Apple ready to flick switch on Apple TV revolution - Page 6

Originally Posted by sjk

For storing synched content, basically explained in Apple TV - Sync with iTunes.

Originally Posted by vespr

.....And for that reason Apple won't get my £200.

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

£200 (= $400, approx)!?

Man, you guys are getting ripped off in Europe. Why do you put up with this sort of cr4p? (In fact, this is the sort of thing that the EU folks and the consumer groups should be going after, instead of getting tangled in their underwear about iTunes and DRM.....)

Originally Posted by dutch pear

First, the non-US bit torrent crowd isn't into paying simply because outside of the States you can't buy these tvseries online. I strongly disagree with labeling this 'crowd' as cheap, 'free beer' people

Secondly, the advantage would be the general point of the apple-TV: getting content (moving image, pictures and music) easily from your computer to your TV/living room.

Third point: divx/xvid (simply meaning non-h264 mpeg4) is every bit as much a standard as mp3 is. Apple supports mp3. The iPod took off thanks to mp3 support. If they want the apple tv to really take off they need to support the most common format for downloadable video content.

Originally Posted by vinea

You get ONE remote from the cable company. It handles all the DVR, navigation, VOD, etc stuff and sometimes even your TV (if its a common brand anyway). Going with TiVO OR any other 3rd party DVR gives you two remotes unless you just chuck the VOD or PPV services ... ... Apple is positioning aTV against the DVD player...not a DVR.

Originally Posted by melgross

MP3 is much more of a standard than Divx. That could change over time, but it's a long way from it yet.

You keep saying that but i can't help but disagree?? What do you have to back this up?? What other video format is the standard for downloadable content??
Yes I know there is very little legal divx/xvid content, but that is exactly the same with mp3, and certainly was when the iPod was introduced. Also both codecs adhere to the MPEG4 standard. So I keep saying that divx/xvid is for downloadable video exactly what mp3 is for downloadable music.

Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing for piracy, but IT IS a major factor that people will want to use 'non-bought' video content with their apple tv. Right now, I'm convinced that over 90% of that content is in divx/xvid format, most commonly inside an AVI wrapper. When that content won't work with the apple tv it will have a BIG negative impact on sales.

Side note: for this exact reason most current DVD players also support divx/xvid!

Originally Posted by dutch pear

Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing for piracy, but IT IS a major factor that people will want to use 'non-bought' video content with their apple tv.

Originally Posted by sjk

And "bought" video, too, like EyeTV MPEG-2 recordings without the time-consuming export conversion for aTV compatibility that Elgato's FAQ is currently suggesting.

Maybe unsupported video formats won't be as dramatic for aTV as if the iPod hadn't support MP3 but I still think it's an important issue from the perspective of potential customers. Isn't it obvious that aTV has a higher chance of general success by supporting popular formats like DivX/XviD and MPEG-2, regardless of origin? Seems to me both the amount and diversity of aTV-compatible content is currently lacking. And who wants to feel coerced into making iTS purchases, if they even can!?

Originally Posted by ecking

100% agree.

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Man, you guys are getting ripped off in Europe. Why do you put up with this sort of cr4p?

Originally Posted by Ireland

Yeah we were going to go crying under our desks, but we changed our minds. What the heck are we supposed to do.

Originally Posted by sjk

Wow, seems like forever since anyone replied and agreed with me on this forum thanks! Even if you'd disagreed just an acknowledgment makes me feel like it's worth posting since usually my comments seem drowned out by more prolific posters.

Originally Posted by Ireland

Yeah we were going to go crying under our desks, but we changed our minds. What the heck are we supposed to do.

Originally Posted by Ireland

Yeah we were going to go crying under our desks, but we changed our minds. What the heck are we supposed to do.

Originally Posted by tribulation

That's what I was wondering LOL

Originally Posted by dutch pear

You keep saying that but i can't help but disagree?? What do you have to back this up?? What other video format is the standard for downloadable content??
Yes I know there is very little legal divx/xvid content, but that is exactly the same with mp3, and certainly was when the iPod was introduced. Also both codecs adhere to the MPEG4 standard. So I keep saying that divx/xvid is for downloadable video exactly what mp3 is for downloadable music.

Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing for piracy, but IT IS a major factor that people will want to use 'non-bought' video content with their apple tv. Right now, I'm convinced that over 90% of that content is in divx/xvid format, most commonly inside an AVI wrapper. When that content won't work with the apple tv it will have a BIG negative impact on sales.

Side note: for this exact reason most current DVD players also support divx/xvid!

Originally Posted by retiarius

Please be aware that because of a little technicality called the Image Constraint Token (ICT),
Apple may not offer 720p material for widescreen, but perhaps only 960x540p.
That is, studios can invoke this tag to suppress any > 540p material from exiting
component outputs, which Apple TV has. Called the "analog hole", see:

http://broadcastengineering.com/mag/...cpr_redefined/

for more details.

That is, although the QuickTime Pro 'Movie to Apple TV' setting will happily transcode
much 1080p and 720p material to 720p (within the Apple TV H.264 specs), some
experiments show that this export tab will force a downrez to 540p, for example
for certain EyeTV -> HD Video export -> QuickTime AppleTV content.

Apple might choose to limit all ITunes content to 540p, or they may offer 720p
if they make their boxen sense that only HDMI/HDCP is used to connect to a big screen
and not the analog outputs.

Originally Posted by vespr

dude you are completely right. DivX is massive. People might not be aware of it, but I'd say a huge majority of AVI's they watch are encoded in DivX/XviD. Heck I saw Notes in a Scandal and the last episode of 24 this week alone, and no surprise they're in XviD.

For example, Sony, the biggest consumer electronics company in THE WORLD, is advertising their new 8" portable DVD player on the sony europe site.

http://www.sonystyle.co.uk/

Navigate to DVD and then Portable DVD player. And what do you see in a big picture right next to the image of the thing "DIVX VIDEO". Note, it doesn't mention H264, WMV. It says DIVX. I wonder why...

Now that's also a £200 a product. What would I rather spend my money on?

DVD-R/-RW (video and VR modes), DVD-R Dual Layer (video mode), DVD+R/+RW and DVD+R Dual Layer
Audio CD and CD-R/RW with audio, MP3 and JPEG files
DVD-R/-RW/+R/+RW and CD-R/-RW with DivX

Originally Posted by @homenow

You could elect George Bush as Prime Minister, he will cut your taxes for you.

You keep saying that but i can't help but disagree?? What do you have to back this up?? What other video format is the standard for downloadable content?? dude you are completely right. DivX is massive.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Admittedly I'm not one of the people downloading lots of pirated content. But I do download video and I feel I rarely download a DivX video.

I would say the far majority of the video I watch on the internet is streamed Flash Video. The majority of the downloaded video is probably split between QT and Windows Media.

The rare times I get something from DivX I get a reminder that I have an outdated DivX player. Which I'd forgotten I even had because I never use it.

Come to think of it most people I know don't know anything about DivX and have not downloaded the player.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

It seems that most who use DivX here admit they are using it to obtain content they did not pay for or received from a distributor who had no legal right to distribute.

If AppleTV did support DivX it would also support this activity. Which isn't beneficial to the content creators, ultimately what benefit is that for Apple?

Originally Posted by melgross

I wish these posters would understand that.

Originally Posted by @homenow

You could elect George Bush as Prime Minister, he will cut your taxes for you.

Originally Posted by spliff monkey

Just got notice that I may see my Apple TV by the 23rd, any other reports?

Originally Posted by Ireland

The last thing we want is another Hitler in Europe.

Originally Posted by sjk

Okay, Mr. Know-It-All.

Some of us do understand your points but they don't negate equally valid points that you might exclude or discredit if they don't support your own arguments. I don't think anyone is immune from that sort of selective exclusion that we sometimes accuse others of having, explicitly or implicitly.

Even though I understand and often agree with much of what you write it sometimes leaves little room for others (myself included) to express their own ideas and opinions without being eaten alive if they happen to contradict you or buried alive by your prolific presence.

I kind of doubt your blunt remarks about "DivX posters" will convince them to read more or dissuade any myopic stubbornness about the issues though you certainly can, and possibly will, keep trying.

Originally Posted by sjk

Personally, I don't care if aTV supports DivX since until earlier today (for brief Toast testing) I didn't have even a single DivX file on my Macs, which also disqualifies me as a "DivX poster" here.

I see several reasons why Apple has chosen (for now) to limit the video formats aTV supports, including not wanting to be perceived as catering to piracy as you mentioned earlier. They want to focus on H.264, especially with it already being the primary video iPod format. And maybe there's even something to Cringley's recent H.264 hardware encoder speculation, although a few of the comments have reasonable doubts of that. Plus they reduce support overhead of trying to figure out why Billy's supposedly supported files, with unknown and suspicious origins, won't play with aTV. But I'm betting they'll get a few people wondering why files they've imported into iTunes that play with iTunes don't play with aTV.

Still, I care that aTV is useless to any customers who'd consider one if it were compatible with more of whatever content is available to them (ignoring Windows Media, which the iPod has already set expectations that Apple won't support even for Windows users). That's really my main point rather than focusing on specific incompatible formats, with any sympathy I've shown for DivX content "owners" in this thread seen in that more general context. I'd rather give people the benefit of doubt that they already or will have legitimately obtained content that aTV won't support, some who've even dabbled in video piracy and chosen not to anymore (like with audio piracy).

Regardless of the reasons right now I'm disappointed how Apple has limited aTV after they'd originally been more liberal and generous with the iPod even though it supported illegally obtained MP3 (mostly) content. And certainly there could be things that eventually change my mind and feelings.

So, that's my indirect response rather than directly addressing what you said that I essentially agree with.

Originally Posted by melgross

That's one of the points I'm trying to make.

But, even though we have both stated this, as have a couple of others, it seems as though these Divx posters aren't bothering to read any of the older posts, and so keep posting the same thing.

They just don't seem to understand that with Apple's leading position in the downloadable content industry, and with them attempting to convince other companies to sell them their content as well, Apple can't be seen as supporting pirated content.

Apple was soundly whipped for the original "rip and burn" ads before the iTunes store came online. Apple was forced to explain over and over that they weren't encouraging pirated music, but the burning of their own collections.

They would just give the studios another excuse to refuse them their content.

Other players, who are either small, or who have little sales of others content, can more afford to supply Divx to their customers.

I wish these posters would understand that.

Originally Posted by vespr

I just find it ironic when you say Apple can't be seen to support pirate DVD's by supplying DivX on their machines, when every consumer electronics company that sells a DVD player already does it, including Sony, one of the major film producers.

But one thing is certain there are millions upon millions of DivX files being traded over P2P, torrents, IRC, newsgroups, Rapidshare etc etc. Every single film, tv show, documentary aired on US television is available on the Internet and it is available in XviD. And personally for me who does download this content, if the iTV supported it they'd have got my money.

I just find it ironic when you say Apple can't be seen to support pirate DVD's by supplying DivX on their machines, when every consumer electronics company that sells a DVD player already does it, including Sony, one of the major film producers.