or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Briefly: Apple TV tops best seller list at Apple Store
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Briefly: Apple TV tops best seller list at Apple Store

post #1 of 106
Thread Starter 
With just one week of sales under its belt, Apple Inc.'s new Apple TV set-top streaming media hub has claimed the top slot on the company's list of best selling items.

According to a ranking of best selling products on the Apple online store (right sidebar), Apple TV over the past week outsold all versions of the company's popular iPod digital music players, including the ubiquitous iPod nano.

Based on rough calculations performed by AppleInsider -- which assumes conservatively that only 10 percent of iPod sales are generated through its online store -- Apple TV pre-orders during the first 7 days totaled in excess of 70,000.

A recent report from overseas stated Apple's initial order of 100,000 Apple TV units was due to begin shipping State-side later this month, suggesting that initial sales of the device may be exceeding the company's own internal expectations.

At the same time, it should be noted that sales of 100,000 Apple TVs would only represent an incremental $30 million in revenue for the Cupertino-based company, which would not materially impact its quarterly financials.

Should Apple TV maintain its initial sales pace, total units for Apple's second fiscal quarter of 2007 could top 500,000 and contribute significantly to earnings.
post #2 of 106
I think I was one of the first.

Are these numbers likely to stay at this level though? It seems like it could be contributed to the initial hype.
post #3 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaPeaJay View Post

I think I was one of the first.

Are these numbers likely to stay at this level though? It seems like it could be contributed to the initial hype.


It's very unlikely, First week of sales on a high profile product are considerably higher than what you should expect for the rest of the quarter.. Although sales may surge again once tv actually starts shipping, currently it is only pre-order.
post #4 of 106
I'm shocked by these numbers believe it or not... Maybe I'm not seeing the full value of the product, but for it to only stream the content from your Macs to your TV, it is NOT worth the $300 price tag. $149 maybe but NOT $300. That just seems distorted to me (pun intended). For $300 it should at least offer DVR/PVR functionality. And ultimately it should do everything a SlingBox does as well!

Now, I would NEVER have a Windows box in my home, but I think Apple is sorely behind in the Media Center arena. C'mon! We/Apple should have done it first and We/Apple should be doing it better than anyone else in the world!

And before I get too beaten up by others, Yes, I understand there are other products out there and there are marketing models to consider (iTunes/Elgato, etc.) But if Apple REALLY want's to jump into the media center arena, they should be doing more.

But really... I'm not feeling all that compelled to run right out and buy one when you consider the fact that I could just spend a bit more and get a Mac mini, and just plug it directly into my HD TV and use sharing via iTunes to view anything on the TV I could through FrontRow, or Media Central, etc, AND have a backup Mac to use if needed...

Maybe it's just me... What do I know?
post #5 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTechIdol View Post

I'm shocked by these numbers believe it or not... Maybe I'm not seeing the full value of the product, but for it to only stream the content from your Macs to your TV, it is NOT worth the $300 price tag. $149 maybe but NOT $300. That just seems distorted to me (pun intended). For $300 it should at least offer DVR/PVR functionality. And ultimately it should do everything a SlingBox does as well!

Now, I would NEVER have a Windows box in my home, but I think Apple is sorely behind in the Media Center arena. C'mon! We/Apple should have done it first and We/Apple should be doing it better than anyone else in the world!

And before I get too beaten up by others, Yes, I understand there are other products out there and there are marketing models to consider (iTunes/Elgato, etc.) But if Apple REALLY want's to jump into the media center arena, they should be doing more.

But really... I'm not feeling all that compelled to run right out and buy one when you consider the fact that I could just spend a bit more and get a Mac mini, and just plug it directly into my HD TV and use sharing via iTunes to view anything on the TV I could through FrontRow, or Media Central, etc, AND have a backup Mac to use if needed...

Maybe it's just me... What do I know?

I agree with everything you said. It at LEAST needs to be a DVR
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox

Being an Apple basher means you never, ever have to acknowledge success.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox

Being an Apple basher means you never, ever have to acknowledge success.
Reply
post #6 of 106
It is worth noting that the iPod is broken up into 4 seperate categories, weakening the impact of the iPod in the top sellers list.

Also, I don't necessarily trust Apple as an honest reporter of non-Stock-Market sales figures. They could be boosting the numbers to make the adoption rate seem higher.

Hopefully my concerns are incorrect.
post #7 of 106
I highly doubt that Apple's "top sellers" list is really an automated list generated by the website. Our sources indicate that the "top seller" list on Apple's site is manually changed by Apple employees. Considering that almost nobody is interested in purchasing an Apple TV, and considering that Apple TV is a product that offers virtually zero value (ESPECIALLY for its high price tag), it is almost impossible for Apple TV to be a #1 seller at the Apple Store. Let's face it -- Apple TV offers NO VALUE! It is a product that is dead from the start.
post #8 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by trevorlsciact View Post

I agree with everything you said. It at LEAST needs to be a DVR

I think we're more likely to see a monthly subscriber plan than DVR functionality. With a subscription plan, Apple TV effectively is a DVR.

If iTunes had all the shows I currently watch, the ability to graze shows from the remote, live programming like sports and award shows, and PPV movies for $4 a pop, for $50-$60 per month plus PPVs, it's bye bye Comcast (well, for cable anyway).
post #9 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

I highly doubt that Apple's "top sellers" list is really an automated list generated by the website. Our sources indicate that the "top seller" list on Apple's site is manually changed by Apple employees. Considering that almost nobody is interested in purchasing an Apple TV, and considering that Apple TV is a product that offers virtually zero value (ESPECIALLY for its high price tag), it is almost impossible for Apple TV to be a #1 seller at the Apple Store. Let's face it -- Apple TV offers NO VALUE! It is a product that is dead from the start.

Lol... I love all the doomsayers... (some may call them trolls, but often they genuinely hold the views they do) ... Often they do look silly later on...

It has been especially fun re-reading all the doomsayers about the original iPod (I kept web archives of some of the best); I'm pretty sure I will be able to come back and enjoy this sort of non-sense in a year or so's time

Just because *some* people don't perceive value in a product, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't... And I think scotty is rather mistaken, not to mention prone to hyperbole ("NO VALUE!")...

Cheers
Fast Red
post #10 of 106
How do we know that the list isn't randomly assorted, like its not the #1 top seller but it is in the top sellers list. I don't see how the 5g iPod outsells the nano's and shuffle's.


I also agree that the top sellers list is hand picked to get people to see the product. Even witht the initial launch, thats not enough to get that thing #1, i can't imagine that many people wanting something that does so little for that price.
www.myspace.com/windowchicken <---i think they are finny =p.
Reply
www.myspace.com/windowchicken <---i think they are finny =p.
Reply
post #11 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

I highly doubt that Apple's "top sellers" list is really an automated list generated by the website. Our sources indicate that the "top seller" list on Apple's site is manually changed by Apple employees. Considering that almost nobody is interested in purchasing an Apple TV, and considering that Apple TV is a product that offers virtually zero value (ESPECIALLY for its high price tag), it is almost impossible for Apple TV to be a #1 seller at the Apple Store. Let's face it -- Apple TV offers NO VALUE! It is a product that is dead from the start.

Who is the "Our" you refer to. And sorry scotty, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. Just cause you think the product sucks doesn't mean that Apple's out to deceive everybody else to make them think it's better than it is. Sheesh
post #12 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTechIdol View Post

I'm shocked by these numbers believe it or not... Maybe I'm not seeing the full value of the product, ...

Me too and I agree. I don't buy movies at all, DVD or iTunes or any thing else. What am I going to do with AppleTV? Whatch Red vs Blue on my TV?
post #13 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

I highly doubt that Apple's "top sellers" list is really an automated list generated by the website. Our sources indicate that the "top seller" list on Apple's site is manually changed by Apple employees. Considering that almost nobody is interested in purchasing an Apple TV, and considering that Apple TV is a product that offers virtually zero value (ESPECIALLY for its high price tag), it is almost impossible for Apple TV to be a #1 seller at the Apple Store. Let's face it -- Apple TV offers NO VALUE! It is a product that is dead from the start.

Cute post!

But, while that will be true for some, there will be others who disagree.

That's why everybody doesn't buy the same product.
post #14 of 106
How don't you see value in it? Let's compare costs.

Cable TV: $40/month.
DVR: $10/month.

After 3 years, that's $1,800.

Apple TV: $300.
Season pass from iTunes: $35 each.

(1800 - 300) / $35 = 42.8 TV seasons.

That's FOURTEEN shows a year. Do you watch that much? I didn't think so.

Apple TV + iTunes is an incredible value, once you throw out cable (not that I ever had it anyway). If next year they can pull of 720p (which would make movies about 3 GB and TV shows between 500 MB and 1 GB), they're golden.
post #15 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTechIdol View Post

I'm shocked by these numbers believe it or not... Maybe I'm not seeing the full value of the product, but for it to only stream the content from your Macs to your TV, it is NOT worth the $300 price tag. $149 maybe but NOT $300. That just seems distorted to me (pun intended). For $300 it should at least offer DVR/PVR functionality. And ultimately it should do everything a SlingBox does as well!

Now, I would NEVER have a Windows box in my home, but I think Apple is sorely behind in the Media Center arena. C'mon! We/Apple should have done it first and We/Apple should be doing it better than anyone else in the world!

Maybe it's just me... What do I know?

Nope. You are not the only one who is shocked. I'm bloody amazed. If this prediction is true (in terms of estimated number of units pre-sold), then this is tip-top marketing.

I got the feeling that Apple TV is not fully realized as a product. It is over-priced in my opinion. I would not buy it in its current version. Maybe down the line (I've come to realize by inner Apple-whore).

I too, wanted at the very least recording capability. Well, that and it doesn't output 1080i.
2.0 GHz Macbook, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD
Reply
2.0 GHz Macbook, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD
Reply
post #16 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

I highly doubt that Apple's "top sellers" list is really an automated list generated by the website. Our sources indicate that the "top seller" list on Apple's site is manually changed by Apple employees. Considering that almost nobody is interested in purchasing an Apple TV, and considering that Apple TV is a product that offers virtually zero value (ESPECIALLY for its high price tag), it is almost impossible for Apple TV to be a #1 seller at the Apple Store. Let's face it -- Apple TV offers NO VALUE! It is a product that is dead from the start.

Ok, let us play 'devil's advocate' with your opinion. I, personally feel that Apple TV won't do well; nee it might be a disappointment and 'tank'.

If that is the case, is Apple TV a "placeholder" for something much wider in scope and ability down the line? Again, I get this feeling as Apple TV seems rather 'half-baked' compared to their recent products.
2.0 GHz Macbook, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD
Reply
2.0 GHz Macbook, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD
Reply
post #17 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

How don't you see value in it? Let's compare costs.

Cable TV: $40/month.
DVR: $10/month.

After 3 years, that's $1,800.

Apple TV: $300.
Season pass from iTunes: $35 each.

(1800 - 300) / $35 = 42.8 TV seasons.

That's FOURTEEN shows a year. Do you watch that much? I didn't think so.

Apple TV + iTunes is an incredible value, once you throw out cable (not that I ever had it anyway). If next year they can pull of 720p (which would make movies about 3 GB and TV shows between 500 MB and 1 GB), they're golden.

You forgot to include the cost of high-speed Internet... cha-CHING!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #18 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

How don't you see value in it? Let's compare costs.

Cable TV: $40/month.
DVR: $10/month.

After 3 years, that's $1,800.

Apple TV: $300.
Season pass from iTunes: $35 each.

(1800 - 300) / $35 = 42.8 TV seasons.

That's FOURTEEN shows a year. Do you watch that much? I didn't think so.

Apple TV + iTunes is an incredible value, once you throw out cable (not that I ever had it anyway). If next year they can pull of 720p (which would make movies about 3 GB and TV shows between 500 MB and 1 GB), they're golden.

Wow when you run the numbers like that, that is actually pretty good. Where it breaks down however is you loose the ability to watch something random or start liking a new show. How do I know I want a season pass if I've never watched it before.

itunes should allow streaming of the first 4 episodes of a season or something too hook people before they hit them with downloads and season passes.

But it'll still probably never work for me because I do watch crap I'd never pay for like flip this house and stuff randomly.

*Unless* there's a discounted rate (like half price) to stream something random, that could be interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
post #19 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking

Wow when you run the numbers like that, that is actually pretty good. Where it breaks down however is you loose the ability to watch something random or start liking a new show. How do I know I want a season pass if I've never watched it before.

Well, you can just buy an episode or two at $2 each. You're right though: what they need to do is let you buy a few episodes, and then if you later buy the entire series, they refund you for the episodes. I hope as the service matures networks will push for that.
post #20 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

You forgot to include the cost of high-speed Internet... cha-CHING!

Just about everyone has that anyway.
post #21 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Just about everyone has that anyway.

Only about half the people have high speed, and many of them have speeds of less than 1 Mb/s.

And almost everyone has either cable or satellite as well. Phone service also. Which will most give up?

I get several hundred channels on my cable network. I don't want to give that up. The whole point to modern communications is to be able to see anything available at any time. So, I might pay half what I pay if I give 90% of that up.

That's hardly a bargain.

I agree with ecking. I watch programs in waves. There are times when I spend a lot of time on the DIY channel. Other times it's science. Others history, etc. My daughter is studying Spanish, so she spends time on the Spanish channels.
post #22 of 106
I think we may see the iPod model again here. Sure, the aTV is not a one stop, do it all, set top box of the future. But it is Apple's first product of this sort (kind of). They over-price and under-power it (which I'm not convinced they are; sure, it's not a BARGAIN, but it's not a rip off either). Let the early adopters snatch it up and test out the infrastructure, UI, etc. See how negotiations with studios go, what the revenue stream looks like. i.e. Test the waters.

Then after they've established themselves, users are familiar with the interface, they've learned a few things, then they buy El Gato and make a DVR version.

- Jasen.
post #23 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

How don't you see value in it? Let's compare costs.

Cable TV: $40/month.
DVR: $10/month.

After 3 years, that's $1,800.

Apple TV: $300.
Season pass from iTunes: $35 each.

(1800 - 300) / $35 = 42.8 TV seasons.

That's FOURTEEN shows a year. Do you watch that much? I didn't think so.

Apple TV + iTunes is an incredible value, once you throw out cable (not that I ever had it anyway). If next year they can pull of 720p (which would make movies about 3 GB and TV shows between 500 MB and 1 GB), they're golden.

Let me see...

Heroes
Battlestar Galactica
Stargate
Stargate Atlantis
Crossing Jordan
NCIS
24
Law & Order
Law & Order: SVU
Law & Order: CI
Survivor
The Amazing Race
Veronica Mars
Smallville
Project Runway

There's my 14 plus 1 extra. That excludes things I watch at random like CSI, Deal or No Deal, Cold Case, all the shows in syndication, etc.

If you watch just 2 shows a day, that's 14 seasons right there. Not a far stretch to imagine someone watching 2 shows a day. And if you have kids, chances are that easily puts you past 14 seasons right there. Maybe you enjoy watching Spongebob Squarepants, but I'd consider cutting off my own leg to avoid that torture. If you watch any reality TV shows like Survivor, they are basically 1/2 season shows so you end watching 2 of those to fill the season. And what about local news, weather, etc? Hell, what if I'm home from work one day and want to catch an episode of The Price is Right before Bob Barker retires? Hook up the rabbit ears and hope the local CBS channel is watchable? Or a better example right around the corner, what about watching the Super Bowl?

Also, back on the reality shows or even a show like 24, since they are not available on iTunes until the day after (if not longer) they air, if you have friends at work that like the same shows, do you want to walk in and have them greet you, saying, "Hey, were you as shocked as I that Steve got voted off Survivor last night?" Or if you missed the 2 Monday night episodes of 24 (like I did, and bought from iTunes since I currently lack a DVR), do you want to walk in and find out from a friend that Jack killed Curtis to defend a known terrorist and that the bad guys actually detonated a nuke near Los Angeles?

And then there's all the storage space, with each 1 hour episode taking about 1/2 a GB of space. At .5GB for 14 seasons averaging 20 episodes, that's 140GB of HD space a year.

And of course, there's the problem that not everything on TV is on iTunes. I had Smallville on my TV list? Hmm, no Smallville on iTunes...goes I'll have to do without. Thanks.

And this continues to annoy me, what about all the people like myself who can't get high-speed internet through any other source but the cable company? What's your suggestion, that I spend 2 days trying to download over dial-up? Beg a friend or relative to let me download from their computer?

Really, it's great that not having cable works out for you but for most it's simply not going to happen as it provides a better value to have a cable and DVR than Apple TV + iTunes for the majority of people. Really, I could do the same thing you're advocating with Apple TV by just buying DVDs. A season of a TV show costs close to the same amount as an iTunes Season Pass (except HBO series), except in the process I get better picture, sound, and bonus features.
post #24 of 106
I think that sentiment is correct. This is the infancy of this product. The long ranging potential is what excites me. I can't help but think that Google could become a part of this picture at some point with their dark fiber. I was starting to digitize my DVDs as MP4 files and was disappointed in the image quality (720x405, 1000 kbps bitrate), when blown up to a large screen display. To playback and deliver image quality that makes it a competitive real world product, the file sizes are going to have to be large...or video compression is going to have to make serious advances. I want to be able to have DVD quality images or better....not lesser. To me, this product becomes a monster when it can team up with a fiber internet connection, making 4GB or so high res movie downloads not so daunting. I want to be able to take my existing DVDs, like my old audio cds, and digitize them at an unnoticeable video compression, and make them useable on my computer, AppleTV or iPod. I'm all ready to go with digitizing my DVDs, but what resolution/format/size/bitrate makes sense for now, and for the future? I don't think anyone has that answer now. That could hurt with early adoption of the product. But I can see how once all these matters are understood and the technology evolves to make this a seamless user experience, Apple will have its foothold and a great potential to set the market like it did with the iPod.
post #25 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by UMDTerrapins View Post

I think that sentiment is correct. This is the infancy of this product. The long ranging potential is what excites me. I can't help but think that Google could become a part of this picture at some point with their dark fiber. I was starting to digitize my DVDs as MP4 files and was disappointed in the image quality (720x405, 1000 kbps bitrate), when blown up to a large screen display. To playback and deliver image quality that makes it a competitive real world product, the file sizes are going to have to be large...or video compression is going to have to make serious advances. I want to be able to have DVD quality images or better....not lesser. To me, this product becomes a monster when it can team up with a fiber internet connection, making 4GB or so high res movie downloads not so daunting. I want to be able to take my existing DVDs, like my old audio cds, and digitize them at an unnoticeable video compression, and make them useable on my computer, AppleTV or iPod. I'm all ready to go with digitizing my DVDs, but what resolution/format/size/bitrate makes sense for now, and for the future? I don't think anyone has that answer now. That could hurt with early adoption of the product. But I can see how once all these matters are understood and the technology evolves to make this a seamless user experience, Apple will have its foothold and a great potential to set the market like it did with the iPod.

Dark fiber? Google is not a backbone. The carriers are. Google has tens of thousands of servers, which are being used at near capacity, as so are being constantly expanded and upgraded.

Apple uses Akamai to serve its media offerings.
post #26 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

Me too and I agree. I don't buy movies at all, DVD or iTunes or any thing else. What am I going to do with AppleTV? Whatch Red vs Blue on my TV?

Why does everyone that obviously doesn't have any need for a certain product complain that they don't see a need for that product?

It's really quite simple: you don't have a need for ?tv. Apple doesn't force you to buy ?tv. You don't have to like or need every product that Apple makes.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #27 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLL View Post

Why does everyone that obviously doesn't have any need for a certain product complain that they don't see a need for that product?

It's really quite simple: you don't have a need for ?tv. Apple doesn't force you to buy ?tv. You don't have to like or need every product that Apple makes.

It might have something to do with this being a discussion forum, and thus an article about the AppleTV invokes people to discuss said product in the provided forum.

If you don't like the discussion, don't read it. Simple.
post #28 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

It might have something to do with this being a discussion forum, and thus an article about the AppleTV invokes people to discuss said product in the provided forum.

Which is why I'm discussing the fact that people who don't need a certain Apple product always seem to think that the product is stupid.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #29 of 106
With over 50,000,000 TV shows and 1,300,000 movies downloaded from iTS (and more titles being added monthly), why is it surprise that there is some sort of a demand for the ?TV?

Selling 500-750k of them a year is not much of a stretch. Is it iPod-tastically successful? No. Profitable? Sure.
post #30 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLL View Post

Which is why I'm discussing the fact that people who don't need a certain Apple product always seem to think that the product is stupid.

I don't think people have simply stated that they don't want one so they think it's stupid. They've given specific opinions on why they think this product has no value.

I think it has no value because in the end all the AppleTV does is act like a $300 iPod video cable. The device is an iPod without a screen. Nothing more.

Even Job's example during the Keynote with someone bringing over their laptop would be just as easy to do with a cable than through AppleTV.

For anyone with a Front Row enabled Mac, it's a better deal to buy the necessary video adapter and cable and run that to the TV. If you can get a video to play in Quicktime, it will play on Front Row. If you download any video from the internet that doesn't come from iTS, chances are your iPod can't play it and neither will the AppleTV. But install the correct codex and Quicktime/Front Row will handle it without issue.

And to make it worse, Apple doesn't provide any means to convert video to an iPod/AppleTV compatible format. There is a function in iTunes that is supposed to convert videos to iPod friendly format, but it doesn't handle muxed mpeg video which results in a video with no sound (at best). To me, it's sort of the same thing if Apple took out the ability to rip CD's to MP3/AAC; the ability to get video into the iPod is an important feature as Apple tries to jump into the home audio/video center.

And I have purchased TV shows from iTunes. And I generally only watch them on my TV via an iPod video cable or on my iMac through Front Row. But on the TV, I really have to crank up the volume to hear them. Not sure if it's the video cable or the audio quality of the source file.
post #31 of 106
I'm surprised people would actually give up HD transmissions to download iTMS shows at 640x480. All the people calculating season pass costs, can you factor in the difference between watching 24 in 720p (FOXs broadcast res) and watching 24 at 640x480 s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d to 1280x720?
post #32 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

How don't you see value in it? Let's compare costs.
Cable TV: $40/month.
DVR: $10/month.

After 3 years, that's $1,800.

Apple TV: $300.
Season pass from iTunes: $35 each.

(1800 - 300) / $35 = 42.8 TV seasons.

That's FOURTEEN shows a year. Do you watch that much? I didn't think so.

Apple TV + iTunes is an incredible value, once you throw out cable (not that I ever had it anyway). If next year they can pull of 720p (which would make movies about 3 GB and TV shows between 500 MB and 1 GB), they're golden.

Except that most cable companies jack up their high-speed Internet rates $10-$20/month if you don't do a cable/Internet package deal. Between that and a lack of 1080i/720p movies and shows, it isn't worth it.

And even if it was worth it and everyone started doing it, I can pretty much guarantee it'd result in higher Internet rates for everyone rather than more competitive cable TV costs.
post #33 of 106
What's the latest estimate on Americans still using a VCR to record their favorite shows?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #34 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porchland View Post

I think we're more likely to see a monthly subscriber plan than DVR functionality. With a subscription plan, Apple TV effectively is a DVR.

Exactly! Repeat after me: Apple has no plans to release a DVR; it would be contrary to their iTunes Store business model.

If you want a Mac DVR, there are plenty of 3rd party options out there, buy one.

Doesn't change the fact that the Apple TV is an overpriced piece of 2 year old technology though.
post #35 of 106
I think people are really missing the point on this. AppleTV is nothing more than a piece of hardware. It's got a processor, a hard drive, inputs, outputs and an operating system -- the last one being easily upgradeable. Just like owners of older iPods, they have all be upgraded through years of software improvements. Why should any of think that this won't be the case for this little box?

New software upgrades mean the USB port on the AppleTV could take an external hard drive. New software upgrades mean better video capabilities. New software upgrades mean almost infinite possibilities.

As for DVR, I agree with a previous post that asks why Apple would want you recording content for free when they make money selling you the same content on iTunes. Seems pretty basic to me.

For me, I purchased Apple TV almost immediately after Job's Keynote. I love the thought of finally making my living room a seamless extension of my iMac.
post #36 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBG4 Dude View Post

I'm surprised people would actually give up HD transmissions to download iTMS shows at 640x480. All the people calculating season pass costs, can you factor in the difference between watching 24 in 720p (FOXs broadcast res) and watching 24 at 640x480 s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d to 1280x720?

The cost I calculated was for the average cable subscription. HD cable is way more expensive.

I'm also assuming that iTunes will be 720p in a year. The file size of movies/shows will only increase about 2.5x.
post #37 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmjoe View Post

Except that most cable companies jack up their high-speed Internet rates $10-$20/month if you don't do a cable/Internet package deal. Between that and a lack of 1080i/720p movies and shows, it isn't worth it.

And even if it was worth it and everyone started doing it, I can pretty much guarantee it'd result in higher Internet rates for everyone rather than more competitive cable TV costs.

Unless you say, don't use Comcast for your cable.
post #38 of 106
@caliminius

You seem to be the exception. Despite statistics, I think most people (with jobs) watch a fraction of the television you do. 1-2 hours, every night, is freaking insane.
post #39 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Only about half the people have high speed, and many of them have speeds of less than 1 Mb/s.

I was referring to the internet in general. Spam mentioned that internet would have to be factored into my equation, but everyone who's even aware of the Apple TV at this point already has the internet so it's a moot point.

I wasn't talking about high speed in particular, although obviously Apple TV is pretty much useless without it.
post #40 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

@caliminius

You seem to be the exception. Despite statistics, I think most people (with jobs) watch a fraction of the television you do. 1-2 hours, every night, is freaking insane.

1-2 hours every night is insane? That's a whopping 2 shows a night. Crazy, I know. As you seem to be discarding the statistics that show that TV watching is a lot higher than that, I can only say you would be the exception.

I'm not sure if you were trying to imply it or not, but I DO have a job.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Briefly: Apple TV tops best seller list at Apple Store