Yeah.. but then again Apple hasn't adopted BluRay either and it's past being newer. Apple is starting to release crap when it comes to home entertainment. They simply don't get it.
Yeah... The iPad is total crap, and has absolutely no use as a home entertainment device-- except as the best (only) in class personal TV, mobile video, music, game player, etc.
...Apple is going to have a very hard time convincing a society that's so focused on 1080p at this point, that 720p is just fine.
You nailed it right on the head. It's really not about whether or not the average consumer can see the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 55" screen at 10'. It's going to be about trying to sell them on 720p when all they've been told the last few years is that 1080p was the way to go.
You are among a tiny, tiny minority who might benefit a slight amount form 1080p. But the normal consumer, of which there are millions, cannot see any difference and does not really care about crazy numbers.
That's completely incorrect, and totally off the top of your head. According to NAB, 1080p sets comprise more than 82% of all HDTV sets sold, and out-sell 720p sets 14-1. That's a big ratio.
The number of new 720p units available for sale is dwindling. Some manufacturers such as Sanyo and Sony plan to discontinue their 720p products. Others will follow suit.
Use 720p when you want something dirt cheap, or you're doing transcoding for mobile or upconverting from SD. Taking an old VHS tape or anything at 640x480 or SD PAL sizes up to 1080p doesn't buy you anything and will most likely look better at lower resolutions anyway. If this "rumor" is accurate, then Apple chose 720p because their iOS devices can't swallow 1080p. They just don't have the screen resolution and probably not the computing power. The iPad's top resolution is 1024x768.
People now know these numbers, they are part of the American lexicon. Why? Because it's TV and Americans love their TV. They may not know the reasons behind the numbers but they know 1080p is king and they know 720p is the budget brand.
It is foolish to do some simple hand waving and declare it's unimportant when in fact it is the single most important marketing feature in high definition.
People now know these numbers, they are part of the American lexicon. Why? Because it's TV and Americans love their TV. They may not know the reasons behind the numbers but they know 1080p is king and they know 720p is the budget brand.
It is foolish to do some simple hand waving and declare it's unimportant when in fact it is the single most important marketing feature in high definition.
This is the point that many seem to be overlooking.
One more thing...AppleTV never supported 1080p, so, how could it 'drop' it?
Good question.
Apple TV supports .m4v, .mp4 and .mov files at 1280 by 720 pixels at 24 fps, 960 by 540 pixels at 30 fps. In this regard, it only supports 720p.
However, it can up-convert the signal to 1080i.
- in the ATV settings it has a menu option to output at several resolutions, 1080i being one.
- my television shows 1920x1080 when it syncs with the ATV signal.
- iTunes HD purchases look surprisingly good, in some cases even better than the supposed 1080p programs on cable. Call my crazy but the 1080 upconversion seems better than my HD cable DVR.
So, Apple TV supports outputting at 1080i but only supports sources at 720p. If it maintains this, I'm OK with it (even though I'd like it to at least support 1080p for my own sources if not iTunes purchases) -- I'm a bandwidth conservationist!
But if Apple drops the upconversion, THAT will be a problem for me. I'd have to go home and experiment to refresh my memory, but I did test the 720p native vs 1080i upconverted on Apple TV and it really did seem to make a difference on my 56" set from a distance of about 10 feet (we're in a bigger house now, about 12 feet back).
There is nothing wrong with "Whatever-TV" to be able to playback both 720p for streaming, and 1080p for native content, whether internal, external drive or LAN.
Over the weekend I installed for my buddy's B-Day a small media hub like the WDLive (actually an Ellion Labo 110), a device smaller than a Mac Mini for 118,-EUR. The thing plays damn near everything you can throw at it (incl. 1080p!), through USB Stick, SD card, Network/LAN, USB Hard drive, even his Sony camera... everything.
To say the least, I/we are quite happy with this device. The funny thing about it, was that it got me to thinking about the iPad, of which I'm a huge fan, and why it doesn't have a usable USB file/document navigation. The Labo's navigation was easy, forthright, and if it came across a doc it couldn't read, it said so. No big deal.
In this sense, I guess I have to put myself on the side of the "wish-listers" for USB/SDcard on the next iPad, which I think will be seriously interesting to see how it will eventually integrate with the "Whatever-TV".
PS: "Whatever-TV" = I could care less what they call it, it should just work and help send my AAPL stock to the stratosphere
Through the $29 CCC (Camera Connection Kit) you get both USB and SD card access-- though for designated use only. I would rather see Apple do it this way than add a SD slot and USB slot to every iPad-- it helps keep the price low, the profits high and fewer holes in the iPad case (to catch cruft and water).
Said another way: I prefer the price of the iPad to be $499 than $529-- let the people who want/need the capability pay extra for it.
I do wish they allowed more general use on the card or USB port though-- maybe there will be some "made for iPad" devices in the future.
That said, the iPad is a mobile device with a long battery life-- it is antithetical to the iPad's design and purposed use to be trussed up with dongles and cables.
So basically what you're trying to say is you live in fan boy heaven....?
Get over it everyone.... 1080 is better than 720 and as far as we know apple is not going to provide the best format.... Typical apple. My xbox already does all this, better than an iTV will.
Actually, no-- I live in the real world! You?
I am a realist-- I never got to date the Prom Queen either (though a Rose Bowl Queen had a crush on me in High School).
This is a rumor:
-- we don't know if there ia an AppleTV upgrade/replacement coming soon
-- we don't know the specs of this rumored device, if/when it comes
Apple could easily (and might just well) enable the device to output 1080P-- as others have posted there are several hardware iOS alternatives that can handle 1080P.
But, then, the majority of people would not have the bandwidth to access streamed 1080P nor the devices to deliver 1080P to Apple WhateverTV box.
So then you techlitists would bitch that Apple is charging us for 1080P when it can't deliver it...
As a realist, I look at an offering: see if I can make use of it; buy it, or not... then move on-- rather that agonizing over "why didn't they" "why couldn't they".
Untrue, as far as I know. Everything transmitted to the home by air, cable or satellite (ie with only BD as an exception) is 1080i (not p) which makes a hell of a difference. The i=interlaced (ie only 25/30 1080 frames a second instead of 50/60 in the p formats) saves 50% of the bandwith and is more similar to the old SD formats. Uncompressed, the pixels per frame are:
1080p: 2,073,600
720p: 921,600
1080i: 1,036,800
Obviously, 720p is close to 1080i and neither resolution nor bandwith considerations should matter. 1080p is a different beast however, and I guess without compression that makes it useless it cannot be streamed though ordinary cable / DSL homes.
On the other hand, 720 is not common either: Only in Germany, the public broadcast stations (ARD, ZDF, third programs) were sold on 720p (again, not 1080p!) but have admitted defeat this summer and are now turning to 1080i (not p!).
If I had a choice, I would get rid of all interlaced formats ASAP because they are cause to endless troubles when viewed on progressive devices (such as any modern computer screen / TV set).
Please don't inject common sense into this thread-- it will only confuse the issue.
Yup. this is very scientific. if you have "normal" eyesight and are sitting at a "normal" viewing distance, 55" screens are required to see the difference between 720p and 1080p. Here's some real numbers [and an actual REFERENCE link]
Assuming you have perfect 20/20 vision, if you sit less than 10 feet away from a 55" 1080p signal, the video quality STARTS to appear better than that of a 55" 720p signal.
Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????
Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....
The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Not really. On my 42" probably wouldn't be noticable The difference between 1080p and an upscaled DVD is a bit more noticable, but not by much. I would say an upscaled DVD is pretty close to on par with Broadcast HD.
Everyone who is going on and on about whether Apple will support 1080p in a new box is arguing about whether it matters or not--but no one is considering the competition: The WD TV Live (Plus), the upcoming Boxee Box, and the upcoming Google device.
I have a WD TV Live ($99) that streams 1080p very well. I have a WD TV Live Plus ($119) that also streams Netflix. Neither of these boxes let you buy content online or run apps--but they do what they do very well and relatively inexpensively.
In order to make an impression, Apple has to do better than these.
Apple may be willing to break even on stripped-down hardware for $99 in order to make more strides in the market--hoping they'll make it up by selling apps/video--but that seems unlike their way of doing things. It seems more likely that they'll go for a $149 or $199 price point and deliver a much better product.
Actually, just about every HDTV sold in the last 3 years has been 1080p. As the number of HDTVs begins to accelerate, nearly all of those purchases are 1080p sets.
Consumers can tell an upscaled DVD from an HDTV broadcast if presented side by side. 720p vs. 1080p is harder but as a videophile, i want the option for 1080p. And Blu-Ray 720p recordings are almost unheard of when you can just do 1080p. I am concerned about 720p only output though since my classic Mitsubishi 65" RPTV CRT HDTV doesn't do 720p input (except from broadcast TV). It would be crushing to have to buy a cheap scaler which would still cost more than the iTV.
Otherwise, it sounds like the product I've been waiting for, especially since the current AppleTV has been lying fallow for so long. A $99 price tag if delivered is almost an impluse buy. It will allow me to finish ripping my DVD library to m4v files and just present them on a menu-based system streamed from my central server (and keep my kids from handling DVD media).
Not to mention that when HD 3D takes off it is required to have 1080p. Or it just doesn't work.
I don't see the logic of this entire thread. The AppleTV has never supported 1080p. Ever. Not when it first came out. Not after any release. Not now. It is, and always has been, a 720p only device. It can "output" 1080i (not p) but only by side-converting 720p material.
So how are they "dropping" 1080p, since they never supported it to begin with? The worst you can say is "new AppleTV remains at 720p, same as always".
This has nothing to do with whether 1080p or 720p is better or worse (of course 1080p is better, btw). Instead, it's just an inaccurate headline. AppleTV doesn't support 1080p now, and never has.
Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????
Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....
The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely agreed. As others have stated, it is a big mistake IMO not to support 1080p. Jobs doesn't want to support Blu-ray so a way around that is to support Blu-ray quality. It must support 1080p.
Those who watch TV on portable devices don't need AppleTV (or iTV). But those who watch at home on flat panels are moving towards larger and larger screens (except for apartment dwellers in large cities.)
In fact, if Apple wants to be perceived as the advanced company that it once was AND if they want to try and kill off Blu-ray, they should support 2160p and convince the studios to provide content in that format (although it might take many hours to download a movie in that format.)
I can tell the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 resolutions. Try it on your desktop computer sometime
You're talking a viewing distance of 1-2 feet. TV viewing distances are several times that and, at those distances, you do need a much larger screen to tell the difference.
Comments
Yeah.. but then again Apple hasn't adopted BluRay either and it's past being newer. Apple is starting to release crap when it comes to home entertainment. They simply don't get it.
Yeah... The iPad is total crap, and has absolutely no use as a home entertainment device-- except as the best (only) in class personal TV, mobile video, music, game player, etc.
...you get the drill!
.
...Apple is going to have a very hard time convincing a society that's so focused on 1080p at this point, that 720p is just fine.
You nailed it right on the head. It's really not about whether or not the average consumer can see the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 55" screen at 10'. It's going to be about trying to sell them on 720p when all they've been told the last few years is that 1080p was the way to go.
One more thing...AppleTV never supported 1080p, so, how could it 'drop' it?
My AppleTV has a setting for 1080p. No 1080p content, but it's got the setting for it.
You are among a tiny, tiny minority who might benefit a slight amount form 1080p. But the normal consumer, of which there are millions, cannot see any difference and does not really care about crazy numbers.
That's completely incorrect, and totally off the top of your head. According to NAB, 1080p sets comprise more than 82% of all HDTV sets sold, and out-sell 720p sets 14-1. That's a big ratio.
The number of new 720p units available for sale is dwindling. Some manufacturers such as Sanyo and Sony plan to discontinue their 720p products. Others will follow suit.
All the top rated HDTVs are 1080p.
Use 720p when you want something dirt cheap, or you're doing transcoding for mobile or upconverting from SD. Taking an old VHS tape or anything at 640x480 or SD PAL sizes up to 1080p doesn't buy you anything and will most likely look better at lower resolutions anyway. If this "rumor" is accurate, then Apple chose 720p because their iOS devices can't swallow 1080p. They just don't have the screen resolution and probably not the computing power. The iPad's top resolution is 1024x768.
People now know these numbers, they are part of the American lexicon. Why? Because it's TV and Americans love their TV. They may not know the reasons behind the numbers but they know 1080p is king and they know 720p is the budget brand.
It is foolish to do some simple hand waving and declare it's unimportant when in fact it is the single most important marketing feature in high definition.
People now know these numbers, they are part of the American lexicon. Why? Because it's TV and Americans love their TV. They may not know the reasons behind the numbers but they know 1080p is king and they know 720p is the budget brand.
It is foolish to do some simple hand waving and declare it's unimportant when in fact it is the single most important marketing feature in high definition.
This is the point that many seem to be overlooking.
One more thing...AppleTV never supported 1080p, so, how could it 'drop' it?
Good question.
Apple TV supports .m4v, .mp4 and .mov files at 1280 by 720 pixels at 24 fps, 960 by 540 pixels at 30 fps. In this regard, it only supports 720p.
However, it can up-convert the signal to 1080i.
- in the ATV settings it has a menu option to output at several resolutions, 1080i being one.
- my television shows 1920x1080 when it syncs with the ATV signal.
- iTunes HD purchases look surprisingly good, in some cases even better than the supposed 1080p programs on cable. Call my crazy but the 1080 upconversion seems better than my HD cable DVR.
So, Apple TV supports outputting at 1080i but only supports sources at 720p. If it maintains this, I'm OK with it (even though I'd like it to at least support 1080p for my own sources if not iTunes purchases) -- I'm a bandwidth conservationist!
But if Apple drops the upconversion, THAT will be a problem for me. I'd have to go home and experiment to refresh my memory, but I did test the 720p native vs 1080i upconverted on Apple TV and it really did seem to make a difference on my 56" set from a distance of about 10 feet (we're in a bigger house now, about 12 feet back).
I'm not buying: this rumor.
There is nothing wrong with "Whatever-TV" to be able to playback both 720p for streaming, and 1080p for native content, whether internal, external drive or LAN.
Over the weekend I installed for my buddy's B-Day a small media hub like the WDLive (actually an Ellion Labo 110), a device smaller than a Mac Mini for 118,-EUR. The thing plays damn near everything you can throw at it (incl. 1080p!), through USB Stick, SD card, Network/LAN, USB Hard drive, even his Sony camera... everything.
To say the least, I/we are quite happy with this device. The funny thing about it, was that it got me to thinking about the iPad, of which I'm a huge fan, and why it doesn't have a usable USB file/document navigation. The Labo's navigation was easy, forthright, and if it came across a doc it couldn't read, it said so. No big deal.
In this sense, I guess I have to put myself on the side of the "wish-listers" for USB/SDcard on the next iPad, which I think will be seriously interesting to see how it will eventually integrate with the "Whatever-TV".
PS: "Whatever-TV" = I could care less what they call it, it should just work and help send my AAPL stock to the stratosphere
Through the $29 CCC (Camera Connection Kit) you get both USB and SD card access-- though for designated use only. I would rather see Apple do it this way than add a SD slot and USB slot to every iPad-- it helps keep the price low, the profits high and fewer holes in the iPad case (to catch cruft and water).
Said another way: I prefer the price of the iPad to be $499 than $529-- let the people who want/need the capability pay extra for it.
I do wish they allowed more general use on the card or USB port though-- maybe there will be some "made for iPad" devices in the future.
That said, the iPad is a mobile device with a long battery life-- it is antithetical to the iPad's design and purposed use to be trussed up with dongles and cables.
.
So basically what you're trying to say is you live in fan boy heaven....?
Get over it everyone.... 1080 is better than 720 and as far as we know apple is not going to provide the best format.... Typical apple. My xbox already does all this, better than an iTV will.
Actually, no-- I live in the real world! You?
I am a realist-- I never got to date the Prom Queen either (though a Rose Bowl Queen had a crush on me in High School).
This is a rumor:
-- we don't know if there ia an AppleTV upgrade/replacement coming soon
-- we don't know the specs of this rumored device, if/when it comes
Apple could easily (and might just well) enable the device to output 1080P-- as others have posted there are several hardware iOS alternatives that can handle 1080P.
But, then, the majority of people would not have the bandwidth to access streamed 1080P nor the devices to deliver 1080P to Apple WhateverTV box.
So then you techlitists would bitch that Apple is charging us for 1080P when it can't deliver it...
As a realist, I look at an offering: see if I can make use of it; buy it, or not... then move on-- rather that agonizing over "why didn't they" "why couldn't they".
Best stated:
All the Woulda-Coulda-Shouldas
Layin' in the sun,
Talkin' 'bout the things
They woulda coulda shoulda done...
But those Woulda-Coulda-Shouldas
All ran away and hid
From one little Did.
-Shel Silverstein-
.
Untrue, as far as I know. Everything transmitted to the home by air, cable or satellite (ie with only BD as an exception) is 1080i (not p) which makes a hell of a difference. The i=interlaced (ie only 25/30 1080 frames a second instead of 50/60 in the p formats) saves 50% of the bandwith and is more similar to the old SD formats. Uncompressed, the pixels per frame are:
1080p: 2,073,600
720p: 921,600
1080i: 1,036,800
Obviously, 720p is close to 1080i and neither resolution nor bandwith considerations should matter. 1080p is a different beast however, and I guess without compression that makes it useless it cannot be streamed though ordinary cable / DSL homes.
On the other hand, 720 is not common either: Only in Germany, the public broadcast stations (ARD, ZDF, third programs) were sold on 720p (again, not 1080p!) but have admitted defeat this summer and are now turning to 1080i (not p!).
If I had a choice, I would get rid of all interlaced formats ASAP because they are cause to endless troubles when viewed on progressive devices (such as any modern computer screen / TV set).
Please don't inject common sense into this thread-- it will only confuse the issue.
.
Too much iNames! This is getting very old. Apple TV sounds very nice.
Yeah, okay iVLAD...
Yup. this is very scientific. if you have "normal" eyesight and are sitting at a "normal" viewing distance, 55" screens are required to see the difference between 720p and 1080p. Here's some real numbers [and an actual REFERENCE link]
Assuming you have perfect 20/20 vision, if you sit less than 10 feet away from a 55" 1080p signal, the video quality STARTS to appear better than that of a 55" 720p signal.
http://carltonbale.com/home-theater/...ter-calculator
anyways, if you don't like the RUMORED 720p limit of this RUMORED new device, wait for iTV2.
You didn't read the table correctly. Recommended viewing distance is always under the 720p viewing threshold, regardless of the screen size.
The moral of the story is - if you want to use recommended viewing distances, you need 1080p.
Never mind that itv.com, itv.co.uk and itv.eu are all registered to ITV in UK.
I don't think that will matter too much given that iphone.com, ipad.com etc don't point to Apple websites
The only thing I notice when watching a 1080p signal are the compression artifacts. 720 is fine.
I can tell the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 resolutions. Try it on your desktop computer sometime
Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????
Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....
The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Not really. On my 42" probably wouldn't be noticable The difference between 1080p and an upscaled DVD is a bit more noticable, but not by much. I would say an upscaled DVD is pretty close to on par with Broadcast HD.
I have a WD TV Live ($99) that streams 1080p very well. I have a WD TV Live Plus ($119) that also streams Netflix. Neither of these boxes let you buy content online or run apps--but they do what they do very well and relatively inexpensively.
In order to make an impression, Apple has to do better than these.
Apple may be willing to break even on stripped-down hardware for $99 in order to make more strides in the market--hoping they'll make it up by selling apps/video--but that seems unlike their way of doing things. It seems more likely that they'll go for a $149 or $199 price point and deliver a much better product.
Actually, just about every HDTV sold in the last 3 years has been 1080p. As the number of HDTVs begins to accelerate, nearly all of those purchases are 1080p sets.
Consumers can tell an upscaled DVD from an HDTV broadcast if presented side by side. 720p vs. 1080p is harder but as a videophile, i want the option for 1080p. And Blu-Ray 720p recordings are almost unheard of when you can just do 1080p. I am concerned about 720p only output though since my classic Mitsubishi 65" RPTV CRT HDTV doesn't do 720p input (except from broadcast TV). It would be crushing to have to buy a cheap scaler which would still cost more than the iTV.
Otherwise, it sounds like the product I've been waiting for, especially since the current AppleTV has been lying fallow for so long. A $99 price tag if delivered is almost an impluse buy. It will allow me to finish ripping my DVD library to m4v files and just present them on a menu-based system streamed from my central server (and keep my kids from handling DVD media).
Not to mention that when HD 3D takes off it is required to have 1080p. Or it just doesn't work.
So how are they "dropping" 1080p, since they never supported it to begin with? The worst you can say is "new AppleTV remains at 720p, same as always".
This has nothing to do with whether 1080p or 720p is better or worse (of course 1080p is better, btw). Instead, it's just an inaccurate headline. AppleTV doesn't support 1080p now, and never has.
Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????
Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....
The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely agreed. As others have stated, it is a big mistake IMO not to support 1080p. Jobs doesn't want to support Blu-ray so a way around that is to support Blu-ray quality. It must support 1080p.
Those who watch TV on portable devices don't need AppleTV (or iTV). But those who watch at home on flat panels are moving towards larger and larger screens (except for apartment dwellers in large cities.)
In fact, if Apple wants to be perceived as the advanced company that it once was AND if they want to try and kill off Blu-ray, they should support 2160p and convince the studios to provide content in that format (although it might take many hours to download a movie in that format.)
I don't see the logic of this entire thread. The AppleTV has never supported 1080p.<blah blah blah>.
Wow dude. Do you read the comments?
I can tell the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 resolutions. Try it on your desktop computer sometime
You're talking a viewing distance of 1-2 feet. TV viewing distances are several times that and, at those distances, you do need a much larger screen to tell the difference.