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 7

post #241 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

Ten years ago, the typical codec to encode movies with on the Internet was MPEG-1, if not something proprietary and horrible like Indeo. Audio was encoded with MP2, if even that; possibly something even more backwards like AIFC. Ten years ago, dial-up was the most typical means of connection, and wireless was completely out of question. This wasn't 56 Kbit/s dial-up, mind you; 33.6, 28.8, 14.4 or even lower were typical connection rates. Storage capacities were in hundreds of Megabytes; if you were lucky, a Gigabyte or two.

Perhaps you would like things to happen "much faster", but quite frankly, they happen very fast as it is.

Trust me, I'd love for everything to be much faster, except for looming, inevitable death.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #242 of 344
Quote:
(vinea)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.

Neither you nor I know what Steve is planning, but what he has shown and what you think he's shown don't match at this point. Don't forget that most of the United States is not big cities. Most of the U.S. is still smaller towns and farmland. Those areas will see little to no benefit from what you describe for years to come. Possibly decades.

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

Where are you getting your "facts"? Post some links... and once again, if I am in the sweet spot of the supposed "target market" for iTV, I'm not waiting overnight to get my movie. I'll just go to Blockbuster or Best Buy.

Quote:
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.

You hit the nail on the head. There's no announcement for HD, HD is difficult if not impossible for most people to download, the iTV is ahead of it's time. Too soon.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #243 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

Both Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates have noted, in public statements, that they feel that the DVD is the last physical media we will see movie content use. This box, and other products like it, will be what makes that come true.

I don't know about Jobs, but Gates didn't say DVD, but HD-DVD/BluRay would probably be the last major physical media formats.
post #244 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

There's no announcement for HD, HD is difficult if not impossible for most people to download, the iTV is ahead of it's time. Too soon.

Apple is simply locking up the market(s). If you don't want to participate this early... that's fine.

As hard drives continue to get larger and the mean internet speed continues to increase, I believe this will become an increasingly kick-butt way to deal with all of our media... with the Mac at the center of it all... leveraging its superior user interface and management capabilities, while TV set-ups can be utilized for their superior presentation capabilities when desired. iPods obviously bringing up the portable end of things. I believe Steve is thinking about this with a very long term frame of mind. Apple is willing to have people download media of questionable quality now, to later realize this vision of the future.
post #245 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan22t

Apple is simply locking up the market(s). If you don't want to participate this early... that's fine.

As hard drives continue to get larger and the mean internet speed continues to increase, I believe this will become an increasingly kick-butt way to deal with all your media... with the Mac at the center of it all so as to leverage its superior user interface and management capabilities, and leveraging your TV set-up for its superior presentation capabilities when desired. I believe Steve is thinking about this with a very long term frame of mind.

Everyone who has looked over the announcement knows this product is not ready for the Average Consumer yet. Sure, it will be changed a bit before it's unleashed next year, but if Jobs sticks to the advertised price point, it probably won't sport too much more functionality.

Choose to believe whatever you want. A lot would have to fall into place before next year for iTV to overdeliver on its promise. Long term, this could be a nice platform, but frankly, I'd rather the entire TV be an Apple smart appliance. It's an extremely challenging direction Jobs is charting for Apple next. I want everyone to be happy and make more money (... if you didn't buy AAPL yet, you could be in for a long slog).

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #246 of 344
Maybe what Jobs introduced was just a decoy to throw off competitors? I'm not saying Apple isn't going to enter the home market, but since Jobs said it's a "project code name," it implies it isn't finished, of course. But just that Jobs has been such a stickler for not letting secrets go too cheaply (consenting to the lawsuits against the people at websites such as this, et al) I would think there is more than meets the eye to this mini pizza set-top box, or whether this is Apple's approach at all? Maybe Steve was giving everyone misinformation?
\tPerhaps they will (as plasma or lcd prices even come further down) make a pro-sumer oversized widescreen iMac (with computer in back naturally) and compete with plasma makers??? This is maybe their next step after any possible iTV or variant of wired/wireless set-top box; or maybe this is really what they have planned too, in addition to the iTV? Then the iMac would integrate/contain the computer, the wireless technology to stream the content via the internet or an external huge hard drive/server that contains content you own - maybe it might look like a MacMini. Or it could be the other way around, Jobs could be telling us the truth, with component pieces based on the MacMini in stackable beauty. The iMac looks like a flat monitor anyway, and they already have wall mount kits to buy.
\tConcerning the need for multiple remote controls, Apple has patented a touch screen method of having virtual remotes on a tablet - talk about a universal remote control! See this blog/article: http://www.macnn.com/blogs/?p=98 Maybe Apple will release this uber-tablet (with built in mic so I can say "MUTE" when I need to answer the phone*) in January with software that controls the monitors mode, i.e., 1) Computer/PVR, 2) TV (cable, satellite, etc), and and eventually phone. The latter idea I'm uncertain about, but would love for apple to tackle, software with speakerphone capabilities perhaps or its own bluetooth earphone/speaker. Or how about some wireless 802.11 microphones please. My phone (home or cell) is part of my hub too, Apple. I do like the little FrontRow remote, though, and if it could be the uber-controler (other than voice) I would be happy, because a bunch of remote controls on a tablet are still a bunch of remote controls.
The wheel of the FrontRow will keep expanding. The key is in the software, and Apple knows this. Well thought out software can kill hardware and formats. Because MS is dragging its ass on Longhorn or Vistait's really hurting box makers like Dell, HP and Sony, etc. Apple mantra of ease of use is turning the market users to buy their hardware. Remember, we still know very little about what Leopard will offer. January should prove very interesting, unless Apple releases something else before the holidays.
post #247 of 344
One can only hope.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #248 of 344
[QUOTE=rahrens]
Quote:

Like I just said to pt123, don't ask me, ask the NFL - they signed the agreement with Apple! I imagine it has to do with another revenue stream...

And again, Apple doesn't want you to record your favorite TV show, they want you to buy it from the ITS, period, end of story. Don't look for it anytime soon.

Besides, there's cost. I've heard enough people sputter over the cost - add an HDD, redesign the case, add circuitry to control/power it, and the cost goes up, what - $150? fergit it, that's why they have gigabit ethernet and will have 802.11n wireless for - to connect it to an appliance you'll already own that has that - your PC or Mac.

You don't need to do any of that to watch it on your iPod, the 640x480 is sized to work with the iPod with no compression. Same file, HD or iPod.

And it's not up to you to decide what will or won't stop or diminish TV sales on ITS, that's Apple's call,and they've decided, at least for now. fuhgitaboutit!

Actually if they were sure about it, I think it would have been done by now. They have had this thing floating around Apple forever. And it's not done until it ships. So don't fuhgitaboutit just yet. I doubt Apple would let this thing out the door like this.
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 #249 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahrens

Don't you get the idea? When this box lets you access all your content from iTunes USING THE APPLE REMOTE, then you will be able to eliminate:

1. stereo
2. dvd player
3. vhs player
4. TV remote (cause you'll be watching TV through the iTV)
5. home theater system (cause eventually, the iTV will replace that, too)

There go your four remotes, all rolled into one! (yeah, I know that's 5, but a lotta folks won't have the vhs...)

You should have stopped at 29.

How does it replace my stereo? Are you expecting people to listen to their music through their tv's speakers?
post #250 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco

You should have stopped at 29.

How does it replace my stereo? Are you expecting people to listen to their music through their tv's speakers?

I imagine he is thinking it had airport express built in. But there is no way it's going to replace my Onkyo.
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 #251 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajprice

OK, question. If I went out and got a Mac mini with Frontrow and an Elgato box plugged into a TV, would the iTV add anything to this setup or is it unnecessary because its functions are already taken by the Mac and Elgato?

The mini can already do just about anything the iTV does and more. I don't see where you would benefit by getting the iTV if you did that, unless you had the hopes of moving the mini to a desk later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco

How does it replace my stereo? Are you expecting people to listen to their music through their tv's speakers?

The audio outs can go to your amplifier. There's nothing in the device that would appear to prevent you from sending the audio signal to the reciever/amp. So it really only would replace the CD player. But to operate it, you still need a display to be on so you can select your playlist and such, the current iTV has no way to tell you in its front panel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker

I imagine he is thinking it had airport express built in. But there is no way it's going to replace my Onkyo.

No, because there's no amplifier output, only a few audio line-outs.

This would appear to offer a few different audio options. Optical could go to a reciever and the analog could go to the TV. HDMI can go to a reciever, which would either a pass-through to send the video to the TV, and maybe a switch.
post #252 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

The mini can already do just about anything the iTV does and more. I don't see where you would benefit by getting the iTV if you did that, unless you had the hopes of moving the mini to a desk later.

Some people seem enamored with the idea of a mini+iTV "media center" but I'm not sure their reasons for wanting them hooked together. For me the primary value of iTV is it being able to interact with computers and media library storage in other locations.
post #253 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk

Some people seem enamored with the idea of a mini+iTV "media center" but I'm not sure their reasons for wanting them hooked together. For me the primary value of iTV is it being able to interact with computers and media library storage in other locations.

Yeah, I want one of my computers to have a big hairy monster raided tetrabyte plus drive that I download or rip or whatever my content to and then, in whatever place in the house (or in the backyard) I want to get my content beamed to, either computer, stereo, TV, whatever, it just goes there. No muss, no fuss, no having to worry where everything is, or how to get to it. That's where the iTV works for me. I'm sure attaching it to a Mini would add other capabilities, but I don't need the iTV to be the hub for me, just a way to get content to my TV that is elsewhere.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #254 of 344
While the iTV looks cool, I can't help but think that Apple should make a video iPod that is capable of driving a full sized TV. This way, you could load your iPod with videos, bring it over to a friends house, plug it into the tv and watch the video as if you were watching it from a DVD player.

- Mark
post #255 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc_markt

While the iTV looks cool, I can't help but think that Apple should make a video iPod that is capable of driving a full sized TV. This way, you could load your iPod with videos, bring it over to a friends house, plug it into the tv and watch the video as if you were watching it from a DVD player.

What part of the current video iPod can't do that? Granted, it doesn't support component, but there are docks that support S-video out and remote control.
post #256 of 344
If I'm not mistaken, the current iPods don't have the capability to output a high quality picture.

- Mark
post #257 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Neither you nor I know what Steve is planning, but what he has shown and what you think he's shown don't match at this point. Don't forget that most of the United States is not big cities. Most of the U.S. is still smaller towns and farmland. Those areas will see little to no benefit from what you describe for years to come. Possibly decades.

The majority of the population is concentrated in urban areas. Only 20% of americans live in rural areas according to the 2000 census.

Some rural areas with good local cable companies (some co-op) has had as good or better connectivity and overall wireless is likely to play a much larger part in rural areas than areas.

http://www.phptr.com/articles/article.asp?p=28793&rl=1


Quote:
Where are you getting your "facts"? Post some links... and once again, if I am in the sweet spot of the supposed "target market" for iTV, I'm not waiting overnight to get my movie. I'll just go to Blockbuster or Best Buy.

I posted links. You simply choose not to click on them despite claiming they are too high in the other thread.

28% of all households have broadband. 48% of online households have broadband. GAO report.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06426.pdf

68% of active online users have broadband (that's called a "majority"). There are 95.5 million US broadband users as of Februrary 2006. Nielsen.

http://www.netratings.com/pr/pr_060314.pdf

June numbers indicate a jump to 73.1%

http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0607/

3 million new broadband customers in Q1 2006 alone.

http://www.leichtmanresearch.com/pre...06release.html

Sorry that the "facts" disagree with your world view. If you can't use Google then you sure as hell aren't in the "sweet spot" for the target market.

Quote:
You hit the nail on the head. There's no announcement for HD, HD is difficult if not impossible for most people to download, the iTV is ahead of it's time. Too soon.

Bullshit. Waiting longer for more broadband and HD penetration allows Microsoft and Sony to catch up. Waiting longer allows the HD-DVD and BluRay camps to make nice. There 95.5 million prospective buyers and if only 1% (an order of magnitude lower than the market study suggest) respond thats still a successful product launch.

http://www.dvd-intelligence.com/main...nes_movies.htm

By the time they launch (Q1 2007), Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and Comcast will have added millions of more broadband users. It wont take "overnight" to download 720p movies for a large number of broadband users.

Vinea
post #258 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

The mini can already do just about anything the iTV does and more. I don't see where you would benefit by getting the iTV if you did that, unless you had the hopes of moving the mini to a desk later.

The part that the mini doesn't provide is a secure video chain where the content is encrypted until the final display. According to Microsoft that can't happen without hardware changes to support the software security. At least that's why they claim you'll never see HD-DVD and BR playback on XP and must wait for Vista.

iTV provides that as a set top without much user access. Its a desired capability by the studios despite them not enabling the bit to force downrez to component.

The next generation Mini might be able to do this...but I doubt that the current GMA950 can support HDCP. Plus all the Apple Cinema displays have to get rev'd to support HDCP to get true HD on the desktop.

Vinea
post #259 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

The next generation Mini might be able to do this...but I doubt that the current GMA950 can support HDCP. Plus all the Apple Cinema displays have to get rev'd to support HDCP to get true HD on the desktop.

I suppose you have a point. The GMA3000 will support HDMI though, and that's supposed to be out next spring.
post #260 of 344
I found out why apple is releasing movies and TV programs at a reduced quality. The movie industry demanded that apple release a lower quality product because of fears that higher quality video would be pirated. An example of the movie industry being as ignorant as the music industry.
post #261 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

The mini can already do just about anything the iTV does and more. I don't see where you would benefit by getting the iTV if you did that, unless you had the hopes of moving the mini to a desk later.
.

The mac mini simply doesn't have the video & audio capablities of the iTV. There is no S-Video, Component, or Optical.
post #262 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tempest

The mac mini simply doesn't have the video & audio capablities of the iTV. There is no S-Video, Component, or Optical.

There is S-Video, and there is Optical.

No Component, though.
post #263 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tempest

I found out why apple is releasing movies and TV programs at a reduced quality. The movie industry demanded that apple release a lower quality product because of fears that higher quality video would be pirated. An example of the movie industry being as ignorant as the music industry.

Where did you find this out?

Are you saying this in respect to the lower resolution of the videos sold in the last year (320x240) or the quality of what's being sold now (640x480 for 4:3)? Whatever it is, what you say doesn't make sense anymore.
post #264 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tempest

I found out why apple is releasing movies and TV programs at a reduced quality. The movie industry demanded that apple release a lower quality product because of fears that higher quality video would be pirated. An example of the movie industry being as ignorant as the music industry.

Love to find out where you got the info from, as no one out here in Hollywood seems to know that. Certainly not at Disney, and one would think they would be the arbiter of this one.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #265 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tempest

I found out why apple is releasing movies and TV programs at a reduced quality. The movie industry demanded that apple release a lower quality product because of fears that higher quality video would be pirated. An example of the movie industry being as ignorant as the music industry.

You "found out", or you "pulled out of your behind"?
post #266 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

Component,

You are right on the other two, but they do not mention component video (as in YPrPb) in that page.
post #267 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

You are right on the other two, but they do not mention component video (as in YPrPb) in that page.

My mistake; I tend to confuse Composite and Component.
post #268 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk

Some people seem enamored with the idea of a mini+iTV "media center" but I'm not sure their reasons for wanting them hooked together. For me the primary value of iTV is it being able to interact with computers and media library storage in other locations.

I think the idea is to have an iTV with PVR via the Mac Mini.
I've already decided that I'm just getting the PVR that my cable company uses. I think iTV is cool. but it's not that cool. I don't think, for me, it would be used even 1/8th as much as a PVR. I don't really need the iTunes store on my TV when I make better use of the resources I already have and that is without the PVR. If the iTV had a PVR I think I may have used iTV and the store just because of the convenience of it, but for me it seems like a waste of time and money in it's current state.
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 #269 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

The majority of the population is concentrated in urban areas. Only 20% of americans live in rural areas according to the 2000 census.

Some rural areas with good local cable companies (some co-op) has had as good or better connectivity and overall wireless is likely to play a much larger part in rural areas than areas.

http://www.phptr.com/articles/article.asp?p=28793&rl=1




I posted links. You simply choose not to click on them despite claiming they are too high in the other thread.

28% of all households have broadband. 48% of online households have broadband. GAO report.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06426.pdf

68% of active online users have broadband (that's called a "majority"). There are 95.5 million US broadband users as of Februrary 2006. Nielsen.

http://www.netratings.com/pr/pr_060314.pdf

June numbers indicate a jump to 73.1%

http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0607/

3 million new broadband customers in Q1 2006 alone.

http://www.leichtmanresearch.com/pre...06release.html

Sorry that the "facts" disagree with your world view. If you can't use Google then you sure as hell aren't in the "sweet spot" for the target market.



Bullshit. Waiting longer for more broadband and HD penetration allows Microsoft and Sony to catch up. Waiting longer allows the HD-DVD and BluRay camps to make nice. There 95.5 million prospective buyers and if only 1% (an order of magnitude lower than the market study suggest) respond thats still a successful product launch.

http://www.dvd-intelligence.com/main...nes_movies.htm

By the time they launch (Q1 2007), Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and Comcast will have added millions of more broadband users. It wont take "overnight" to download 720p movies for a large number of broadband users.

Vinea


- Did you read the PDF report you linked to? The headline in that PDF is the following: "Broadband Deployment Is Extensive throughout the United States, but It Is Difficult to Assess the Extent of Deployment Gaps in Rural Areas". Translation--- that report is loaded with estimates, not hard figures, Vin.

- It also states, right at the beginning of the article: "About 30 million American households have adopted broadband service...", that was in 2005. Households, not individuals...

- It continues--- "companies do not report the number of subscribers served or whether subscribers are business or residential within each zip code..." I'm assuming most of the broadband use in the US at this time is assigned to businesses, not individual households. Try as you might to prove otherwise, experience has shown me most families do not have the household budget to throw money into broadband, I see many more families with cable TV than broadband.

- Yes, consumers seem to be in a wait and see posture regarding HD-DVD and Blu-Ray that is obvious. iTV still doesn't address ease of use issues and assumes high percentages of dissatisfaction with readily available DVD solutions.

I wonder about the conclusions you are drawing based on evidence you are really scraping hard to find, Vinea.

You're seeing the trees you want to see, and completely failing to see the forest the consumer sees.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #270 of 344
Apple knows how people are using the Mac Mini (as a media center), and you can be sure they don't plan to 'replace' the Mac Mini's role (there's money in them there hills). Notice the USB port on the back of the iTV? Plan on seeing a Blu-Ray capable Mac Mini right about the same time as the release of iTV. Mac Mini is NOT required for streaming movies/music, so it's inexpensive for PC/iPod owners to extend their iPod experience into the living room.

The Mac Mini is the upgrade option, including HD playback of Blu-Ray movies, burning, and more.

As for recording capabilities, I'm sure there is still a raging debate inside Apple as to whether following the PVR model today will kill thier plan of REPLACING traditional TV in the future. They would definitely prefer you choose to download your shows, all the way until you decide you no longer need cable/satellite and subscribe to just the shows you want via iTunes, and watch live Sports events via broadband streams.

Nonetheless, I don't have exact specs, but it looks to me like the iTV is made for stacking with the Mini.
post #271 of 344
My plan to address the missing DVR stuff....

For one week after the broadcast, you will be able to watch TV shows for free on demand. This could be paid for by advertisements. If not by advertising, perhaps a Tivo type monthly subscription for this service. If this is an actual download it will have to have some kind of expiration date. If the miracle in streaming technology Think Secret hinted about last year actually exists, perhaps the free ones will just be streamed. After that, or if you want to watch without commercials, or if you want to collect episodes, it's $1.99. It might be enough to make me forget about DVR.
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
post #272 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

- Did you read the PDF report you linked to? The headline in that PDF is the following: "Broadband Deployment Is Extensive throughout the United States, but It Is Difficult to Assess the Extent of Deployment Gaps in Rural Areas". Translation--- that report is loaded with estimates, not hard figures, Vin.

The latest figures are only 17% of Americans still live in rural areas. So for the other 83% of us the possibility of broadband are decent. Even in rural areas broadband isn't non-existant. Which part of 17-20% confuses you?

They say difficult to assess the extent. Not that it was non-existant. Given these are based on FCC required reports the data doesn't get any better than this.

In addition:

"In July 2005, FCC found that 99 percent of the countrys population lives in
the 95 percent of zip codes where at least one provider reported to FCC
that it serves at least one high-speed subscriber as of December 31, 2004. In
83 percent of the nations zip codes, FCC noted that subscribers are served
by more than one provider, and the commission noted that for roughly 40
percent of zip codes in the United States, there are five or more providers
reporting high-speed lines in service."

99% of the pop lives somewhere where at least one person in thier zip code is getting broadband service.

Quote:
- It also states, right at the beginning of the article: "About 30 million American households have adopted broadband service...", that was in 2005. Households, not individuals...

Yes. That's a good number as there are multiple users per household. Plus the figures are much higher in 2006. 48% of online households have broadband as of 2005.

Quote:
- It continues--- "companies do not report the number of subscribers served or whether subscribers are business or residential within each zip code..." I'm assuming most of the broadband use in the US at this time is assigned to businesses, not individual households. Try as you might to prove otherwise, experience has shown me most families do not have the household budget to throw money into broadband, I see many more families with cable TV than broadband.

Broadband penetration of businesses are listed seperately. Broadband is up to 89% of business users now. Assume what you want but you are wrong.

Plus you ignored the previous line:

"Based on the modifications to the filing requirements FCC implemented,
FCC collects, through its Form 477 filings, information on several aspects
of each companys provision of broadband at the state level, such as the
total number of subscribers served, the breakdown of how those
subscribers are served by technology, and estimates within each
technology of the percentage of subscribers that are residential. "

They DO report which are residential vs business...just NOT on a by zipcode basis.

Quote:
- Yes, consumers seem to be in a wait and see posture regarding HD-DVD and Blu-Ray that is obvious. iTV still doesn't address ease of use issues and assumes high percentages of dissatisfaction with readily available DVD solutions.

I wonder about the conclusions you are drawing based on evidence you are really scraping hard to find, Vinea.

You're seeing the trees you want to see, and completely failing to see the forest the consumer sees.

I wonder about your obtuseness and why given hard evidence from the GAO from FCC reports you still assert that broadband penetration is poor (it is but in percentage...we have more broadband users than any other country in the world). Seeing what I want to see? That's the kettle calling the pot black. Which part of 73% of all online users have broadband is hard to understand?

Really hard to scrape? Its called Google. But given how net savvy you appear to be I guess for you that is hard to do.

Vinea
post #273 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzaslove

Love to find out where you got the info from, as no one out here in Hollywood seems to know that. Certainly not at Disney, and one would think they would be the arbiter of this one.

One of the Microsoft VPs on AVSForums said as much with respect to HD and unprotected video chains. Apple seems uniquely positioned as a company that can control the entire ecosystem from iTunes to Macs to iTV and has a proven track record of DRM with music.

That's the basis of my contention that iTV will allow 720p downloads because Apple can tell the studios that the video chain remains encrypted and hardware protected until inside the display.

That could be why they prefer to have a seperate box like the iTV rather than upgrade the mini. As a general purpose PC it's a lot more vulnerable and the DRM measures likely too restrictive for computing. Plus it makes 720p available to all existing PC and Macs that are capable of running iTunes 8 rather than waiting for the DRM protected motherboards and vid cards.

Vinea
post #274 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

One of the Microsoft VPs on AVSForums said as much with respect to HD and unprotected video chains. Apple seems uniquely positioned as a company that can control the entire ecosystem from iTunes to Macs to iTV and has a proven track record of DRM with music.

That's the basis of my contention that iTV will allow 720p downloads because Apple can tell the studios that the video chain remains encrypted and hardware protected until inside the display.

That could be why they prefer to have a seperate box like the iTV rather than upgrade the mini. As a general purpose PC it's a lot more vulnerable and the DRM measures likely too restrictive for computing. Plus it makes 720p available to all existing PC and Macs that are capable of running iTunes 8 rather than waiting for the DRM protected motherboards and vid cards.

Vinea

Don't disagree that content makers (studios and such) want a secure path (which is why I think iTV and the plan behind it might be great), but as far as demoting the resolution, everyone that's I've heard talk of it (and, granted, most of them are busy making movies or televisions shows, so we don't have much time to chat) has not agreed that it was so much the studios forcing any issues by dictating as the studios not knowing where to go: WalMart? Google? Apple? It's a bit chaotic out there. And, more important, some of the Imagineers who were brought over to help out on online distribution at Disney basically have said that the tech isn't mature enough to push into 720p yet. But soon. I think Steve knows all of this (how can he not), and will slowly increase resolution over time.

I'm pretty jazzed by the whole thing. I wanted a way to do all of this, and now, come the new year, there's going to be one.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #275 of 344
I also don't think the 640x480 rez is mandated by the studios...I think that they'd have gone along with the 960x540 resolution but until iTV the primary users of DL'd movies will be iPod owners. For them 640x480 is good enough.

I also agree there is confusion among the studios. I think they will go with a little bit of everything until a clear winner appears. The nice thing about the Disney partnership is that they've been one of the more paraniod studios. An Apple solution that passes their muster, even with Steve on the board, will make the less paranoid studios more accepting that the Apple solution is "secure enough".

So yeah, I'm pretty jazzed too. I was going to skip the whole HD-DVD/BR fiasco for a while and live with cable HD but this will be a nice lower cost alternative as long as I don't get hung up on no media.

Vinea
post #276 of 344
The funny thing about this thread since iTV isn't a finished or shipping product yet. Much of this thread my be rendered wrong when its full spec and functionality are announced.

But then again maybe not.
post #277 of 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

The nice thing about the Disney partnership is that they've been one of the more paraniod studios.

Paranoid? They are absolutely not paranoid!!! (Please speak into this cup of coffee here and speak loudly.)

Yeah, they can be a little "conservative" at times, but once they get onboard, they're very fun to work with (many a happy time there). I can't wait to see how this all unrolls -- lots of new toys to play with soon.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #278 of 344
Alright well this is what I can see Apple doing in the farther-away future...don't worry I'm prepared to be flamed

I think that the iTV will eventually become a whole reciever/amp. It already has most of the things it needs, but make it slightly bigger, put on a LCD (or oLED I suppose) screen on the front and have more ports. So now Apple has their reciever, but they need speakers to work with them right? So they release wireless (bluetooth or 801.11n) surround sound speakers to connect wirelessly to your iTV. Gives you the option of 5.1 or 7.1 surround. Also supports 2 subwoofers. This could get rid of much of the cable problem, except for the power needed to run them. This is the major flaw in my area. The subs can have their own power supply but the Surround would need some sort of battery.

Ok so now we pretty much have the speakers, the reciever, the DVD, CD, by this time HD-DVD/Blu-ray player, and the amp. What is left? Why the TV itself of course. This is the most controversial part of this idea. The 30inch display is already a great screen, which could be their smaller tv, with a seperate iTV. The bigger ones (Insert sizes here...) could have the option to have a built in iTV on the back of it. By the way I think i forgot to mention that the iTV would have its own HDD by this point to store everything. The Apple Remote and iPod are the remote of course, as well as the iPhone. All of these items connect wirelessly to your Mac (PC I suppose too, which brings up the question what if Apple did manage to dominate all the markets I have been talking about and then pull support from PC...?)

This would make Apple the center of everything pretty much, and would be everywhere. All they would need then is a built in video game console...which they will NEVER do.

Now my friend and I were talking and my friend believed to get a name for themselves Apple would have to either work with or buy a company such as Onkyo and perhaps some high-end speaker companies. What do you guys think...be as harsh as you want.
post #279 of 344
I like the idea of iTV replacing the AV receiver. Not replacing its same complex functionality but replacing it with something much simpler. Televisions themselves are capable of directly connecting the cable box, DVD player, and Playstation. Televisions themselves can output an amplified surround sound signal.

In the very near future their will be less need for the complexity and multiple inputs of an AV receiver. Because of digital signals the inputs are being simplified down to the necessary few and much of the hardware functionality can be done in software.
post #280 of 344
Shadow Slayer 26, I own an Onkyo THX theater stereo system, and I don't think Apple is up to buying a company that big from Japan. AFAIAC Onkyo makes the absolute top of the line in home stereo equipment, and I doubt Japan would let them go.

Other than that - I think your speculation goes way to far. There are so many more subtle things Apple can do to this thing that would give it 40X better penetration (Like DVR/PVR) that are much more immediate for this to work out for them. I think it could be bigger than the iPod if they just upped the spec list a bit. I like the idea of advertisements from the iTS on TV shows, and paying for subscriptions on commercial free ones. I think that is a great idea.
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
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