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 - Page 2

post #41 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

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

What content does AppleTV have that GoogleTV doesn't? (This is a genuine question. Not owning either device, I am not sure what the answer is).

From the outside looking in, it really seems to me the biggest issue for Google TV is a terrible interface, which requires the usage of a keyboard, for it to be useful.

GoogleTV seems to add complexity, while AppleTV reduces it. In the living room, adding complexity is a complete no-no.
post #42 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

Apple doesn't "do" content creation...


But Steve Jobs does. And quite successfully.
post #43 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.

Why doesn't Apple allow the ATV to play more codecs/video formats like VLC? Currently the ATV is only good for playing over-priced content from the iTunes Store.

Think back to the early days of iTunes. I think it became successful before there even was an iTunes store because people either ripped their music off of CDs or downloaded it freely off the internet. A lot of that happens today with video and movies, but its in formats the ATV can't play. Expand the gamut of playable formats, and the ATV becomes an awesome playing device at a price competitive with Roku and Boxee. It will then end up in more homes and ill give Apple more leverage with the studios which currently overprice their content. $4.99 rental - no way!
post #44 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

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.

You're now arguing my point. You responded to my post to AppleStud where he suggested that an AppleTV SDK and App Store was pointless when you can mirror content via AirPlay. I disagree with him and you disagreed with me so your position can't switch to an iOS-based iDevice being used a basic remote, not as mirrored content, as that is part of the core statement.
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 #45 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!


1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).

while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.
post #46 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.

netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
post #47 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).

while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.

Plus there will be less aliasing from upscaling the resolution if you're displaying on a 1080p panel.
post #48 of 138
We use the ATV so much we are thinking of canceling TV from Verizon. We only watch the news and that's even rare these days. Netflix is awesome on a large HD TV screen from ATV screen via FiOS. I read many complaining they get signal break up and buffering issues on Netflix but we never do.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #49 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicFingers View Post

netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.

Anyone know the average bit rates between the different streaming services/sites?
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 #50 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicFingers View Post

netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.

We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help on Netflix. I hear you on iTunes that is great. Unless Netflix service varies in different regions ... we are in SW Florida.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #51 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help on Netflix. I hear you on iTunes that is great. Unless Netflix service varies in different regions ... we are in SW Florida.

I wonder if there are ports that need to be forwarded for Netlifx streaming on the AppleTV for 3rd-party routers.
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 #52 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

What content does AppleTV have that GoogleTV doesn't? (This is a genuine question. Not owning either device, I am not sure what the answer is).

From the outside looking in, it really seems to me the biggest issue for Google TV is a terrible interface, which requires the usage of a keyboard, for it to be useful.

GoogleTV seems to add complexity, while AppleTV reduces it. In the living room, adding complexity is a complete no-no.

I have never owned a Google TV but own both the original Apple TV and the new gen Apple TV. From my understanding of articles I've read and the original Kevin Bacon commercials for Google TV, it works as a aggregator. Search "Kevin Bacon" and it will tell you any movies, television shows, etc. with Kevin Bacon not only on regular broadcast television (cable included) but also available internet content (Hulu, youtube, etc.). The problem with it is that Google didn't work with content providers so most of the online goodies are currently blocked from view. This makes the Google TV basically a DVR and channel guide.

Apple TV on the other hand is a souped up ipod for your television. Whatever is in your itunes can be played on your TV, you can rent TV shows and movies through itunes, there's netflix, sports streaming channels, youtube, podcasts (which has NPR BTW. Somebody mentioned that as a want which is actually already provided), photo galleries from your computer, mobileme and flickr.

I have given both versions as gifts and the people really liked them a lot.

Oh, also, someone mentioned not being able to play different codecs like VLC. Actually, this is where airplay shines. Any app on your ipad that plays multiple video codecs can flick the video to your Apple TV which eliminates that shortcoming.

One more thing (lol), I doubt there will be an SDK for apps on this until there is a hardware refresh. The current model has only 8GB of storage used for buffering video. After two or three apps stored on there, I could see some major problems with streaming.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #53 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!

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

Doesn't matter because your eyes are not quick enough to see that. Your eyes will see 1080i/60 as 1080p/30, therefore you will have problem only with fast moving objects.

On topic, it doesn't surprise me at all. Google always release half-baked product on their 1st version. Too bad there's nothing it can copy from Apple here to speed the process.
post #54 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.

720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.

And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.
post #55 of 138
Holy shit. This is pretty banana insane. Nintendo is getting destroyed by apple on handheld and now even on console area. I think Wee U will be a fail unless their price point is 199.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #56 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

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

Sadly there is no such thing.

1080p is already "low res" on some of the monitors you can buy today, and there are likely just as many higher res formats above it in the future as there are below it today.

One very important thing is frame rate. Anyone with good eyesight can see flicker and stutter even in an uncompressed 1080p format when the camera moves, simply because they eye can detect higher frame rates than 30 or 60 fps. Don't you want to go to a movie someday and have the camera pan across a gigantic detailed scene and actually be able to see the elements clearly?
post #57 of 138
Here's hoping we FINALLY get an update that enables viewing iTunes LP and iTunes Extras content. That stuff seems made for the Apple TV and it's been nearly a year and it still can't play content that the old Apple TV can. How hard can it be? C'mon, Apple!
post #58 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

[...] 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. [...]

A shortage of hit titles, eh? There can only be two reasons for that:

1. Nintendo and their 3rd party developers don't know how to make hit games any more.

2. There aren't enough games for Wii because it's difficult to develop for Wii.

I suspect the latter. The word "difficult" is overloaded here.

You run into the first barrier to Wii development immediately. Nintendo won't even talk to you unless you're a well-established game developer with a long track record of successes. The EAs of the world are "in." You average iOS game developer working at home is "out."

Then, if you meet Nintendo's requirements, you need to buy the proprietary development software and hardware tools. $2k -> $10k on a sliding scale.

After that, you're under NDA and although I have only very briefly done any coding for any console, I hear that coding for today's consoles is tough. Especially as you try to wring out every last erg of performance using assembly code, etc.

http://www.ehow.com/how_4597196_deve...-wii-game.html

Compare all that with Apple's iOS and Mac developer program. Sign up free if you just want to play around. Pay $100/year if you want to submit apps to the iOS App Store or Mac App Store. Yes, you need to toe the line on many App Store rules. But the development environment is relatively straightforward. Apple provides ample reference guides, tutorials, and sample projects. The Xcode development environment is free, and it works for Mac, iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.

Nintendo seems to be acting like a movie studio. Cherry-picking what they perceive to be the best developers and games the way movie studios (attempt to) cherry-pick the best directors and movie projects. They want a blockbuster every time. Doesn't always happen.

Apple acts more like a gigantic film school. They just tell their students to make the best films they can. There is, of course, a huge number of average students and there is a huge number of average projects. But there will occasionally be the over-achieving Spielberg or Lucas or Fincher.

For Nintendo, having hit titles is a do-or-die imperative. Hit titles are what sell Wii consoles, and they are relatively few and far between. On the other hand, the App Store isn't the only reason why people buy Apple products. All those apps add significant value to iOS devices and Macs, to be sure, but they are only one component in the Apple ecosystem (iTunes, AirPlay, and soon iCloud etc.)

I think people underestimate the value of having many good and great developers working on apps for a platform. The console gaming world doesn't allow for large numbers of developers to write titles for the consoles out there, as far as I know. And that will be one of the constraints to the consoles' success.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #59 of 138
I've purchased three aTV's-- one first generation and two second generation. Two of the units are for a digital sign in our office... first one died after a few years, so on to the second generation.

The one at home... is cute and all... but there really isn't much content available. Wife and I were going to rent a movie... it comes up... but not available for rental. So, we switch back to the STB and watch something from FiOS... and let the aTV collect dust for another month or two.

Maybe it is different for people that use Netflix, but from where I sit it needs to offer more than "just TV." The only way to get there is with a dedicated SDK and the seamless ability to interact with other iOS devices and storage. Then, maybe it would also live up to its prospects for a digital sign driver at the same time.
post #60 of 138
The way AirDrop makes a secure, direct connection between Macs gives me hope that the same tech will be used to make a secure direct connection between an iOS-based iDevice and AppleTV for keynote and other apps for use in schools and businesses, instead of passing through a router.
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 #61 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.

And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.

And it's actually a good stream. I'm usually quite picky on video quality but haven't had any issues with it. If it's an epic movie I really want to see perfectly I still get the Blu ray. But if it's just a comedy I want to rent it is more than acceptable.

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply
post #62 of 138
1080i looks like CRAP unless it's standing still. Sports are 10X better in 720P than 1080i for this reason.



Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).

while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.
post #63 of 138
But you can, just go here:
http://firecore.com

Quote:
Originally Posted by apophis View Post

Why doesn't Apple allow the ATV to play more codecs/video formats like VLC? Currently the ATV is only good for playing over-priced content from the iTunes Store.
post #64 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. 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.

+1. The ATV used to have a lot more network content but now its slim pickings. The networks are being short sighted as usual. I would still rather watch programs via my satellite but occassional if I've missed a bunch and want to get caught up, the ATV/iTunes is great for that. It's just another stream of revenue the studios are forgoing out of stupidity.

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 had it for awhile. The best aspect of it was using the keyboard to search for shows to set them to record on your DVR. Much easier than typing it out via the remote. However, the GoogleTV software looked like it was in beta and after 6 months and no updates I finally sold it. The thing didn't even have an app for your Gmail for crying out loud. It would have been sweet to get a little indicator with preview when a message comes in but it never happened.

Logitech ought to sue Google for breach of contract. Google went by it's typical M/O of not seeing something through to the end.

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply
post #65 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!

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

Umm... the point was that 1080i is evidence of higher-bitrate streaming on its way. Not anything about its relative merits.
post #66 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Indeed - with a full SDK of it's own ATV could eat Wii's lunch.

Maybe, but they would still need to address the controllers. A Nintendo branded Wii controller streets for $18 easily. iOS devices start around $200. I don't think the controller has to be a touch screen device, but going by this thread, people might think Apple set the standard on touch screen input and anything less might get widely rejected. On the other hand, I wish I could find a good use for my old iPhone 3G.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).

while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.

I'd say the motion artifacts make 1080i more or less pointless because it's ugly. Besides, encoding 1080p24 takes less bandwidth than 1080i60 unless they do special pull-down removal, but when you do that, you might as well encode it as 24p.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Sadly there is no such thing.

1080p is already "low res" on some of the monitors you can buy today, and there are likely just as many higher res formats above it in the future as there are below it today.

One very important thing is frame rate. Anyone with good eyesight can see flicker and stutter even in an uncompressed 1080p format when the camera moves, simply because they eye can detect higher frame rates than 30 or 60 fps. Don't you want to go to a movie someday and have the camera pan across a gigantic detailed scene and actually be able to see the elements clearly?

The problem here is the people that rail against the "soap opera effect". In other words, they want the low frame rate. I think it's going to take a while to get higher resolutions in the home.
post #67 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.

Well, why not just 480p then? it is good enough for most people, especially those that aren't videophiles.
post #68 of 138
I've used ATV stand alone with the candy bar cursor remote, with the Remote app on an iPhone and iPad, and with screen mirroring from my iPad via the HDMI dongle/cable. some observations:

- all old school cursor LRUD UI's suck. but since ATV uses one so it can be an inexpensive universal device, its entire UI is structured to work that way.

- unfortunately the Remote app offers instead only trackpad control of that cursor which requires a lot of scrolling and is clumsy to use, when instead it should provide full sets of simple direct touch buttons for the UI branches. i think that is because it was really designed for the iPhone which lacks a lot of screen area to work with, and was not re-thought much for the later iPad which does have the room. so i find myself using the candy bar ATV remote most of the time (even tho its controls are a bit fussy too, being small).

- there already exists a third class of iOS ATV apps - the built in third party ATV apps specifically formatted for 16:9 display: MLB, Netflix, NBA, and YouTube. they are similar to the iPad versions but simplified to work with the cursor UI.

- once the iOS 5 wifi screen mirroring is out, i'll use it a lot more. the HDMI dongle works now, but it's clumsy when you are holding the iPad and sitting on the sofa.

- some iPad media and game apps already output a 16:9 display. but otherwise the screen mirroring is pillar-barred to 4:3 on your HDTV. certainly a specific 16:9 format would be better for any app.

- many apps are pointless to port to big screen TV viewing anyway. but mirroring web browsing from the iPad works great because it is so easy to zoom, scroll, and select on the iPad. all cursor UI browsers, like the PS3, are practically unusable.

- input switching on your HDTV is necessary. my wife barely understands it. with iOS 5, i won't need to use the HDMI aux input anymore, and so will be down to just two - TV (OTA, Cable, or TiVo - i've got a lot of TV's)) and ATV. if ATV had a widget app with local weather and news headlines on its start screen, that would be my default input for when i turn on the TV. except you can't set default inputs on TV's, they always start with the last one used.

given all the above, i'd say:

- for ATV 3 - next year? - Apple should do a total UI redesign (and hardware spec bump) that dumps the ATV cursor UI and candy bar remote totally and uses only the iOS touch screen Remote app instead. which needs to also be totally re-designed.

- that would also make a new Apple HDTV an innovative and unique product, not just one more like Samsung, Sony, and the others that are trying to stick set top box functions (including Google TV) with cursor UI apps inside their HDTV's. and so it might really happen.

- until then i don't think Apple needs to put out an SDK for third party ATV apps. but i assume it will continue to add more built in ATV 2 apps via deals with content owners - Hulu et al.

- i expect most iPad media and game apps will be augmented to take advantage of screen mirroring with 16:9 output and even split UI controls, like Real Racing has demonstrated. we'll see how much other types of apps try this too. this will be the big impact of iOS 5, and there should be a lot of good new stuff. i'm looking forward to it.

- widgets would be nice too. Jobs seems to have some bias against them, i dunno why.
post #69 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Sadly there is no such thing.

1080p is already "low res" on some of the monitors you can buy today, and there are likely just as many higher res formats above it in the future as there are below it today.

Of course. I meant "future-proof" w.r.t. data formats compatible with modern HDTVs that I'm likely going to want to stream through an ATV in the next 3 years, given that I have a 30/30Mbps FIOS link.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

One very important thing is frame rate. Anyone with good eyesight can see flicker and stutter even in an uncompressed 1080p format when the camera moves, simply because they eye can detect higher frame rates than 30 or 60 fps. Don't you want to go to a movie someday and have the camera pan across a gigantic detailed scene and actually be able to see the elements clearly?

Um, yes. Not sure what this has to do with my TV, an ATV, and a 30/30 link though.
post #70 of 138
500k devices didn't seem a lot to me for a 99 dollar streaming device until I read the whole line that said per quarter. I bought the Apple TV because I love the design (and Apple) and streaming youtube and Netflix from this is great without hearing the fan go off on my 360. It's too bad that Netflix is still a subpar experience compared to the 360 (minus the ability to use an iOS device as a remote) and Roku seems to offer more versatility for the same price. I guess these Apple TV boxes will have much better value when iOS 5 comes out so I can stream my iPad content to my TV.
post #71 of 138
So odd that a company which popularised the concept of an app store can't see the logic and merit in an app store connected to the TV. An ATV app store would make the device infinitely more useful, more appealing, and so hugely increase sales. In the US at least you get Netflix on ATV, but in the UK the closest we have to Netflix is BBC iPlayer, and there's no sign of that on ATV.

Apple need to promote ATV from a hobby to a real product and spend some serious time improving it.
post #72 of 138
"" prompting the exist of chief executive Gerald P. Quindlen. ""
should be exit***
post #73 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Maybe, but they would still need to address the controllers. A Nintendo branded Wii controller streets for $18 easily. iOS devices start around $200. I don't think the controller has to be a touch screen device, but going by this thread, people might think Apple set the standard on touch screen input and anything less might get widely rejected. On the other hand, I wish I could find a good use for my old iPhone 3G.

They could easily create cheaper controllers, an entirely dumb touch sized tablet. They'd probably need to put a screen on it, but it needn't be a high quality IPS screen, or superbright. You would rather want inductive charging though. I think a $150 console with $50 controllers, but compatible with iPod/iPhones as extra controllers would work just fine. Just depends if they're interested in the market.
post #74 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

They could easily create cheaper controllers, an entirely dumb touch sized tablet. They'd probably need to put a screen on it, but it needn't be a high quality IPS screen, or superbright. You would rather want inductive charging though. I think a $150 console with $50 controllers, but compatible with iPod/iPhones as extra controllers would work just fine. Just depends if they're interested in the market.

I was thinking more along the lines of a D-controllers that mirrors the current remote buttons, but with additional buttons for more complex gameplay.
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 #75 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.

True, but if you've ever seen something dazzling in 2k or higher, believe me people are going to want it, and not just videophiles. As for Apple TV, well for now that's fine. For now. I have one and it's convenient, or it would be if I'd stop going on preview binges and just watch a movie
post #76 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

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.

99% of the general population wouldn't be able to tell the difference under normal video scenarios so is there really a point for such low bitrate content?

Hell, the *majority* of television is broadcast in 720p and a lot of the stuff in 1080i is converted from 720p source.
post #77 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

99% of the general population wouldn't be able to tell the difference under normal video scenarios

Then "99% of the general population" needs to get their eyes checked. There's a large difference between 720 and 1080.

Quote:
Hell, the *majority* of television is broadcast in 720p and a lot of the stuff in 1080i is converted from 720p source.

And that's... the fault of the viewers? If anything, that just proves they don't know high definition content when they see it because they've never really seen it.

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 #78 of 138
There's an easy way Apple can do an end run around all of AppleTV's limitations: just make it stupid cheap. Sell it at a loss if need be. $49 tops.

Then, you sell at least as many to stand alone customers, probably a good deal more. But now it's also a near impulse buy as an iPhone/iPad accessory. Instead of having to convince lots of people that it's worth it to stream their iTunes library or look at Netflix and YouTube, you're telling tens of millions of iOS device owner that they can do games and AirPlay on their TV for the price of a BestBuy HDMI cable.

I know Apple doesn't do the loss leader thing, but making AppleTV explicitly a TV dongle for iOS devices and pushing it hard that way would likely quadruple sales overnight and go a fair ways towards locking up the living room.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #79 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Sell it at a loss if need be.

I know you're not new to Apple, so I'll just take this as a joke from you.

Why not offer the A4 Apple TV at $49 and the A5 Apple TV at $100?

Cheaper model does 720p, more expensive one does 1080p and has more features, like Channels.

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 #80 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. 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.

I love my Apple TV. But I think that I should be able to do some basic surfing on it - e.g., it's got a WiFi connection; why shouldn't I be able to surf to the Hulu website and watch videos on my TV via my Apple TV? That's what I do right now with my Windows-based laptop -- hook up the HDMI output from the laptop to the TV. Seems like a no-brainer to be able to do the same via Apple TV and its on-screen "keyboard".
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