or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple selling half a million Apple TVs per quarter but no update planned for Q3
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple selling half a million Apple TVs per quarter but no update planned for Q3

post #1 of 138
Thread Starter 
As dissatisfied consumers return purchases of rival set-top-boxes in droves, Apple's market-leading Apple TV continues to achieve moderate success, selling roughly 500,000 units per quarter as the 2011 holiday shopping season approaches.

The latest update to Apple's $99 streaming media box arrived last fall and within just a few months went on to sell a million units. Since then, Apple has provided no update on sales of the device, but Concord Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo tells AppleInsider that his industry checks indicate the company shipped 480,000 units during the second calendar quarter of the year, representing more than 70% year-over-year growth.

Although Apple continues to see Internet television devices as a nascent category, frequently referring to the Apple TV as a "hobby," when sales of the device are pit against its peers, the Apple TV appears to be a runaway success.

For instance, Logitech said this week that "very modest sales" of its $249 Google TV-based Revue set-top-box were exceeded by returns of the product from unhappy customers, prompting the company to slash pricing by 66% to match Apple TV's $99 price point.

The move will reportedly cost the device maker some $34 million in one-time charges as it hopes to remove price as a barrier to broad consumer adoption. The failed partnership with Google also contributed to a $29.6 million loss for Logitech during its fiscal first quarter, prompting the exit of chief executive Gerald P. Quindlen.



Looking ahead to the second half of the year, Kuo said his industry checks have turned up no evidence that Apple plans to push a hardware revision to the Apple TV into production during the third quarter. Instead, the Cupertino-based company will reportedly take a more measured approach to advancing the platform in 2011, relying instead on an Apple TV Software Update this fall that will allow devices such as the iPad 2 and upcoming iPhone 5 to beam their content to the big-screen.

The technology, dubbed AirPlay, essentially allows devices equipped with Apple's A5 processor and the forthcoming iOS 5.0 update to mirror their video content from supporting applications to HDTVs hooked up to an Apple TV. While ideal for sharing video with friends and family, the feature is even more significant for Apple's encroachment on the gaming market, as it will allow any iOS game developer to offer console-style gaming (demos below) by which the the iPhone or iPad transforms into a wireless controller, equipped with gyro sensors and touch-screen controls.





Caught in the crosshairs is troubled console maker Nintendo, which now plans to race to market with a competitive product called the Wii U -- a 6.2-inch touchscreen wireless controller with similar capabilities -- such as a gyro and camera -- that it claims was under development long before Apple introduced the iPad.

The world's largest video game maker revealed Thursday that it continues to bleed cash, posting a net loss of 25.5 billion yen ($324 million) for the three-month period ended June and prompting the company to slash the price of its 3DS handheld to $169.99 from $249.99 beginning August 12. And the outlook for the Kyoto, Japan-based firm's fiscal year doesn't fare much better. It's guiding net profit of 20 billion yen, down 82 percent from its previous outlook, on sales of 900 billion yen -- blaming the skid on a shortage of hit titles for the Wii and 3DS.



Meanwhile, Apple continues to struggle with the second prong of its Apple TV strategy: HD video content. Unlike the inaugural Apple TV that offered a trove of archived television content priced between $2 and $3 an episode, the company continues to face opposition from networks who feel the new Apple TV's $0.99 per episode HD rental model devalues their content, according to people familiar with the matter.

Over the past year, Apple has failed to reach licensing agreements with content producers that would have them join Fox and partner Disney, for which Apple chief executive Steve Jobs is a director and largest individual shareholder, in providing their television content to Apple TV users. As such, Apple is now reportedly in talks to grow its streaming video business through a potential acquisition of Hulu, an ad-supported streaming service that offers video content from NBC, ABC, USA, Bravo, FX, A&E, and numerous other television networks.

"[W]e love the product. It's clear that customers love the product," Apple chief operating office Tim Cook said this month of the Apple TV. "We really guided right when we went to the new Apple TV just last fall. But right now, it's still a hobby status that we're continuing to invest in it because we think that there is something there."
post #2 of 138
1) So Apple is shipping more AppleTVs than Motorola can push tablets into channels. That's sad.

2) I really hope they add an App Store/SDK to the AppleTV within the next year.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #3 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) So Apple is shipping more AppleTVs than Motorola can push tablets into channels. That's sad.

2) I really hope they add an App Store/SDK to the AppleTV within the next year.

why does the ATV need it's own SDK when developers can just make an iPad app instead? Mirroring.
post #4 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

why does the ATV need it's own SDK when developers can just make an iPad app instead? Mirroring.

Do you really want to use an iPad for all apps on the AppleTV? Imagine if there was no native Netflix app but you had to mirror from your iPad to get Netflix to work. Besides now costing at least 6x as much as just an AppleTV you have a more complex setup that requires two devices when you just wanted to use one device.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #5 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

why does the ATV need it's own SDK when developers can just make an iPad app instead? Mirroring.

Because most ATV owners don't have an iPad and most iPad users don't have an ATV.

That's some strange logic you've got there.
post #6 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Do you really want to use an iPad for all apps on the AppleTV? Imagine if there was no native Netflix app but you had to mirror from your iPad to get Netflix to work. Besides now costing at least 6x as much as just an AppleTV you have a more complex setup that requires two devices when you just wanted to use one device.

Indeed - with a full SDK of it's own ATV could eat Wii's lunch.
post #7 of 138
The Apple TV's got a lot of potential, but one of the big problems is that it's at the mercy of studios and networks for a lot of its streaming content. Having Netflix is huge, but I'd like to see Hulu, Pandora, and Amazon's VOD service as well, as unlikely as that may be. Finally, I'd like the Apple TV to be able to pull some of the other streams out there, like ESPN3.com or NPR.

Some of that might be possible if Apple opens it up to app developers. That might also lead to more games and such on the device, which would be really interesting and exciting.
post #8 of 138
Does anybody know if AirPlay would allow, say an iPad game to both stream to a TV and show separate video on the device itself — not just mirror the video from the iPad? (The result would be something akin to the WiiU's dual screen, which I think could allow for some very interesting ideas with apps/games.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cxc273

Some of that might be possible if Apple opens it up to app developers. That might also lead to more games and such on the device, which would be really interesting and exciting.

Definitely. Why Apple hasn't opened up the AppleTV to iOS devs is beyond me. The iPhone didn't become "The iPhone" (as we know it) until they opened it up to developers. The hardware is good! The software is just too limited as is. (Without jailbreaking.)
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #9 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Do you really want to use an iPad for all apps on the AppleTV? Imagine if there was no native Netflix app but you had to mirror from your iPad to get Netflix to work. Besides now costing at least 6x as much as just an AppleTV you have a more complex setup that requires two devices when you just wanted to use one device.

People are oversimplifying what it will take to run iOs apps on the aTv. How are you going to input to them. You NEED a touch screen. Right now, that means either an iPhone/Touch or an iPad. As far as I know, iOS has no API for a touch controller that isn't an iOS device.

Quite frankly, it's goi g to be difficult to use a touch device while using a large Tv as the screen. I've tried Real Racing2 HD that way, and it's not easy. So you look at the course on the controller, or the car on the track on the monitor?

They'll figure this all out eventually, but it may take some time.
post #10 of 138
But...

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #11 of 138
I never understood the purpose of Google TV. Dishnetwork resells it for "only" $179. Apparently, it does nothing because returns now exceed sales.
post #12 of 138
give me a future-proof 1080p capability and I'd buy one in a second

oh well, my super-power-innefficient PS3 is still fine
post #13 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Does anybody know if AirPlay would allow, say an iPad game to both stream to a TV and show separate video on the device itself not just mirror the video from the iPad? (The result would be something akin to the WiiU's dual screen, which I think could allow for some very interesting ideas with apps/games.

To a certain extent it can do that now, though. It depends on what you mean by "video". If you mean a different screen, then yes for sure. If you mean a different running video, then I'm not so sure.
post #14 of 138
It's obvious that content providers want ATV to fail because, like the short-sighted music industry, they fear Apple's volume over cost-per-unit business model. The only sure solution I can see is for Apple to buy a media company (other than ABC and Fox). Then they can do what is being done to them--deny content access to their competitors.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #15 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by msuberly View Post

I never understood the purpose of Google TV. Dishnetwork resells it for "only" $179. Apparently, it does nothing because returns now exceed sales.

I found the "returns exceed sales" description to be a bit disturbing.
post #16 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

give me a future-proof 1080p capability and I'd buy one in a second

oh well, my super-power-innefficient PS3 is still fine

What do you mean by a "future proof 1080p capability"? 1080p capability is just that.
post #17 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

What do you mean by a "future proof 1080p capability"? 1080p capability is just that.

He's pretending there are no resolutions higher than 1080p. His worldview doesn't allow Super Hi-Vision to exist.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #18 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

What do you mean by a "future proof 1080p capability"? 1080p capability is just that.

I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.
post #19 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

He's pretending there are no resolutions higher than 1080p. His worldview doesn't allow Super Hi-Vision to exist.

Nope. I'm pretending that I'm not likely to buy a higher res TV any time soon.
post #20 of 138
How about Apple picks up the pace of its "measured approach" and release an iOS Apple TV App Store already?! aTV Flash (black) provides a few hints of where things could go...

Oh, I also want access to the content *I* want, AKA live streaming of shows like Judge Andrew Napolitano's Freedom Watch, and Stossel, both on Fox Business channel...
post #21 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

People are oversimplifying what it will take to run iOs apps on the aTv. How are you going to input to them. You NEED a touch screen. Right now, that means either an iPhone/Touch or an iPad. As far as I know, iOS has no API for a touch controller that isn't an iOS device.

Quite frankly, it's goi g to be difficult to use a touch device while using a large Tv as the screen. I've tried Real Racing2 HD that way, and it's not easy. So you look at the course on the controller, or the car on the track on the monitor?

They'll figure this all out eventually, but it may take some time.

That's where an SDK for AppleTV widgets would come in handy. You can still use your iDevice as a remote control, but you wouldn't have to. Mirroring everything between both devices simply isn't a great solution if they plan to grow the product.

I'd like to see the AppleTV be an intermediary device between the cable/sat (and other HDMI-compatible devices) and the TV/receiver. This would let me use the AppleTV to switch inputs; have screen overlays for stocks, weather, incoming calls, FaceTime, Facebook, Twitter, etc. as I see fit; and not have to give up my current cable/sat setup to make it work. I don't think Apple is going to do this because they don't want to part of a chain but the whole chain, but I'd certainly like them to do it.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #22 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.

let's not pretend we're all videophiles, here. Or that we all have unlimited bandwidth and super-high speed connections. 720p is plenty for most people.
post #23 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Do you really want to use an iPad for all apps on the AppleTV?

Not necessarily an iPad but an iOS device for sure, at least for almost all apps.
Quote:
Imagine if there was no native Netflix app but you had to mirror from your iPad to get Netflix to work. Besides now costing at least 6x as much as just an AppleTV you have a more complex setup that requires two devices when you just wanted to use one device.

For any app that requires any significant user interaction you will want to have a touchscreen remote (iPad, iPod touch, iPhone). Movies, audio and images can work ok without a touchscreen remote because the interaction required is small compared to the usage period (you spent two minutes selecting a move and then watching it for two hours without requiring any interaction beyond a simple start/stop).
post #24 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

let's not pretend we're all videophiles, here. Or that we all have unlimited bandwidth and super-high speed connections. 720p is plenty for most people.

And the rest of us have 1080p content that we've downloaded or ripped ourselves and would like to play back on our 1080p televisions that everyone sells and has sold for half a decade.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #25 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

It's obvious that content providers want ATV to fail because, like the short-sighted music industry, they fear Apple's volume over cost-per-unit business model. The only sure solution I can see is for Apple to buy a media company (other than ABC and Fox). Then they can do what is being done to them--deny content access to their competitors.

Apple doesn't "do" content creation, so they won't be buying any studios or networks anytime soon (or ever, I believe). What Apple does "do" however, is content distribution. Yes it's tough to get deals done right now, but the upcoming Airplay mirroring is a step to circumvent that. Every network has (or will have) an iPad app (either a Hulu-type service or apps for individual networks). Since there will be no way to prevent users from streaming it to their Apple TV, apple just instantly made all their content viewable on ATV without requiring any licensing deals. It's not ideal, but it works.

The thing preventing true cord-cutting is the simple fact that if I drop Comcast Cable i'm still reliant on Comcast internet. My view is that Apple should/could/would buy 4G spectrum for their devices to access. Thereby, I can now access all of my streaming services and not depend on Comcast for anything. This is EXACTLY why Comcast bought NBC, so that they don't become a dumbpipe transmitter.
post #26 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Yes, for almost all.

For any app that requires any significant user interaction you will want to have a touchscreen remote (iPad, iPod touch, iPhone). Movies, audio and images can work ok without a touchscreen remote because the interaction required is small compared to the usage period (you spent two minutes selecting a move and then watching it for two hours without requiring any interaction beyond a simple start/stop).

Except I have my iPad with me when I go out or maybe I'm in the other room using a different app so now no one else would be able to use the AppleTV. Using an iPad to control the AppleTV works well but you really need an alternative method for when the iPad is not available.
post #27 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Yes, for almost all.

For any app that requires any significant user interaction you will want to have a touchscreen remote (iPad, iPod touch, iPhone). Movies, audio and images can work ok without a touchscreen remote because the interaction required is small compared to the usage period (you spent two minutes selecting a move and then watching it for two hours without requiring any interaction beyond a simple start/stop).

Then use the Remote app over the included remote, but to suggest that mirroring your content between both devices makes the more sense is silly. The AppleTV needs to interact in the HEC the way a HEC works, not the way the iPad works. They are different devices with different uses.

And what if you don't have an iPad or your iPad, being the mobile device that it is, is not there. Are you really suggesting that people shouldn't have access to their AppleTV apps without their $500+ remote controller? Again, Netflix and MLB seem to work pretty well as native apps.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #28 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Does anybody know if AirPlay would allow, say an iPad game to both stream to a TV and show separate video on the device itself not just mirror the video from the iPad? (The result would be something akin to the WiiU's dual screen, which I think could allow for some very interesting ideas with apps/games.



Definitely. Why Apple hasn't opened up the AppleTV to iOS devs is beyond me. The iPhone didn't become "The iPhone" (as we know it) until they opened it up to developers. The hardware is good! The software is just too limited as is. (Without jailbreaking.)

Have a look at this 'interview' with Greg Joswiak: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdBxM...layer_embedded (go to 3:45). You can see that you have a different view on both of the iOS device.

The key point is that apps on the AppleTV are not much use without a remote (and the bundled remote works for simple things like selecting a movie but not for anything more complex). And the iPod touch (or iPhone or iPad) is the remote. And once you use an iPod touch as your remote, it does not matter whether the apps run on the AppleTV or the iPod touch.
post #29 of 138
Why in the world do you think that 1080i is good? -- it's like 540 lines of resolution! 1080i is actually lower quality than 720p!

Watch this for explanation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-JXfyvlPh0

iOS Apple TV *is* capable of decoding 1080p video, see:
http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title...S_specific_FAQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.
post #30 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Have a look at this 'interview' with Greg Joswiak: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdBxM...layer_embedded (go to 3:45). You can see that you have a different view on both of the iOS device.

The key point is that apps on the AppleTV are not much use without a remote (and the bundled remote works for simple things like selecting a movie but not for anything more complex). And the iPod touch (or iPhone or iPad) is the remote. And once you use an iPod touch as your remote, it does not matter whether the apps run on the AppleTV or the iPod touch.

You're conflating two things. One is using an iOS-based iDevice as a remote (which isn't mirroring the content between devices) and the other is mirroring the content between devices (as seen in Racing HD).
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #31 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cxc273 View Post

The Apple TV's got a lot of potential, but one of the big problems is that it's at the mercy of studios and networks for a lot of its streaming content.

What do you think is killing GoogleTV? Content.

GTV tried to put Hulu feeds up and got blocked because the Hulu deals are for computer viewing not TVs. Hulu had to block the devices or be in contract violation with the nets, who don't want to piss off the cable companies and so on

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #32 of 138
Hey Apple, when ya gonna add NFL? Training Camp has started -- we could be using our ATVs to watch training camp too at this point in time, which could be interesting...
post #33 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That's where an SDK for AppleTV widgets would come in handy. You can still use your iDevice as a remote control, but you wouldn't have to. Mirroring everything between both devices simply isn't a great solution if they plan to grow the product.

I'd like to see the AppleTV be an intermediary device between the cable/sat (and other HDMI-compatible devices) and the TV/receiver. This would let me use the AppleTV to switch inputs; have screen overlays for stocks, weather, incoming calls, FaceTime, Facebook, Twitter, etc. as I see fit; and not have to give up my current cable/sat setup to make it work. I don't think Apple is going to do this because they don't want to part of a chain but the whole chain, but I'd certainly like them to do it.

IOS 5 is supposed to enable bluetooth on the ATV so there will be lots of input options.
post #34 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.

It looks like Apple had to limit the TV resolution to 720p because the hardware is grossly underpowered for the 1080i capability the AppleTV was supposed to provide. As a result, Apple had to release a software update that limited the video output to 720p.

There is a similar problem playing back high-resolution audio files (48/24. 96/24 lossless). The scrolling of titles stutters as the CPU cannot keep up with concurrent hi-rez audio playback and scrolling of titles. Also, any scrolling through song lists or artist lists is severely throttled while a hi-rez audio file is being played.

It appears that Apple wants me to buy yet another AppleTV box as a fix for their hardware design ineptitude.
post #35 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

Except I have my iPad with me when I go out or maybe I'm in the other room using a different app so now no one else would be able to use the AppleTV. Using an iPad to control the AppleTV works well but you really need an alternative method for when the iPad is not available.

Yes, without an iOS touchscreen device in the room, an AppleTV can only be used for basic things like playing movies, audio or photos (the AppleTV comes with a basic remote for this). If you take your Wii remote to another room, the Wii is also rather useless.
post #36 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Why in the world do you think that 1080i is good? -- it's like 540 lines of resolution! 1080i is actually lower quality than 720p!

...

iOS Apple TV *is* capable of decoding 1080p video, see:
http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title...S_specific_FAQ

Ability to decode 1080p is very different than ability to properly play 1080p.

From the article you cite: "... All devices are capable of decoding 1080p video, though video larger than 1920x800 will currently cause hiccups on occasion. ..."


"Hiccups" --- Again, the underpowered AppleTV hardware rears its ugly head.
post #37 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Then use the Remote app over the included remote, but to suggest that mirroring your content between both devices makes the more sense is silly. The AppleTV needs to interact in the HEC the way a HEC works, not the way the iPad works. They are different devices with different uses.

And what if you don't have an iPad or your iPad, being the mobile device that it is, is not there. Are you really suggesting that people shouldn't have access to their AppleTV apps without their $500+ remote controller? Again, Netflix and MLB seem to work pretty well as native apps.

I am suggesting that if you want to use apps with a complex user interface, you need a remote with a complex user interface.
As I said already about five times in this thread, for simple consumption uses (apps), the basic remote that comes with the AppleTV is ok (but even for that a touchscreen remote is better, try typing a long movie title with the current AppleTV remote into your AppleTV).
post #38 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by camper View Post

Ability to decode 1080p is very different than ability to properly play 1080p.

No one has ever explained why this is the case, though.

Quote:
though video larger than 1920x800 will currently cause hiccups on occasion. ..."

That's hardly definitive by any stretch of the imagination. Resolution really wouldn't have as much to do with it as bit rate.

Which is why an A5 Apple TV was expected so that these arguments can finally be put to rest.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #39 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You're conflating two things. One is using an iOS-based iDevice as a remote (which isn't mirroring the content between devices) and the other is mirroring the content between devices (as seen in Racing HD).

Yes, it is conflating two things but it still proves the point that you need a capable remote to play any real game 'on' the AppleTV.
And Apple is simply not developing a separate remote when they already have the iPod touch (get a 8 GB 1st gen used iPod touch if you will). And they won't allow third-party remotes because this would not provide a unified user experience as each remote would act differently.
post #40 of 138
Wow, $200 million annually in revenue for a "hobby" device is pretty fantastic. I bet many other device manufacturers would love to have that much revenue on their "flagship" devices. Not to mention all of the after sales revenue thru iTunes for movie and TV rentals. It's pretty incredible. I really like my ATV and am looking forward to getting another one once they improve the specs in the future. I am hoping that they put an A5 chip in it and higher resolution would be great, but frankly, I'm pretty happy with the 720p i get from ATV. I also think a lot of internet connections can't really handle 1080p downloads very reliably. Since the movie has to be downloaded and there isn't that much buffer memory in the current model, I think the 720 works well. It's not blu-ray quality, but it is pretty equivalent to my Cable Hi-Def 1080i resolution.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple selling half a million Apple TVs per quarter but no update planned for Q3