or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple previews iTV set-top device
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple previews iTV set-top device - Page 5

post #161 of 344
I didn't say NFL events. You're thinking too small. This is about mass customization.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #162 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

I didn't say NFL events. You're thinking too small. This is about mass customization.

I'm thinking too small? You still don't get the advantage of iTV + iTunes vs a library of DVDs. Certainly there are disadvantages but the advantages are compelling as well.

NFL events is simply an indicator of things to come. Many of the things you list are already reality in some form or another on iTunes. Concerts, seminars, conferences? That's thinking big? Of course its all about mass customization and dare I say it...convergence.

Vinea
post #163 of 344
the decision to leave a hard drive OUT of this thing was brilliant. the iPod just became that much more important now. everyone with an iPod has the ability to throw their music, favorite shows and increasingly more and more movies and run to anyone else's with an iTV to watch it all. The iPod is on it's way to becoming more or less or a portable DVR.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #164 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

I'm thinking too small? You still don't get the advantage of iTV + iTunes vs a library of DVDs. Certainly there are disadvantages but the advantages are compelling as well.

NFL events is simply an indicator of things to come. Many of the things you list are already reality in some form or another on iTunes. Concerts, seminars, conferences? That's thinking big? Of course its all about mass customization and dare I say it...convergence.

Vinea

Yes, too small Vinea.

What is the REAL advantage of iTV?

DVD/movie playback? Nope, a DVD already does this cheaper and better and you physically own it. Streaming audio? Meh, we've seen that, why do it on a TV unless you've got component audio/TV, and if you do have component audio, the quality level is insufficient for the audiophiles out there. So, that's out.

What I can believe iTV will serve best are the little things mentioned in the Stevenote. Podcast video, which leads to a whole lot of new possibilities.***

Specialized content for narrow interests... interests so narrow they'll never be served by cable/satellite TV, but large enough to warrant a worldwide audience, one that might even be willing to pay $1.99, or $2.99, or $5.99 even (and conversely, 50 cents, or 10 cents might even work).

Narrow. Targeted. One-to-one. MyTV! ChannelMe! MyNetwork!

***= Video dating, want-ads, one to one car sales, real estate tours, narrowly focused training, education, & chat, of course, porn will probably take up a big chunk of this new audience as well. That's reality.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #165 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnq

Considering people sleep 8 hours, work 8 hours, commute 1-2 hours, I'd say this is plenty of time to have a couple movies download by the time you get home to watch them.

It's NetFLIX minus the postal service, basically (plus you own it).

With the owning comment, you seem to be comparing different models, you are comparing download-to-own vs. a physical media rental model. You probably should be comparing rental vs. rental or own vs. own for the most relevant comparison. Apple isn't offering rentals or subscriptions, so what they offer for buying a movie download should be compared to buying the DVD (or HD-something) equivalent.

If you happen to be commuting, then you might be able to drop by a store to just buy the DVD for cheaper. Or you can order the DVD online and if you buy from one that's close to you, you might get it next day.
post #166 of 344
Quote:
24" is far too small for HDTV at normal seating distances.

Why exactly is 24" too small for HD but fine for SD?
post #167 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

Why exactly is 24" too small for HD but fine for SD?

I think the comment was for typical seating distances for TVs. At seatting distances typical for TV watching (10ft/3m), the improved resolution you get on a 24" iMac vs. a regular LCD TV that size isn't going to mean anything to a lot of people, though at 2m, I can see the benefits. At sitting distances for computers, then the 24" would be fine for HD, though an expensive way to watch TV. If you are really serious about HD display, then a good 37" / 42" 1080p display can be had for about $1300 / $1700 US, respectively.
post #168 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

I think the comment was for typical seating distances for TVs. At seatting distances typical for TV watching (10ft/3m), the improved resolution you get on a 24" iMac vs. a regular LCD TV that size isn't going to mean anything to a lot of people, though at 2m, I can see the benefits. At sitting distances for computers, then the 24" would be fine for HD, though an expensive way to watch TV. If you are really serious about HD display, then a good 37" / 42" 1080p display can be had for about $1300 / $1700 US, respectively.

Yes, at 10' you couldn't see the difference between 480p, 720p, 1080p on a 24" display.

"Optimum" viewing distance as defined by the HDTV spec for a 24" (dia) 1080p display is 3.58 feet where someone with 20/20 vision can just resolve 1 pixel (1/60th of a degree) and has maximized the screen field of view for immersion at that resolution.

While humans CAN see better than that 60 pixles per degree is the rule of thumb for what can be resolved.. 10' is waaay out there relatively speaking. 480p results in 85 pixels per degree which is much better than 60 ppd.

Someone sitting 10' from their TV would be hard pressed to see the difference between a 720p and 1080p 50" display. At 60"+ some difference would be noticable to most folks.

Vinea
post #169 of 344
What about integrating a dashboard overlay through iTV?
post #170 of 344
Mmm...iTV is all about HD content and not about specialized content. iTV is the enabler for streamed HD content from the studios. See other iTV thread for why...or I could repeat myself but the short version is HDCP security.

Vinea
post #171 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

Mmm...iTV is all about HD content and not about specialized content. iTV is the enabler for streamed HD content from the studios. See other iTV thread for why...or I could repeat myself but the short version is HDCP security.

Vinea

You may have missed this part, but iTV doesn't handle HD content. All Apple offers is standard NTSC resolution content, similar to DVD.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #172 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

You may have missed this part, but iTV doesn't handle HD content. All Apple offers is standard NTSC resolution content, similar to DVD.

Where do you get the idea that iTV doesn't handle HD? It has HDMI for a reason, and it's not just showing photos in HD.
post #173 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

Where do you get the idea that iTV doesn't handle HD? It has HDMI for a reason, and it's not just showing photos in HD.

I'll rephrase... Apple doesn't sell it.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #174 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

I'll rephrase... Apple doesn't sell it.

Yet. What is to stop them from selling HD video once this device is available?
post #175 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

I'll rephrase... Apple doesn't sell it.

Is iPod only about content sold in the store?

No, of course not.

So why, then, would iTV be?

And why couldn't Apple up the resolution again, like they've just done?
post #176 of 344
I can agree with SpamSandwich in one sense. If iTV only works with Front Row and only streams media from the computer to the television. Then yes its pretty limited and doubt I would get one.

iTV would be extremely useful if:

iTV can communicate both ways, computer to TV, as well as TV to computer. iTV can work with third party software and hardware. Front Row will have an open API for third party hardware/software. Any software on your Mac can stream work to a television for viewing.

If iTV were open to these options it would be extremely useful.
post #177 of 344
Quote:
Yes, at 10' you couldn't see the difference between 480p, 720p, 1080p on a 24" display.

Ok yeah I see your point.

Quote:
You may have missed this part, but iTV doesn't handle HD content. All Apple offers is standard NTSC resolution content, similar to DVD.

At this point we don't know enough to say this for sure.
post #178 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by slugtronn

DV res is 720x480. Standard DVDs will look the same as VGA video on a TV. It's pretty much the same resolution. Unless you're talking about a £30 DVD player that plays BlueRay disks...

So for 60 horizontal pixels less than PAL I get to pay more for the movie, lose the special features, max out my ISP download limit, pay $300 for a hardware box, burn loads more electricty with the Mac, iTV & TV all one at once and probably end up feeling compelled to buy a bigger hard disk for all these movies to be saved on. Sorry but this doesn't add up right now.
post #179 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

Yet. What is to stop them from selling HD video once this device is available?

Nothing, only the majority of people will find themselves unable to use it, due to horrifically slow downloads and massive file sizes... that's all.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #180 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtotes

So for 60 horizontal pixels less than PAL I get to pay more for the movie, lose the special features, max out my ISP download limit, pay $300 for a hardware box, burn loads more electricty with the Mac, iTV & TV all one at once and probably end up feeling compelled to buy a bigger hard disk for all these movies to be saved on. Sorry but this doesn't add up right now.

Thank God someone else has caught on. Mr. Totes, I salute you.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #181 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

I can agree with SpamSandwich in one sense. If iTV only works with Front Row and only streams media from the computer to the television. Then yes its pretty limited and doubt I would get one.

iTV would be extremely useful if:

iTV can communicate both ways, computer to TV, as well as TV to computer. iTV can work with third party software and hardware. Front Row will have an open API for third party hardware/software. Any software on your Mac can stream work to a television for viewing.

If iTV were open to these options it would be extremely useful.

iTV can work from the TV to the computer. Steve Jobs showed us, by checking out movie trailers online by simply clicking a button. This means that iTV sent the request to the compter, which went online and the got the trailer, and then sent it back to iTV.

The real question is whether or not the API will be open. If it is, then it would be simple to go get the latest YouTube hit, etc. The possibilities are endless; but only if the API is open.
post #182 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by dws

iTV can work from the TV to the computer. Steve Jobs showed us, by checking out movie trailers online by simply clicking a button. This means that iTV sent the request to the compter, which went online and the got the trailer, and then sent it back to iTV.

The real question is whether or not the API will be open. If it is, then it would be simple to go get the latest YouTube hit, etc. The possibilities are endless; but only if the API is open.

How do we know that the iTV itself didn't go online? That seems more likely to me.

Oh man, I wish the API were open... I would definately get one then. But considering that the iPod API is *still* closed, I don't have much hope.
post #183 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rageous

the decision to leave a hard drive OUT of this thing was brilliant. the iPod just became that much more important now. everyone with an iPod has the ability to throw their music, favorite shows and increasingly more and more movies and run to anyone else's with an iTV to watch it all. The iPod is on it's way to becoming more or less or a portable DVR.


Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #184 of 344
I don't know if Apple is willing to go the DVR route. Note that there are no inputs into the iTV other than USB so the lack of a drive only hampers temporary storage of streamed material. So given the form factor and lack of inputs I would have to assume that if they were to ever offer DVR capability that it would appear on the mini which could stack with the iTV.

The drive given the form factor, even if included, would still make it a poor DVR without a NAS somewhere.

As far as not having HD...well the folks that really think that 640x480 is the end resolution for iTV believe that Steve is a complete idiot. There are already many folks with the bandwidth requirements but SpamSandwich wants to believe its still 1996 and not 2006. The majority of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and cable customers will be able to stream 720p within a few years. The telcos are investing billions into the buildout...$15-$20B by Verizon alone. Many of their customers have the bandwidth to stream 720p movies today.

The majority of internet users aready have broadband and can download 720p movies overnight.

They have a secure video chain that will be acceptable to the studios.

So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.

Vinea
post #185 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

I don't know if Apple is willing to go the DVR route. Note that there are no inputs into the iTV other than USB so the lack of a drive only hampers temporary storage of streamed material. So given the form factor and lack of inputs I would have to assume that if they were to ever offer DVR capability that it would appear on the mini which could stack with the iTV.

Look, people, read some of the earlier posts. It's been said already.

Apple is NOT going to add an HDD or and optical drive into this puppy anytime soon. Their business model here is - drumroll please - the Mac is the DIGITAL HUB!

That means that if you want to record a movie - do it on your Mac. The Mac Pro can hold four 500 GB drives. That's a lot more than they could ever put into this box. Besides, Apple doesn't want you to record your favorite TV show - they wantcha to buy it from the ITS instead!

This is version 1. It is not intended to be what it will be in just a year or two. It's a new release of a new product, fer cryin out loud. This Sneak Peek was probably allowed for two reasons: to keep consumers away from competing appliances and to show the Hollywood Studios that Apple is serious, (and more so) than Amazon.

Besides, put an HDD into it, and maybe an optical drive and it'll cost $500. And people on this and other forums are already crying over the price. How much do ya want it to cost?
post #186 of 344
The iPod doc has audio and video out, and the iPod can output 640X480 video. As long as there is a doc where you go or you take yours you should be able to hook it up to a TV and play the new higher resolution video on the road. This does not make it a DVR, but it is a portable solution to take your video's to a friends house to watch.

The lack of HD may or may not be a problem for the iTV, we don't know yet. Will it have a limited flash drive for a cache and it's OS? or will the OS be flashed on ROM? Will it act as a Thin Client of the host computer, using it's HD for holding the information and any extensions that it needs?
post #187 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

The Mac Pro can hold four 500 GB drives.

If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.
post #188 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.

Vinea

I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.

Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.

So what's the deal? The unit has the advanced output port for current HD resolution. That means that, whatever they are currently holding the resolution down to, the box will undoubtedly handle the larger resolution. All they're waiting for is 802.11n standards to get published so the wireless will work as advertised.

If your ISP won't handle the load, that's not Apple's problem; what it WILL do is put additional pressure, in the form of market demand, on the ISPs to increase the pace of Broadband rollout. Believe me, there are enough of us that do have fast enough connections that we'll gladly shell out the bucks to put this baby into our living rooms.

Give this a few years to shake out, and broadcast Tv is going to be close to folding. This is just the first tentative baby steps towards total on demand entertainment content. Ten years is a good guess at how long it might take to reach a good market penetration, but this is the beginning.
post #189 of 344
It's certainly plausible that one could plug an iPod into the USB port of the iTV and access the iPod's content through the iTV. Friends and family could come over with their iPods and show you stuff. Could be cool.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #190 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.

You're correct, but that wasn't my point. My point was that the storage doesn't need to be in the iTV. Apple intends for you to use the MAC as the hub; it will control the content. If you want to add massive amounts of storage, then by all means, put in a large array such as you mention. Apple will be more than happy to sell you content to fill it up with through the ITS!
post #191 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmoNut

It's certainly plausible that one could plug an iPod into the USB port of the iTV and access the iPod's content through the iTV. Friends and family could come over with their iPods and show you stuff. Could be cool.

Your sig is wrong, you're not wrong - sharing that way would be really cool - and a LOT more enjoyable than the old slide projectors were!

That's what I like about the Mac community - so many folks have great ways to enjoy the technology - and have a lot of fun sharing how they do it, too.

I'm going to be watching this appliance closely.

By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?

Just speculation, but the 802.11n standard isn't due out until spring 2007. Bummer.
post #192 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker

Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.

Do you really think your argument is helped by tired name calling?

I don't want a hard drive in my set top box. I'd much rather buy my own HD space and have it hooked up to my computer. If I want to record my programming, I'll just put a tuner on my mac. And I'll probably not buy much video from the iTunes store, I'm mostly interested in ripping my DVD's to a server.
post #193 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.

Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.

I said it looks like ass in comparison to a HD source. Why don't you try your own suggestion and read the posts?

I have a large screen (100") and I can certainly say that DVD quality is not close to even cable HD. It's hard to tell if the Incredibles is in HD from the live stream but the Engadget folks thought so. Other folks thought not. Animated features are often to worst to try to judge video quality from as they tend to look pretty good anyway.

As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.

If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.

The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.

Vinea
post #194 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.

If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.

The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.

Vinea

You have no idea what we're showing. We have access to studio quality direct feed as well as cable access. Not just PCs. It is a large conference center, and dvd content is often a subject of events we hold. Each conference room has a large stack of equipment, including DVD players, connected to the projectors, and some of these rooms are quite large, certainly as large as a movie theater.

Obviously, if it has an HDMI connector, then DVD isn't all it will do, now will it? Steve said in the event that they were showing 640x480, I think it was. He said "near-dvd". But as I said, the presence of the HDMI port suggests that the box will do better. Right now, they are limiting the resolution due to download limitations, and as soon as the infrastructure, and the market is right, I am sure that they will upgrade.

Right now, they are proving to the studios that they can deliver the goods. If enough people respond to this, it will result, as the iPod did, in the content providers getting on the bandwagon too. I agree that the timing here is right. All they have to do is convince Hollywood that they can do with this what they did for music.
post #195 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

Why put a DVD player in it? I'd bet that Apple will allow streaming from the mac to the iTV. If they allow that, you've already got a DVD player in your mac - and one that's controllable by the Apple Remote through the iTV! How cool - one less remote to have on my coffee table! (Steve DID note that the iTV is compatible with the Apple Remote, by the way)

Bleh. One more reason to not like where iTV is going. Another remote. Do you realize how many bloody remotes are required to operate component TV+Audio? In this house, there are currently four remotes. Four!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #196 of 344
They can't do for this what they did for music. A big part of the appeal of buying music from iTMS and other digital stores is that you can cherrypick the songs you want and skip the rest. Want to hear that one great song? You pay 99¢ instead of $12-$15+

You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.

It's a decent start.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #197 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?

He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.
post #198 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunoBruin

He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.

No, he never said calendar or fiscal. I listened very closely for that, as I had heard that same question before I watched the feed. He said "Q1 2007" exactly like that, at least twice.
post #199 of 344
How plausible is it that the iTV could upconvert the 640x480 content to 720p on an HD screen? Until 720 or 1080 content is released upconversion could be a good work-around.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #200 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rageous

They can't do for this what they did for music. A big part of the appeal of buying music from iTMS and other digital stores is that you can cherrypick the songs you want and skip the rest. Want to hear that one great song? You pay 99¢ instead of $12-$15+

You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.

It's a decent start.

Actually, the cherry pick thing is the same. You have the same full control over what content you buy. The kicker here is the price. We all wish it were better. I think it will over time, tho.

Timewise, what's the beef? You can start watching within 1 minute of the download starting, so they're buffering the download, just like watching a trailer. I'd say that's FASTER than going to Blockbuster and standing in line.

Granted, not being able to burn to DVD is a bummer, but that's gotta be a demand on the part of Hollywood. I don't think Steve had quite the handle on negotiations here that he did with the music moguls.

And this won't just change the movie industry. This'll change the way we get ALL video content, eventually. People have been complaining about wanting on demand cable for a while now, and the cable companies have successfully fought that. Not any more!

If this takes off for Apple, they will be in on the ground floor of a movement in this industry that will shake it to the core! It won't be overnight, but it WILL happen. On demand is what the market wants, and with people willing to vote with their wallets, it'll happen. Once the studios see the $$$ begin to roll in, it won't take that long.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple previews iTV set-top device