or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Pentium M-based Intel chip at heart of Apple TV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Pentium M-based Intel chip at heart of Apple TV - Page 3

post #81 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

I think any 4:3 TV will work on the following conditions:
1. (There is a component input OR you have a component-to-composite adapter) AND
2. Your TV is able to "detect" OR you can set your TV to "know" that it is a 16:9 signal,
.....ie. Your TV will letterbox 16:9 signals if it autodetects or you force it to letterbox.

The tech specs on apple.com say otherwise.

Not all sets that have component in from a few years ago support 480p and you cannot convert a 480p signal to composite using just a (physical) cable adapter.
post #82 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Seriously, WHY is there a Hard Drive in this thing? It makes NO SENSE! If it can stream at 300Mb/s, that should be plenty quick for any 802.11n-equipped computer. So assuming that one's AppleTV gets its media from a "host computer" (which is in turn connected to the iTS), everything on the AppleTV would be a duplicate of content on the host computer -- a device which could just as well be streaming the data. Apple could have cut the price by almost $50 by not including the 40GB HD. Very unwise, if you ask me.

Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.

Perhaps this will be a future version of the device, and Apple might just be testing the waters, but if the device fails, primarily because it doesn't include DVR capabilities, the AppleTV will not have a second chance. Apple needs to get the product right the first time, not the second time. Same goes for all their computers/devices, practically... 2nd gen is always better. I know I'll receive some flak for saying this, but that's why I'm waiting for the 2nd gen iPhone... that and I don't have money for it now . A big wedding is coming up!

-Clive

The hard drive is so that Apple TV can be used if the host computer is turned off. A DVR in a Apple device is unlikely since Apple's is in the business of selling content via the iTunes store.. A DVR would essentially record for free the same content that Apple wants you too BUY.
post #83 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.

Besides the obvious reason stated by solsun, how do you figure a dual tuner DVR and a larger HDD would cost only $400. Other problems with your statment:[list][*]80GB HDD for a DVR?[*]The load required to compress streamed H.264 wireless media, record compress in H.264 from two tuners, wjile outputing a 3rd source to an HDTV requires more than a slightly beefier CPU. There
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 #84 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

To further elaborate on my above post... If Apple did it right, extra peripherals would not be needed... Purchases through Apple tv could be done with the simple Apple remote.. A menu based navigation with categories like "new releases," "dramas," "comedies" etc. etc... move up and down through the categories, press the menu button to watch the trailer, and press menu again to purchase and begin downloading.. The hardware is already capable of this, a software interface to the iTunes store is all that's needed.

APpleTV doesn't even need to do the work. It can access, purchase and download this media from the synced computer's iTunes. I think this is what is going to happen as I cant imagine any other reason why one and only one computer can be tethered to the appliance.
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 #85 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTrain View Post

As Kaspar stated earlier,

"On its website Apple similarly says Apple TV supports: "Enhanced-definition or high-definition widescreen TVs capable of 1080i 60/50Hz, 720p 60/50Hz, 576p 50Hz (PAL format), or 480p 60Hz."

Who really cares. The video content is not as good as DVD quality, nor is it anywhere near what the coming standard of Blu Ray, HD-DVD is... So what is this device really good for again? Certainly not for the videophiles out there.

Can you say... Laser Disc anyone?
post #86 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

I disagree, I don't think I've missed the point massively.. In fact, I think Apple missed the mark as far as what consumers need/want to make this a real killer living room product.

I agree that a Mac mini may be overkill for the living room, but a mini is currently the only way to be able to do what I would want in a living room device.. Apple Tv is already a computer, so all Apple had to do was create a way for it to interface with the iTunes store for Movies and Tv show purchases on demand... They could have done it so it would be all menu driven (without the need for a keyboard,) so that consumers could watch movie previews and be able to immediately purchase and watch all from their couch.

Microsoft managed to make an on demand movie service with the Xbox 360 which offers both purchase and rental options as well as full HD resolution... Apple could have (and should have) done it better.

I believe you are talking about consumers in general and then you move into "what you would want". Consumers want simplicity and the best practical way to engineer the iTS without the use of a physical keyboard into Apple TV is to make it like an iPod. Imagine an iPod with thousands upon thousands of different artists. And face it, that's what you would have to do to be able to access every song on the iTS. Either that or have some god awful on screen keyboard thing that you scroll across to type in letters.

Why would Apple bother spending all that money and time to achieve a couple of new sales of songs and movies when they don't even make money from them?

The whole approach of iTunes is that it does everything for you. The idea of season pass is that it downloads every new version, and by definition it will sync it to apple TV straight away. While the MS thing is a good price, how much do the geeks who use XBox 360 A.) Spend on XBox Live B.)Spend on the super-dooper XBox 360 that you need in order to have a large enough hard drive in order to store all these HD videos and C.) Spend on their 50 Mbit/s ultra geek connection to actually download all this gumpf.

Microsoft is the prime example of how throwing money at a problem may get you results, but not the best results. I can imagine in typical Microsoft style, the XBox Live store will be confusing in terms of prices (points?? is that like monopoly money?) and confusing in terms of interface.

Microsoft is aiming at a vastly different market I'm afraid so your argument there is void. As for iTunes, just go to your computer, click on what you want, download it, and then press sync to Apple TV, done.... Do you really want years of Apple software engineering for something that would take you 5 seconds more otherwise, or maybe 5 minutes pre-planning? God it's this kind of lazy attitude that is causing mass obesity in this world.
post #87 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

The hard drive is so that Apple TV can be used if the host computer is turned off. A DVR in a Apple device is unlikely since Apple's is in the business of selling content via the iTunes store.. A DVR would essentially record for free the same content that Apple wants you too BUY.

Who turns off their computer?

Your iTS comment makes sense in the present, however, the iTS is not the future of digital content, at least not yet. *Maybe* in the long-term future, you will be able to select what shows you want to watch and they will be "otomatically" d/l-ed from the iTS to your TV, but let's have a reality check. So much of the world today has cable or sattelite. DVR is an option for them, but expensive. If Apple could release a device that appeals to both camps, it'll slowly pull more people in. Eventually, once iTS becomes a viable alternative to cable, people will start to switch. Until then, DVR will be a useful tool.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #88 of 145
Odd. With the older Dothan based core, they're missing out on the SSE3 and Media boost or whatever Intel calls it.

Interestingly enough, this seems like it could be a neat little computer. How fast will hackers make this usable as one?
post #89 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEatMaKeR View Post

Who really cares. The video content is not as good as DVD quality, nor is it anywhere near what the coming standard of Blu Ray, HD-DVD is... So what is this device really good for again? Certainly not for the videophiles out there.

Didn't they say they will be offering 720p video? They'd have to make a blunder to make their 720p worse than DVD.
post #90 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Besides the obvious reason stated by solsun, how do you figure a dual tuner DVR and a larger HDD would cost only $400. Other problems with your statment:[list][*]80GB HDD for a DVR?[*]The load required to compress streamed H.264 wireless media, record compress in H.264 from two tuners, wjile outputing a 3rd source to an HDTV requires more than a slightly beefier CPU. There

The premium series 2 TiVo model is current $169 at TiVo.com. It supports 180-hrs and has a dual-turner. Plus you can transfer the content to your PC to burn it. Granted that you have to pay for the plan as well, that sort of device will be more than capable for 95% of those who own (or desire to own) a TiVo.

Regardless of what hardware would be required to equip the AppleTV, I am confident that many people would be willing to pay quite a bit for a device that would unite media purchased from the iTS and media received through cable/sattelite.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #91 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by nutrix View Post

I believe you are talking about consumers in general and then you move into "what you would want". Consumers want simplicity and the best practical way to engineer the iTS without the use of a physical keyboard into Apple TV is to make it like an iPod. Imagine an iPod with thousands upon thousands of different artists. And face it, that's what you would have to do to be able to access every song on the iTS. Either that or have some god awful on screen keyboard thing that you scroll across to type in letters.

Why would Apple bother spending all that money and time to achieve a couple of new sales of songs and movies when they don't even make money from them?

The whole approach of iTunes is that it does everything for you. The idea of season pass is that it downloads every new version, and by definition it will sync it to apple TV straight away. While the MS thing is a good price, how much do the geeks who use XBox 360 A.) Spend on XBox Live B.)Spend on the super-dooper XBox 360 that you need in order to have a large enough hard drive in order to store all these HD videos and C.) Spend on their 50 Mbit/s ultra geek connection to actually download all this gumpf.

Microsoft is the prime example of how throwing money at a problem may get you results, but not the best results. I can imagine in typical Microsoft style, the XBox Live store will be confusing in terms of prices (points?? is that like monopoly money?) and confusing in terms of interface.

Microsoft is aiming at a vastly different market I'm afraid so your argument there is void. As for iTunes, just go to your computer, click on what you want, download it, and then press sync to Apple TV, done.... Do you really want years of Apple software engineering for something that would take you 5 seconds more otherwise, or maybe 5 minutes pre-planning? God it's this kind of lazy attitude that is causing mass obesity in this world.


Um yes, I did say consumers, and in case you haven't noticed,the general consensus is that most people are dissappointed and wanted/expected more from Apple tv (read the forums, check the Apple discussions.) I then explained what I want in a device because I can't speak for everyone else.. Apple is about simplicity. For a living room device, being able to browse and purchase from your couch is as simple as it gets.. Apple could have done this using the same or a similar navigation system as they currently have in place. Streaming is great. Content on demand with a rental option for movies is the "killer" living room device. (I think) most people would appreciate this and it could be done while retaining Apple simplicity. "Browse, Buy, Sync, and stream all from your couch." Having to interface with your computer is an unneccessary step, with Apple tv, you should be able to do it all from your tv.
post #92 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Who turns off their computer?

I do. Even if you don't think it is much, it's still a waste of power to leave them on all the time. Even sleep mode is a lot better than just leaving it on, and all it takes is a mouse click and a second to get back to normal.
post #93 of 145
I'm really curious about that. Either I'm missing the point, or there is too much hype for something so unnecessary. Here's a few thoughts and please tell me where I'm right and where I'm wrong.

: : a Mac mini can do everything an appleTV does, and more (apart from the new Front Row app).
: : even if you have a Mac mini in another room, all you need to carry along to your TV room is Mac mini, power brick and remote.
: : Apple laptops can do the same and are even more portable than the Mac mini
: : appleTV is supposed to reduce the fuss with cables etc, but you still need another device for DVD playback on your TV.
post #94 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.

DVRs are a commodity item. $10/month from comcast gets you a HD capable DVR.

Without cablecard you miss out on all the interactive pieces of HD (HD VOD, PPV, etc). The cheapest TiVO's series 3 is still more expensive.

The cheapest Series 2 is only $69. Of course there's that monthly service fee.

It is doubtful that Apple could make a dual tuner DVR Series 3 competitor for $400...especially now that TiVO won its case and Apple would have to pay royalties. Nor would aTV compete with a $70 TiVO. So why bother? Let Miglia do it.

Vinea
post #95 of 145
I agree with those who are saying a mini is the better option, but I'll go one better and suggest a TOTAL media setup for the home, centered around a mini. Please let me know if you think this is so crazy:

1 mini in the living room, with a bunch of nice drives + backup for adequate storage (let's say 200GB+). Front Row + remote for all your media/browsing needs.

Set this mini to store 1 "Master" iTunes library - that is, all music, all purchased movies, all tv shows (throw in a bit torrent config while you're there).

Everyone in the house syncs their iPods to this machine.

All other machines in the house can share the Master iTunes library from the mini via iTunes Sharing/Front Row Sharing (plus have their own private/local media if they want).

Benefits:
1 Master Library means everyone in the house doesn't need to purchase the same song/movie/etc. multiple times if they want it on their iPod
No more 100GB of media clogging the boot drive on your personal computer
centralized backup (connect 2 drives to mini, use scheduled mirroring)
bit torrent client always running (use your router to throttle bandwidth as needed)
divx/avi playback

Given that the AppleTV has a Pentium M and you can pick up a Core Solo mini now for roughly the same price... am I missing anything here?

If you want to get really fancy, install OSX Server on the mini and have Mobile Home accounts for everyone on the network (Dad's using the iMac again, no problem, open the MacBook and check your mail). [Of course, OSX Server software increases the setup cost]
post #96 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken(gr) View Post

I'm really curious about that. Either I'm missing the point, or there is too much hype for something so unnecessary. Here's a few thoughts and please tell me where I'm right and where I'm wrong.

: : a Mac mini can do everything an appleTV does, and more (apart from the new Front Row app).

Perhaps. There is no HDMI support on the Mini although you can do DVI to HDMI for video. Oddly there is the rumor that Apple TV doesn't do HDCP which would be a mistake if the studios limit HD sales on iTunes. On the other hand they may not feel 720p in the wild is all that big a threat...especially since they haven't enabled ICT anyway.

Quote:
: : appleTV is supposed to reduce the fuss with cables etc, but you still need another device for DVD playback on your TV.

Presumably the intent is to have iTunes hold your video library as it does your audio library. No DVD player required on the aTV any more than a CD player is require on the iPod.

Eh...with the UWB wireless HDMI products at CES there's a 50-50 shot that the next HT projector I buy might have that built in which reduces my need for aTV. Guess I was wrong about that.

Vinea
post #97 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Presumably the intent is to have iTunes hold your video library as it does your audio library. No DVD player required on the aTV any more than a CD player is require on the iPod.

Thank you for your answers. As for the iPod/CD, aTV/DVD relation, I cannot agree with that.

It's fast and easy to rip an entire CD, and it eats up 50-100MB of your hard disk space. And you do need as many of your CDs ripped in order to create playlists etc.

The situation with DVDs is a lot different. They eat up a lot of disk space, they are hard to rip (illegal too?), and there are DVDs that you rent, too.
post #98 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacSuperiority View Post

Too bad there not passing the savings on to the consumer. This box probably costs them $150 max.

can i please tell you what the components cost of a mouse is? pleeeeease? that should make your head explode.

exploding heads are fun.
>>< drow ><<
Reply
>>< drow ><<
Reply
post #99 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by smax View Post

How long until someone installs inux on one...?

It would be a cheap box to experiment on...

I'm waiting on this too. My estimate is that by late february, we'll wee a post on linuxdevices.com
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #100 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

I'm waiting on this too. My estimate is that by late february, we'll wee a post on linuxdevices.com

Maybe for a screen shot of the kernel booting. Even with the rapid development & experimentation on the Linux platform, it takes longer than that to get it to do something useful other than maybe routing packets.
post #101 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Flood View Post

You store the content on the Apple TV so that your computer doesn't need to be running to watch or listen to the content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dukemeiser View Post

If you shut your computer down, you could still play it off Apple TV after you sync it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

The hard drive is so that Apple TV can be used if the host computer is turned off.

But you might need internet connectivity. The original article says:

Users can sync their entire iTunes libraries to the drive but will need an internet connection when attempting to play back licensed content purchased from the iTunes Store. (emphasis added)

If true, that means Apple TV can't be used for "offline" playback of FairPlay content? Ouch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikef View Post

According to the Apple posted specs, no, your 480i capable sets are not compatible with the AppleTV. Maybe it's an oversight on the spec sheet and the AppleTV will output 480i, but that's not what it currently says/does.

That's my understanding, too. Looks like any TV that won't support a progressive scan DVD player using non-interlaced output (480p) also won't support Apple TV.

Quote:
Since I'm using old 480i technology at home, the AppleTV is no good for me either

Same here.

The manual for my not that old JVC AV-27F704 says:

• Progressive DVD player (players with an output scan of 31.5 KHz) will not work properly with this television. Set your DVD player's output to "interlaced" or non-progressive mode.

That hasn't been an issue since my much older Pioneer DV-C503 DVD changer doesn't have progress output.
post #102 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Who turns off their computer?

Power outages that outlast UPS battery backup?
post #103 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk View Post

But you might need internet connectivity to. The original article says:

Users can sync their entire iTunes libraries to the drive but will need an internet connection when attempting to play back licensed content purchased from the iTunes Store. (emphasis added)

If true, that means Apple TV can't be used for "offline" playback of FairPlay content? Ouch.

I'm guessing only if you turn your wireless router off with your computer. There was something in the keynote about the aTV being associated with only iTunes account but could stream from 5.

I guess that's how they handle "managed use" where someone comes over with a purchased movie on a laptop.

Vinea
post #104 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

Um yes, I did say consumers, and in case you haven't noticed,the general consensus is that most people are dissappointed and wanted/expected more from Apple tv (read the forums, check the Apple discussions.)

And you really think forum users accurately represent Apple TV's target market?
post #105 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

I'm guessing only if you turn your wireless router off with your computer.

Or a wired router, since Apple TV might be directly connected to one with Ethernet.

Quote:
There was something in the keynote about the aTV being associated with only iTunes account but could stream from 5.

I guess that's how they handle "managed use" where someone comes over with a purchased movie on a laptop.

So, Apple TV will use an additional online method to authorize content that may have already been authorized in iTunes to play on specific computers (including any Apple TV synchs with)? In other words, seems Apple TV alone can't be authorized for iTS FairPlay content playback.
post #106 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk View Post

And you really think forum users accurately represent Apple TV's target market?

Maybe, maybe not. But I honestly don't think I've read more than a handful of comments by people who think that this is the "killer" living room device that it could have been.. I mean, why spend $299 plus $179 for Apple's 802.11n router to playback near dvd quality movies without dolby surround when a $19 iPod av cable will basically do the same thing..

And In contrast to Apple tv, the general consensus on the iPhone is that Apple hit a home room.. We're going to have to wait a while to see how the market reacts to Apple tv, but considering it's limitations, I honestly don't see this being a hit or the must-have living room device that people were hoping for.
post #107 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.

Perhaps this will be a future version of the device, and Apple might just be testing the waters, but if the device fails, primarily because it doesn't include DVR capabilities, the AppleTV will not have a second chance. Apple needs to get the product right the first time, not the second time.

Not to pick you specifically out, but since people seem to keep posting this. Just to be clear. APPLE HAS NO INTEREST IN PRODUCING A DVR. They want you to purchase content through the iTunes Store. I doubt Apple would've sold what you're suggesting (80GB, dual tuner, faster processor, etc.) for $400, unless there was some kind of subscription involved. Even then, the specs on it probably would've been pretty wimpy (say compared to the DVR my cable company provides me for ~$10/month, that has 120GB, dual HD tuner, record/play 1080i content, etc.).

The real problem with the Apple TV is that even if you had a 3rd party Mac DVR solution, or other sources of video content, the Apple TV's specs are so weak that it's unlikely to support these other videos. You're paying $299 for 2005 hardware.
post #108 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmjoe View Post

APPLE HAS NO INTEREST IN PRODUCING A DVR.

Nah.
Apple wants to give us a great media centre type machine. But more than that they want to create up a new paradigm of downloadable content and an Apple Store. To do that Apple needs to assure the media companies that it's on their side (and get their support!), rather than trying to skip their ads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Seriously, WHY is there a Hard Drive in this thing? It makes NO SENSE!

For me, I'd happily stream it all (and I'd rather have access to the 40GB to use as a backup!).

But imagine an Apple savvy husband with his laptop, and a not so Apple savvy wife. He sets up his laptop with movies/video/music etc for both of them, but if he goes out and if there was no sync, the AppleTV box would be useless to his wife (since his laptop is gone - no streaming). This pretty well sums up my parents. The AppleTV sync is perfect for a laptop user who's responsible for the household viewing experience
post #109 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken(gr) View Post

Thank you for your answers. As for the iPod/CD, aTV/DVD relation, I cannot agree with that.

It's fast and easy to rip an entire CD, and it eats up 50-100MB of your hard disk space. And you do need as many of your CDs ripped in order to create playlists etc.

The situation with DVDs is a lot different. They eat up a lot of disk space, they are hard to rip (illegal too?), and there are DVDs that you rent, too.

Yes, you really do need a lot of diskspace but its a lot cheaper today than before. You can get a 1TB NAS for $700.

Legality depends on laws in your country. In the US the Library of Congress ruled no because of DMCA even though some folks believe yes due to fair use/backup.

Vinea
post #110 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk View Post

So, Apple TV will use an additional online method to authorize content that may have already been authorized in iTunes to play on specific computers (including any Apple TV synchs with)? In other words, seems Apple TV alone can't be authorized for iTS FairPlay content playback.

I read that to mean that you can't buy new content via aTV but already purchased ones should work even with the host iTunes machine off. Presumably new episodes wont stream in either until you boot your machine.

Vinea
post #111 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I do. Even if you don't think it is much, it's still a waste of power to leave them on all the time. Even sleep mode is a lot better than just leaving it on, and all it takes is a mouse click and a second to get back to normal.

I'd agree unless it's put to good use. Why not keep it on (for the convenience and to avoid wearing it out through thermal cycling) and run something like Folding at Home, which is socially of high value as this contributes to top research at Stanford University. Check out http://folding.stanford.edu/ download the app for your OS and get 'folding'. Join a Team (or set one up) and get that competitive spirit going! The Mac Teams are doing well but surely there are more GigaFlops of power just waiting to crunch numbers to help humankind?!
post #112 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

Maybe, maybe not. But I honestly don't think I've read more than a handful of comments by people who think that this is the "killer" living room device that it could have been.. I mean, why spend $299 plus $179 for Apple's 802.11n router to playback near dvd quality movies without dolby surround when a $19 iPod av cable will basically do the same thing..

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions but the fact that the AppleTV has an HDMI connector and an optical digital audio connector suggests to me that it is going to be able to work with Dolby Digital / DTS material as and when it comes available on the iTunes Store. There is no indication of the sound capability of existing movies (on the quick check I made on the US Store) but this does not preclude future ones from having multi-channel sound.

In principle it doesn't preclude existing movies from having multi-channel sound (does anyone know if they do?) as, at present, the sound may simply be being downmixed into 2 channels when played back in iTunes.
post #113 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by drow View Post

can i please tell you what the components cost of a mouse is? pleeeeease? that should make your head explode.

exploding heads are fun.

No need for exploding heads: just buy some AAPL shares!
post #114 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunbow View Post

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions but the fact that the AppleTV has an HDMI connector and an optical digital audio connector suggests to me that it is going to be able to work with Dolby Digital / DTS material as and when it comes available on the iTunes Store. There is no indication of the sound capability of existing movies (on the quick check I made on the US Store) but this does not preclude future ones from having multi-channel sound.

In principle it doesn't preclude existing movies from having multi-channel sound (does anyone know if they do?) as, at present, the sound may simply be being downmixed into 2 channels when played back in iTunes.

I think it should be possible to have Dolby Digital or DTS output via HDMI or OpticalAudioOut on the AppleTV. The only multichannel source would be DVD streaming from Mac/PC to the AppleTV. We'll need someone to verify if this is the case. \
post #115 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Maybe for a screen shot of the kernel booting. Even with the rapid development & experimentation on the Linux platform, it takes longer than that to get it to do something useful other than maybe routing packets.

Possibly. But the AppleTV uses parts with existing Linux drivers (I think). In addition, many of the Apple binaries are likely POSIX compliant and may actually be able to be used as is. Anyway, the linux community has hacked devices that are, in my opinion, a lot harder to hack.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #116 of 145
And I thought it was the Windows crowd who get sold down the river on irrelevent specs!

All that bull about beefier processors and graphics cards is annoying cerebral masturbation & the implication that it's substandard technology will only deter sales to non-tech savvy potential customers (precisely the ones who should be buying it). They'll end up with a box, with higher spec hardware but a poor user experience and limited content, to sit in the corner.

The only specs that are relevent are the video playback which is 480p (1.5mbps for H.264 & 2.5mbps for MPEG4) as these relate to it's real-world capability, nothing to do with GHz

The kit should be fine for higher def video playback but Apple are historically bad at leveraging GPU capability (QT all but ignores them) so until a software update unleashes that capability let a black box be a black box - albeit cool & silver-grey.

Even 720p would hike up storage requirements at least 4 fold so current mid-range iMacs would hold around 80 hours (on top of normal useage) not much in the way of TV seasons & Movies

I'm getting one! (after they release TV on iTS outside the US)

McD
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
post #117 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDave View Post

And I thought it was the Windows crowd who get sold down the river on irrelevent specs!

All that bull about beefier processors and graphics cards is annoying cerebral masturbation & the implication that it's substandard technology will only deter sales to non-tech savvy potential customers (precisely the ones who should be buying it). They'll end up with a box, with higher spec hardware but a poor user experience and limited content, to sit in the corner.

The only specs that are relevent are the video playback which is 480p (1.5mbps for H.264 & 2.5mbps for MPEG4) as these relate to it's real-world capability, nothing to do with GHz

The kit should be fine for higher def video playback but Apple are historically bad at leveraging GPU capability (QT all but ignores them) so until a software update unleashes that capability let a black box be a black box - albeit cool & silver-grey.

Even 720p would hike up storage requirements at least 4 fold so current mid-range iMacs would hold around 80 hours (on top of normal useage) not much in the way of TV seasons & Movies

I'm getting one! (after they release TV on iTS outside the US)

McD

Bingo. The GeForce Go 7400 is nice though ..."Cerebral masturbation" ... Heh, that's essentially what we do on AppleInsider every day
post #118 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDave View Post

I'm getting one! (after they release TV [AND MOVIES] on iTS outside the US)...

Heh. So I guess you'll buy one in 2009. 8)
post #119 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasper View Post

I believe it will work fine if you have red-blue-green compositive video ports on your TV. But a TV from 1994 won't have these. I'm not sure about convertors and how that would work.

I spent the day looking for converts. Couldn't find any. I found several that would up convert. But none that would down-convert 480i/p component to S or composite.

As far as the HD. The ?TV is the Video iPod. It is a 40GB iPod that syncs to iTunes in one computer. It will also 'share' with 5 computers. The internet connection is to validate that the computer it is synced to and/or streaming from is authorized to play that song/movie.

Network storage, look to the new Airport base station.
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
post #120 of 145
Any idea if this will stream/transfer over other content than ITunes purchases?
DVD Rips, MPGs, AVIs, etc?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Pentium M-based Intel chip at heart of Apple TV