it "HD" is good enough for them.

being a hobbyist myself, i do wish Apple would include a live USB port (instead of the dead USB port on ATV) on its iTV to attach a big external drive to hold all my iTunes media files. they have to be stored someplace on a home LAN, and if they were there then it would not be necessary to have any computer running and logged in to pump them through my home A/V - or stream them to my other portable iStuff outside the home, which would be huge.
post #70 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

The same gripes come up every time Apple uses the 'i*' convention, and every time, it becomes a non-issue.
Branding is REALLY important, whether people like it or not. And Apple has made good use of iBrands.

This article's snippy author forgets that 'iPhone' as thought up by Cisco, was aped from the original 'i' something called the 'iMac'. Followed by iCEO and iTools also by Apple. Seems to me that Apple created this little naming hierarchy and brand, they get dibs in the court of public opinion.
post #71 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Kicking apps

Since then, Apple has built up the iTunes App Store for iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad devices but left Apple TV to sit in maintenance mode, collecting few features and never getting an official SDK of its own that would enable third parties to extend its features.

By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.

Apple's ability to rapidly muscle into the market for portable gaming could similarly be repeated by giving existing App Store developers the ability to quickly port and optimize many of their existing games to work on HDTV sets, providing a very cheap alternative to more serious console gaming devices.

If released alongside iPod touch 4 expected next month, Apple could decisively leverage the current excitement surrounding iPad to inhale lots of HDTV users during the holiday season at a time when the growth of the Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony PS3, and Nintendo Wii are all maturing.


Hmmm, Appletv er iTV is moving in on the likes of PS, Nintentdo, and X-Box 360... if Apple creates a Wii type of action pads, maybe call it, Magic Pad... darn it, name already taken. Anyway to those who said Apple was never a "gamers" computer company... welcome to the new reality!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #72 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by yensid98 View Post

This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.

What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.

Lots of iOS apps would be great to use with a TV. not all, but many. Games of course. and media streaming apps of many kinds. various widget kinds of things you like to check often. but even more, just web browsing. the big advantage of a TV is several people can watch it together at the same time - call it social browsing. but if you have done this with an HTPC, you know that the need to enlarge text/pages is frequent, and the iOS does this beautifully.

and then of course apps will be created just for the iTV implementation of iOS that take special advantage of a big screen TV.

as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.
post #73 of 231
I suspect dropping 1080p was forced upon Apple due to new innards not hacking it robustly. If it is not suited to certain situations, why not have both options? Does not make sense, hence my suspicions.

My 1080p SONY LCD (and 1080i Trinitron 16:9 CRT) will go hungry.
post #74 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

Almost all HD broadcasters broadcast at 720p...

1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.

CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.

It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.
post #75 of 231
I hope the new interface/software is compatible with the previous AppleTVs. I'd like to be able to continue using it, e.g., in my basement.

On another topic, issue of naming rights is going to be more problematic than in Apple's other instances. ITV is a global product (including in the US where, for instance, The Jim Lehrer Newshour uses their reporting all the time).
post #76 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

As for 1080p most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and an upscaled DVD.

Yeah, just like fewer and fewer people can tell the difference between Mac OS X and Windows 7.

Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

As it is now only small percentage of HDTV owners have 1080p. And even if Apple were to sell 1080p it wouldn't be true 1080p like Blu-Ray because of the massive size of the files.

Apple now gets to unilaterally decide what is "good enough" for consumers. This is Microsoft through and through.

Like a possessively jealous lover Steve Jobs is determined to take Apple to the grave with him.
R.I.P. OFF
post #77 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.

I'm sure that solution would work fine. It does today with the Apple TV but the trouble is as successful as these devices not everyone who would buy an iTV would have an iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone. If Apple is going this route they definitely needs to create a remote that ships with the iTV so that everyone has the same access and interface.
post #78 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123 View Post

CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.

It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.

1080i and 1080p are two very different viewing experiences on a large TV. Don't conflate the two.
post #79 of 231
Dropping 1080p on a low-cost "i" device isn't that big of a deal. Apple has a history of entering a market at the high end and then expanding to cover a broader swath of the population.

The new Mac Mini (with HDMI) can practically be thought of as the "Apple TV Pro." As long as it still exists and satisfies the needs of higher income people with ridiculously large TVs, the iTV can slot in and satisfy most people. Think of the iTV like an "iPod Mini" and you're on the right track.

It also makes sense for Apple to introduce a lower cost living room device to preemptively defend it's extremely lucrative iTunes franchise against the likes of Amazon, which already streams movies and TV shows to many people's set-top boxes and Blu-Ray players. (I'm a die-hard Mac and iPhone user, but I've stopped buying/renting video from iTunes because, with Amazon, I can buy a video once and then watch it on my Mac or on my TV with the $150 Sony BD player I have and could afford vs. the $600 Mac Mini with HDMI I would prefer but couldn't justify.)

Price an iTV at $99 or $149 and a lot of people like me will come back to the iTunes fold for buying/renting movies and TV episodes.
post #80 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red View Post

Yeah, just like fewer and fewer people can tell the difference between Mac OS X and Windows 7

I use both in my office and I can unequivocally say that W7 is pathetic. Its only saving grace is that it uses less space than XP.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Report: Next Apple TV to be renamed iTV, drop 1080p