Apple fit with early lead in "digital living room" - Page 2

What I do is have a schedule under Energy Saver, you can tell computer to turn on at 1:55am and shut down a few minutes after the show is done. It would be nice if EyeTV can handle that work automatically though.

Like I said, the hardware is definitely capable of it (to output 5.1/6.1 on the digital output; there are only two analogue outputs), but all the information available from Apple so far suggests that only stereo is supported.

Yes, AAC supports multiple channels, I don't know about Apple Lossless but the bandwidth required would be too high anyway. It would be nice if iTunes downloads used 5.1 AAC and the ATV supported that and AC3 & DTS for DVD audio.

No "law fixing" or licensing needed. Are you familiar with Flip4Mac's Drive In application? It's been available (as beta) for a while now and the DVD forum doesn't seem to mind. If the AppleTV supported MPEG-2, CSS, region coding, AC3 and DTS (all of which is a software issue, not hardware), Apple could implement "Drive In" functionality in iTunes and allow that content to be played on the AppleTV.

You are indeed missing the point. This whole interface and box were designed to beam and store content on and around your TV, so you can pick up a little remote and watch all your media on your TV without any configuring at all, or without the need to attach your lappy to your TV. Most don't want even that small hassle, and more people own desktops too. I think and hope Apple TV is a first step for Apple. It's a decent first step, but I hope they have a whole replacement for cable using direct Internet connect and iTunes subscription iPTV service planned, I hope they see what I see here.

While I haven't done it for a long while, I know what you mean. But with HDTVs, it should be so bad(?)

But that's just what I think they should have gone for. To make a front row-ish interface for all of the excellent OSX features that we all love (safari, mail at minimum), the iTV/iTunes streaming as it is now, and a DVR. I think that a nice little Apple menu would make all of that easy to use while 10-20+ feet back, and make it the ultimate tv watching machine.

You also mentioned about torrents. But for the people that say Apple would never make a DVR or DVD player because it would cut out of their sales -- so will torrents. Same thing. But, all of those users will most likely buy new movies from time to time to get them instantly -- assuming they bought the iTV in the first place. Since most of us that have DVRs, etc that see this thing as pointless -- Apple will never even get the chance to sell us any content because their such-limited device will never even make it into our house. So it's a lose-lose situation for them. No initial $299, and no ongoing fees from us. When they could've had our iTV purchase profit, and ongoing PPV movie sales.

My cable box offers PPV already, so there's obviously no point in buying an iTV for that reason. But if I did have one, I would have used it instead of my cable's PPV almost certainly. They are never going to get me to pay $2-3 per TV episode, that's just silly. Like I also said before, for anyone that watches more than 3 shows a month on cable, and wants any type of live content (news, sports, events, etc) - you **can't** cancel your cable. Which means you'd be insane not to keep using your DVR instead of buying shows through iTV. The numbers just don't add up.

From iPod to iTunes to iPod w/ video then tv shows on iTunes followed by movies, iPhone and AppleTV: by now it should have been pretty obvious that Apple introduces new features gradually.

Those complaining that AppleTV as configured lacks a lot of things or got some things wrong (like purchase vs movie rentals): Be patient. Apple has wisely avoided doing a Windows MCE where you dump the whole complex ogre on the consumers lap and says "There, go figure it out."

AppleTV is not meant for those of us who enjoy figuring out how to install, configure, and operate consumer electronics devices.

I've made the observation before that the key to Apple's living room invasion strategy is iTunes. Millions of us already access it at a regular basis to manage our iPods. A few millions will manage their iPhones on it as well and a few more for AppleTV. The iTunes as a content and device management app will be hard to replicate by Sony, Microsoft or whomever because who wants to deal with two separate content/device management apps?

Apple Gradalism is good. If Apple incorporated all the features that are being clamoured for, AppleTV right out of the gate will be hopelessly complex. Then it will become another Windows MCE flop.

Ah, but it's not the same thing. I wasn't referring to Apple losing a few pennies from selling you a TV show, music video or movie as Apple already get the bulk of their profit from the hardware sale so they care very little about where you get your content.

I was refering to the tenuous relationship with its content providers. Despite making money hand over fist not one of them is happy to have Apple calling the shots. If it appeared that Apple was trying purposely giving customers torrent download access and a built-in DVR the content providers would be be really pissed, perhaps not even resigning their contracts or finding a legal way to terminate it. I even suspect that at least some of the contracts with Apple has has them agreeing not to include DVR functionality in their machines.

That's a non-argument for two reasons. One, if they will eventually offer all the features people want in a simple way they can do it now. The iPhone makes a complex situation and amalgamation of features easy, they could do that with Apple TV too.

What I think Apple REALLY needs to do right now is; sell an Apple TV with a bigger hard drive, bring TV Shows to Europe, start an iTunes TV Show subscription service. Then eventually later in 2007 or early 2008 build actual TV's in two or three sizes with Apple TV software and wireless technology inside them and the side-slot DVD player. Then here's the big one, they need to ALSO licence Apple TV technology (software interface and wireless iTunes tech) to other TV manufacturers so they can build the software inside and put an iTunes Ready sticker on their TV's. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME. THAT WOULD BE HUGE. THAT WOULD TAKE THE "LIVING ROOM" IMO.

With the exception of the DVD player, HP pretty much offers such a thing. As a set top box, I don't see Apple being that successful. It's really aimed at people who already have large iTunes collections and want to be able to transfer them to the T.V. It's three times the price of a good DVD player and the iTunes movies have some drawbacks compared to DVDs. There has to be major advanced in video compression technology and Apple has to license AppleTV technology to the television makers before this is anything more than a niche product.

The features that people want but iTunes audio and video does not yet support:

1. HDTV, not supported yet but supported by Apple TV at 720p. Logically Apple will update iTunes video content at some point in time to support this. Also, when technology and internet connection speeds are right Apple will logically come out with a 1080p version and gladly resell the video content to those that upgrade to the higher resolution just as Sony and others are doing with Blue Ray and HD DVD.
2. Surround sound. Probably not needed for most content that they sell to date, and support could be costly for Apple if they were to offer the ability in every version of the Free Quicktime or iTunes download. As I understand it Apple would have to pay a licensing fee to support most surround models in their hardware/software which is not economical in software that if free not just to Mac users but also to PC users. It does however make sense for Apple to add this support to Apple TV hardware which they are making money on. Then it is just a mater of adding it to the content that they are selling, probably when they upgrade that content to 720p.
3. Rental/subscription service. There is no evidence that Apple will offer it, but they could and I'm sure that they have at least discussed it internally.
4. DVR. Apple could add it, but it would be a more logical addition to the Mac that is the hub and has the software and disk space for doing this. Apple TV is only a playback device and Apple will keep it that way to keep costs down. Content creation, purchases, and storage are dependant on the Mac.
5. Support for other file formats. Apple may have a plug-in model for Apple TV, or could extend iTunes to import more formats. They could also just keep everyone dependant on other transcoding methods, some of which are faster and cost the consumer less than Quicktime Pro.

All of these and more are possible. If you look at the list the first 3 have not been necessary so far because Apple has not had Apple TV. This is especially true for the first 2. For the third to be a success they need both the consumer base to support it and the content library that will attract the consumer. I don't think that they have a large enough content library today to support a good rental business, especially if the consumer is limited to watching that video on their computer rather than on the big screen.

This is a first generation product and if they had everything that we wanted then there would be nothing to add to it for future upgrades. If you take the iPod as an example then there will be a number of these over the next year, and the device will be a lot more powerful than it is today to entice not only new users but also early adopters to upgrade the units that Apple will be shipping within the next week. There are even features that they could add with a simple software upgrade, the first of which will probably be released within the next 2 months. Adding support for other codecs through software would probably be fairly easy if this uses the Quicktime framework.

I think that if this is successful and Apple see's similar growth from it's sales that they did with the iPod it is going to force some changes in Apple's business practices in regards to distribution and format support. Apple has already getting scrutiny with the success of iTMS and the iPod around the world for audio. If they do the same with video and keep the same restrictions to 3rd party support then they are going to be running the risk of inviting anti-competative/trust lawsuits around the world. I think that at some point they are going to have to open up fair play for other companies to use or open up their hardware to 3rd parties to develop software that supports it. This will be voluntarily done or forced by the courts of one country or the other. The best thing Apple could do is license fair play once they are established enough to attract business away from WMP/DVIX and pocket a bit of money from every file sold from the other distributers as well as through their distribution channel.

Excellent post, @homenow.

I don't see them offering a rental service for Movies, but I do see them offering a subscription service for TV Shows with an certian limit to the amount of series you could subscribe to. They would need to add some free live news into the mix to give it a chance to replace a cable box.

TV Shows, news, video podcasts, Google vid and youtube. That's what we need. You still buy your music, you still buy your movies.

No, no, no. You are thinking as yourself. someone who's pretty interested in and comfortable with technology. I bet Apple already has a design manual compiled that says exactly how simple things need to be when you introduce a new product to the consumer. And furthermore, I bet that manual says that when in doubt, go for less complexity.

I mean the iPod, as simple as you think that might be, is still a challenge for most people. I have nieces right down the teenage iPod-user demographic and though they are pretty good with the standard 2 or 3 routine functions --ripping, buying from iTunes, and synching, they still need help when the thing hiccups on them.

And it's not really how complex the thing is, it's the rate at which you introduce the features. If you demand the consumer learn a lot of things in a short time, then forget it, they'll pass on the device. Here's the playbook:

1. You start out by releasing the product [AppleTV, in our case] with a really simple feature set.

2. Then give it a few months for the consumer to master the simple feature set.

3. More importantly, give it enough time for that subset of consumers who always end up helping their friends/family with their tech gadgets to learn the current feature set. The size of this subset of 'handholders' depends on how complex that feature set is. If you want more handholders (and thus more free tech support), make the feature set simpler.

4. Once the consumers are comfortable with the product you introduced, then you start adding features. Again, a little at a time, with enough time in between for the consumers to learn the new features before they need to deal with the next ones. And the features you introduce must, as much as possible, be natural extensions of the features you already have. (Notice that AppleTV itself is just an extension of the whole iTunes infrastructure feature set.)

That's what Apple has been doing and that's why Steve Jobs has 3.5 billion in his pocket you and I don't.

I love the idea of the AppleTV, but until they support 1080p and 5.1 audio, no thanks.

The DVR would be nice, but Elgato is a good add on and they seem to have a good integration to the iTunes. So, I would not mind to purchase Elgato.

I would love to see a drop in price for AppleTV. $150 to $200 would be a great price and very attractive thing for people to buy.

So, Hopefully the 2.0 version will address my wishes above.

It IS technically possible, the problem is the OK of content providers, especially movie studios like Disney, where does SJ sit on the board.. right. They could go full frontal, and provide semi legal ways of going around that but (like with the iPod) they prefer to be all open to content providers (contrary to recent lover google with youtube).

oh my, here you go again.

That's sound very intelligent. a TV with AppleTV built-in, so then in one year when Apple releases a new version of AppleTV, my whole TV set is obsolete and all the good cash I put on a great TV from Apple is down the tubes because now my AppleTV built in is not as good as the new one, but my TV still a fantastic display.
That doesn't make any sense. Unless you are expecting Apple to bring a cheap TV set with AppleTV built in, So if you replace it you don't break the bank.

Seriously, I rather pay good money for a top of the line flat HDTV monitor and buy AppleTV separately for $300 bucks and then in one year or two replace it with a new version and keep my kick ass HDTV monitor. That seems more plausible to me.

you don't understand. AppleTV is here to pave the road for future products. But the future will be not one product doing everything (MS style) but a set of products doing a couple of things very good. If you wan't everything you describe buy a Mini, a second external hard drive or something like this.

Apple TV is a way to capitalize on the iTunes-iPod success and putting your content on the most widespread electronics device, the TV-set. it's that easy, it really is.

a-Maze

I'd agree and add... need DVR functionality.

If I were paying for satellite or cable, I couldn't throw either out in favor of AppleTV yet... and there's no "discovery" for new programming.

Man, this thing has a long way to go.

You might be right, the old rental format that made Blockbuster a success was changed by NetFlix into a subscription service. The subscription service makes more with downloaded content, depending on the rules that is. There has to be a balance of conserving the providers bandwidth (which costs the provider money) and keeping the service attractive enough for the consumer to use over the rest of the offerings. Can I have 3 movies "out" at a time, are they active for a certain amount of time after I download them, can I download and watch whatever I want as long as I am a member of the service. The last is the most consumer friendly, but could be abused by the consumer with "constant" downloads to build up an on site library. Also, if Apple were to do this then they need to maintain a reason for the consumer to buy movies as well since they sell them too and the studio's are going to want to sell the movies still.

All they have to do is offer the pilot episode for free to get you "hooked" as well as rely on how people currently "discover" new series such as word of mouth.

I don't foresee Apple making a TV with the box built in. What happens if the box breaks? What happens if the TV breaks? That would be way to expensive to have as one box.

Also, Apple TV is suppose to be usable by anyone -- and most people wouldn't buy an Apple Television, myself included.

Well I do, so prepare to be surprised.


That's why they continue to sell the Apple TV box. If you have a new TV, you get the external box; if you want a new TV, you get the Apple Tele with the internal box. Also as I said Apple would probably need to license the Apple TV technology to other brands like Sony, Panny, and Pioneer etc. So people who want to go with the iTunes service but are brand loyal can stay brand loyal and still get an iTunes Ready TV, or get a non-iTunes Ready TV and buy the external box. That would pretty much cover every taste and preference.

I think Elgato products are nice, and if Apple didn't have a very specific *living room media player* coming out, then a Mac Mini + Elgato would be the way to go. But -- since Apple IS making a device specifically for my TV, it is a natural fit that anyone would want on their TV [anyone meaning people that watch more than 1-2 shows max and/or want at least some sort of live TV like news, sports...].

The main problem I have with having my Mac + Elgato + iTV is that it seems rather pointless. For one, as I said before I don't want to leave my G5 on all the time -- it sucks up way too much electricity. Having it shut down using energy saver would be ok I guess except I never know what random show I want to record until the day of when I look. That would mean I'd have to constantly be changing the energy saver shutdown time every day to make sure it's on to get my program(s). Seems like a big hassle and kind of defeats the purpose of being 'easy'. Also if I'm downstairs watching TV I don't want to think about having to go back up to restart my Mac, only to go back down to watch a show that's on my Mac [upstairs]...again, not worth the trouble day in and day out.

Another big issue is the fact that it relies on my Mac for everything. It's not a self sustaining device, it's way too tied to my Mac. With Tivo I have it set to record shows all throughout the day/night and watch/sort at my leisure. Since I work on my Mac all day long, that would mean that Elgato would always be on recording stuff and tying up considerable CPU resources. I'm not sure how efficient Elgato is at recording, but recording video/audio is no small task for a computer, and would definitely slow down hard drive access times with it constantly recording a stream of AV, and limit RAM for my normal uses. So it's really not acceptable, at least in my situation. Of course I could buy a new computer, probably a Mini, and an Elgato, and an iTV......but then I've really gained absolutely nothing over a Tivo at 2x+ the cost.

That's what the iTV should be for I think. It should do the heavy lifting and recording, and also offer the Mac tie-ins as extras. All nicely packaged up with the Apple touch.

Am I the only person that watches more than 2 TV shows? I would be lost without the ability to flip through many channels. Picking 1 show is nice if you know exactly what that *1* show is. But I normally flip through many channels to find all kinds of random stuff I'd never have seen or heard of otherwise. And before you say it....the iTMS "guide" isn't the same. All that is, is the most popular major shows. If I were to "flip" through that [I need more than a 30 second preview], I'd run through a hundred dollars per night. At least for me, buying per-episode is totally ridiculous.

I agree.

I totally see your point, tribulation.
That's why I have not got too excite about AppleTV solution as well as Elgato.
I love my dishnetwork dvr. The fact is a separate device and is not attach to my computer that I primarily use for work is a great thing.
I would love Apple to have the AppleTV as stand alone product that does everything you described, but it seems that's not the direction Apple is taking. The Mac at this time will always be the hub.
So, Meanwhile, I'll keep my DVR and satellite subscription.

I think AppleTV is a great idea but is far ahead of it's time. People are too attach to live tv and and the idea of a buying content at iTunes for a la carte shows and movies is so new, so it will take time for people to switch to that, plus on Apple's side it will take long time to provide all the content that people crave and also at better resolutions.
So, I would say most people will keep the current model for many years to come and just use AppleTV as an additional resource for their programming needs.

And we ALL know what great foresight you have. Whatever happened to leopardvision.com?*

Oh, right.

The Mac mini + Elgato + AppleTV is a waste. You could just use the Mac mini + Elgato where you'd put an AppleTV. I've gotten rid of my Mac mini in lieu of the AppleTV, which will save me some money as I use my desktop Mac s a data server. I only turn it off when updates require it.

The only current drawback is my ability to play DVDs and other formats that QT can handle via FrontRow. As I've said before, I hope to gain this ability with AppleTV shortly after its release.

That product offering is too complicated for Apple's style.


Dang Ireland. You just got TREATED.

Happy St. Patty's Day though.

If people thought DVR was better from a pc, then MS would have already owned the living room by now. DVR is best with a DVR device - 'a la Miglia.

iTV is to get the computer on the TV not to insert itself between recording and the TV. As the guy above said, people shouldn't have to keep a dual core MacBookPro on just in case you want to relisten to American Idols.

iTV will grow slowly, at the exact speed of video content on iTunes.

Buy an iTV and buy a Miglia and that is all you need. If one breaks, you can just replace it. Why put it all in one box that would put too much money in one place. As long as both can run from one remote, I'll take two boxes.

720P TV Show content is coming soon; I guarantee it, but I wouldn't hold your breath for 1080P movie content.

The way I see it is that the iTV offering is the part that doesn't offer anything. I mean really, there's nothing to it but a few cute graphics, it basically does nothing.
Stringing a long svideo cable and IR extender up 3 flights of stairs from my Mac to my TV would be about as useful -- heck at least then I'd get something worthwhile on the screen. 2 boxes, 2 remotes, why? By overly "simplifying" things, Apple has overly complicated things by adding an extremely limited box that takes up space [which is usually tight enough in a normal living room setup], and adding a dumb little remote. Unless I want to go buy yet another universal remote, I'm stuck then with Apple's mini-useless remote.

There are lots of products that can be justified with enough features or standalone functionality to hold their own as a separate device. I don't feel the iTV is one of them by any means. While the very small feature-set might be interesting to a select few, I'm overly sure that this thing will not be well received after its initial offering unless they add a DVR, lower the price drastically, or add a significant subscription based AppleCable service. Yes I know, who am I, I know nothing. Let's just wait and see how the numbers play out post-2 months release.

I agree. I hope it will be released at or soon after AppleTV is available.

I also expect that these will include subtitles for the hearing impaired that can be turned on/off. I gather this as Jobs mention that Quicktime will be getting subtitle abilities with Leopard. And, it seems logical that Apple would add support for the hearing impaired.

I will make a prediction that I think everyone would agree with, Apple will never license Apple TV technology to another manufacturer. They may at some point in time license Fair Play if they think they need to, but not the rest of it.

Firstly, the box containing the ATv could be removable, or optional. No big deal there. It doesn't preclude Apple from continuing the current version either.


Sure, most people won't buy a Mac either, should Apple cease making them?

If Apple could sell a million Tv's a year, not an impossible task, as many people WOULD buy them, and a lot of Tv's are sold around the world each year, that would be well over a billion dollars a year for them, likely over two billion. Not a small addition.

I don't think it's impossible.

I've gone through this same argument with people recently.

The metrics work if only a few shows are watched, but without Apple also offering subscriptions, there would be no way for the hundreds of inveterate channel flippers to be happy.

Same thing is true for the cost structure.

I agree totally.

Anyone have any reputable quotes/links that say Apple TV won't do 5.1??

Best reference that I know of, i.e., that it supports surround sound and more is right on the Apple site.

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.h...m=304277#faq26

Thanks so much. I have a Harmony Remote (H659) but wasn't aware that they had released a software update that now makes them compatible with intel Macs, until I read your post then visited Logitech's site to d/load the update. Thanks. Previously, I had to run the software and program the Mac using my wife's 12" Powerbook.

I also didn't know there was such a device as the HDMI switcher, b/c that's exactly what I need. I paid a lot of money for a custom home theater install but, alas, my beautiful Samsung 50" plasma only has 1 HDMI port, which my HD Tivo/DirecTv is using. With the switcher, however, I can now also connect the AppleTv via HDMi as well.

Awesome and thanks again.

YoungTurk

Yeah, I meant to upload something like this but I've not go round to it because I've been a bit busy replying to comments like this and making cups of tea