1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.
A new report says the next update to Apple TV will adopt the name iTV, while also dropping support for 1080p video output to standardize on 720p HDTV.
The iTV name change seems possible but it would cause confusion in the UK since they have an iTV channel. Maybe it would stay Apple TV in the UK? That doesn't seem likely.
Dropping 1080p doesn't seem like big a deal since the iTunes Store doesn't sell 1080p video. I've had an Apple TV from day one and didn't even know the format was supported.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.
This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.
What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
For Apple's mass market users, a cheaper device that streams easy to buy and view HDTV content makes far more sense than the current Apple TV, which requires syncing with a local iTunes system or downloadable storage for rentals.
Apple TV as it stands today DOES stream easy to buy and view HDTV content. All that's required is a one time entering of a four digit code from iTunes into the Apple TV. All my music, music videos, TV shows and movies stream without incident. I also have the option to sync photos, stream YouTube, listen to internet radio, look at friends Flicker pages. I can even stream content from a visiting friends computer through Apple TV. How is this proposed new Apple TV any different in these regards?
Perhaps what AppleInsider was trying to say is that instead of downloading music and video from the iTunes store you could stream it, therefore bypassing the wait for a download. That would be cool, but why do I need a new AppleTV to do that? Couldn't that functionality be added with a software update? I don't see what difference in hardware is required to make this possible.
This supposedly new Apple TV sounds very similar to what we have today with only slight modifications. None of which would compel me to "upgrade." Am I missing something?
All the best experts agree that under 55 inches, nobody can tell the difference.
iTV is not at all aimed at videophiles who care if the picture is 720p or 1080p. so that debate of "can you see it" is irrevlant to THIS product. it's aimed at the 95% of consumers who just want to easily get great digital stuff on their TV without fiddling with computers, DVD's (including BD), and DVR's. calling it "HD" is good enough for them.
being a hobbyist myself, i do wish Apple would include a live USB port (instead of the dead USB port on ATV) on its iTV to attach a big external drive to hold all my iTunes media files. they have to be stored someplace on a home LAN, and if they were there then it would not be necessary to have any computer running and logged in to pump them through my home A/V - or stream them to my other portable iStuff outside the home, which would be huge.
The same gripes come up every time Apple uses the 'i*' convention, and every time, it becomes a non-issue.
Branding is REALLY important, whether people like it or not. And Apple has made good use of iBrands.
This article's snippy author forgets that 'iPhone' as thought up by Cisco, was aped from the original 'i' something called the 'iMac'. Followed by iCEO and iTools also by Apple. Seems to me that Apple created this little naming hierarchy and brand, they get dibs in the court of public opinion.
Since then, Apple has built up the iTunes App Store for iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad devices but left Apple TV to sit in maintenance mode, collecting few features and never getting an official SDK of its own that would enable third parties to extend its features.
By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.
Apple's ability to rapidly muscle into the market for portable gaming could similarly be repeated by giving existing App Store developers the ability to quickly port and optimize many of their existing games to work on HDTV sets, providing a very cheap alternative to more serious console gaming devices.
If released alongside iPod touch 4 expected next month, Apple could decisively leverage the current excitement surrounding iPad to inhale lots of HDTV users during the holiday season at a time when the growth of the Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony PS3, and Nintendo Wii are all maturing.
Hmmm, Appletv er iTV is moving in on the likes of PS, Nintentdo, and X-Box 360... if Apple creates a Wii type of action pads, maybe call it, Magic Pad... darn it, name already taken. Anyway to those who said Apple was never a "gamers" computer company... welcome to the new reality!
This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.
What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.
Lots of iOS apps would be great to use with a TV. not all, but many. Games of course. and media streaming apps of many kinds. various widget kinds of things you like to check often. but even more, just web browsing. the big advantage of a TV is several people can watch it together at the same time - call it social browsing. but if you have done this with an HTPC, you know that the need to enlarge text/pages is frequent, and the iOS does this beautifully.
and then of course apps will be created just for the iTV implementation of iOS that take special advantage of a big screen TV.
as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.
I suspect dropping 1080p was forced upon Apple due to new innards not hacking it robustly. If it is not suited to certain situations, why not have both options? Does not make sense, hence my suspicions.
My 1080p SONY LCD (and 1080i Trinitron 16:9 CRT) will go hungry.
1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.
CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.
It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.
I hope the new interface/software is compatible with the previous AppleTVs. I'd like to be able to continue using it, e.g., in my basement.
On another topic, issue of naming rights is going to be more problematic than in Apple's other instances. ITV is a global product (including in the US where, for instance, The Jim Lehrer Newshour uses their reporting all the time).
As for 1080p most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and an upscaled DVD.
Yeah, just like fewer and fewer people can tell the difference between Mac OS X and Windows 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3
As it is now only small percentage of HDTV owners have 1080p. And even if Apple were to sell 1080p it wouldn't be true 1080p like Blu-Ray because of the massive size of the files.
Apple now gets to unilaterally decide what is "good enough" for consumers. This is Microsoft through and through.
Like a possessively jealous lover Steve Jobs is determined to take Apple to the grave with him.
as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.
I'm sure that solution would work fine. It does today with the Apple TV but the trouble is as successful as these devices not everyone who would buy an iTV would have an iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone. If Apple is going this route they definitely needs to create a remote that ships with the iTV so that everyone has the same access and interface.
CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.
It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.
1080i and 1080p are two very different viewing experiences on a large TV. Don't conflate the two.
Dropping 1080p on a low-cost "i" device isn't that big of a deal. Apple has a history of entering a market at the high end and then expanding to cover a broader swath of the population.
The new Mac Mini (with HDMI) can practically be thought of as the "Apple TV Pro." As long as it still exists and satisfies the needs of higher income people with ridiculously large TVs, the iTV can slot in and satisfy most people. Think of the iTV like an "iPod Mini" and you're on the right track.
It also makes sense for Apple to introduce a lower cost living room device to preemptively defend it's extremely lucrative iTunes franchise against the likes of Amazon, which already streams movies and TV shows to many people's set-top boxes and Blu-Ray players. (I'm a die-hard Mac and iPhone user, but I've stopped buying/renting video from iTunes because, with Amazon, I can buy a video once and then watch it on my Mac or on my TV with the $150 Sony BD player I have and could afford vs. the $600 Mac Mini with HDMI I would prefer but couldn't justify.)
Price an iTV at $99 or $149 and a lot of people like me will come back to the iTunes fold for buying/renting movies and TV episodes.
Assuming this rumor is correct, I consider the omission of 1080p to be a mistake. I want to connect it to a projector using an Elite Screen @ 108x144. Surely I can't be the only one.
Comments
1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.
No, it means that you sit too close to the TV. We're talking about normal viewing distances.
Define "normal"
A new report says the next update to Apple TV will adopt the name iTV, while also dropping support for 1080p video output to standardize on 720p HDTV.
The iTV name change seems possible but it would cause confusion in the UK since they have an iTV channel. Maybe it would stay Apple TV in the UK? That doesn't seem likely.
Dropping 1080p doesn't seem like big a deal since the iTunes Store doesn't sell 1080p video. I've had an Apple TV from day one and didn't even know the format was supported.
By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.
This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.
What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.
For Apple's mass market users, a cheaper device that streams easy to buy and view HDTV content makes far more sense than the current Apple TV, which requires syncing with a local iTunes system or downloadable storage for rentals.
Apple TV as it stands today DOES stream easy to buy and view HDTV content. All that's required is a one time entering of a four digit code from iTunes into the Apple TV. All my music, music videos, TV shows and movies stream without incident. I also have the option to sync photos, stream YouTube, listen to internet radio, look at friends Flicker pages. I can even stream content from a visiting friends computer through Apple TV. How is this proposed new Apple TV any different in these regards?
Perhaps what AppleInsider was trying to say is that instead of downloading music and video from the iTunes store you could stream it, therefore bypassing the wait for a download. That would be cool, but why do I need a new AppleTV to do that? Couldn't that functionality be added with a software update? I don't see what difference in hardware is required to make this possible.
This supposedly new Apple TV sounds very similar to what we have today with only slight modifications. None of which would compel me to "upgrade." Am I missing something?
Yep. Nobody can really see 1080p except for a tiny, tiny percentage who have gigantic tv sets.
Apple is smart to get rid of the useless 1080p frmat.
Useless 1080P format? You are such a loser. Go ahead and enjoy your sub par quality video's while the rest of us bask in full 1080p greatness...
ITV is not copyrighted in the United States. sorry.
Yes, it is. Remember that many ITV programmes end up on US television so they have a US presence.
No matter what it's called, I love my Apple TV. If the new one costs $99, I'll buy one for every TV in the house.
Daniel. Just wondering if one would be able to connect to a new iTV for FaceTime calling. Perhaps not everybody would be into it at
the start. But I think it would be a great Home phone, just to stay in
touch with the most important people in our life.
It would also be great if Apple could offer it up as a WiFi Hotspot
upgrade.
I've posted about iTV with FaceTime few weeks ago. I think it will happen. I think we will see FaceTime in many Apple products.
All the best experts agree that under 55 inches, nobody can tell the difference.
iTV is not at all aimed at videophiles who care if the picture is 720p or 1080p. so that debate of "can you see it" is irrevlant to THIS product. it's aimed at the 95% of consumers who just want to easily get great digital stuff on their TV without fiddling with computers, DVD's (including BD), and DVR's. calling it "HD" is good enough for them.
being a hobbyist myself, i do wish Apple would include a live USB port (instead of the dead USB port on ATV) on its iTV to attach a big external drive to hold all my iTunes media files. they have to be stored someplace on a home LAN, and if they were there then it would not be necessary to have any computer running and logged in to pump them through my home A/V - or stream them to my other portable iStuff outside the home, which would be huge.
The same gripes come up every time Apple uses the 'i*' convention, and every time, it becomes a non-issue.
Branding is REALLY important, whether people like it or not. And Apple has made good use of iBrands.
This article's snippy author forgets that 'iPhone' as thought up by Cisco, was aped from the original 'i' something called the 'iMac'. Followed by iCEO and iTools also by Apple. Seems to me that Apple created this little naming hierarchy and brand, they get dibs in the court of public opinion.
Kicking apps
Since then, Apple has built up the iTunes App Store for iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad devices but left Apple TV to sit in maintenance mode, collecting few features and never getting an official SDK of its own that would enable third parties to extend its features.
By converting Apple TV into an iOS device, the company could erect a third new wing of apps in iTunes. The popularity of iPad (which has collected a portfolio of over 20,000 apps in just a few months) suggests tremendous potential for a TV-oriented iOS product.
Apple's ability to rapidly muscle into the market for portable gaming could similarly be repeated by giving existing App Store developers the ability to quickly port and optimize many of their existing games to work on HDTV sets, providing a very cheap alternative to more serious console gaming devices.
If released alongside iPod touch 4 expected next month, Apple could decisively leverage the current excitement surrounding iPad to inhale lots of HDTV users during the holiday season at a time when the growth of the Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony PS3, and Nintendo Wii are all maturing.
Hmmm, Appletv er iTV is moving in on the likes of PS, Nintentdo, and X-Box 360... if Apple creates a Wii type of action pads, maybe call it, Magic Pad... darn it, name already taken. Anyway to those who said Apple was never a "gamers" computer company... welcome to the new reality!
This makes no sense to me. None. Why would I want iOS apps on my television? Photo editing, RSS readers, fart games, social networking are all things I do while watching TV not instead of it.
What would be the interface? Is Apple going to release a new remote along with the new Apple TV? Certainly the current remote is incapable of running all but the most basic of iOS apps and even fewer in a comfortable manner. iOS apps are popular because they are portable and designed for short bursts. Maybe Apple wants to change that, but it's unproven territory.
Lots of iOS apps would be great to use with a TV. not all, but many. Games of course. and media streaming apps of many kinds. various widget kinds of things you like to check often. but even more, just web browsing. the big advantage of a TV is several people can watch it together at the same time - call it social browsing. but if you have done this with an HTPC, you know that the need to enlarge text/pages is frequent, and the iOS does this beautifully.
and then of course apps will be created just for the iTV implementation of iOS that take special advantage of a big screen TV.
as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.
My 1080p SONY LCD (and 1080i Trinitron 16:9 CRT) will go hungry.
Almost all HD broadcasters broadcast at 720p...
1080p is cool and all for sure. But I don't think it's that big a deal until until everyone is on 1080p. I can't even tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on HDTVs under 60". A lot of people seem to be caught up on higher numbers.
CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.
It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.
On another topic, issue of naming rights is going to be more problematic than in Apple's other instances. ITV is a global product (including in the US where, for instance, The Jim Lehrer Newshour uses their reporting all the time).
As for 1080p most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and an upscaled DVD.
Yeah, just like fewer and fewer people can tell the difference between Mac OS X and Windows 7.
As it is now only small percentage of HDTV owners have 1080p. And even if Apple were to sell 1080p it wouldn't be true 1080p like Blu-Ray because of the massive size of the files.
Apple now gets to unilaterally decide what is "good enough" for consumers. This is Microsoft through and through.
Like a possessively jealous lover Steve Jobs is determined to take Apple to the grave with him.
R.I.P. OFF
as to the remote, why not an iPhone/iPad/touch? seems pretty straightforward, that.
I'm sure that solution would work fine. It does today with the Apple TV but the trouble is as successful as these devices not everyone who would buy an iTV would have an iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone. If Apple is going this route they definitely needs to create a remote that ships with the iTV so that everyone has the same access and interface.
CBS, NBC, PBS, Discovery HD is 1080i. ABC, Fox, ESPN HD is 720p.
It may be true that many people cannot tell between 720 and 1080 but given a choice I buy 1080 (Blu-ray) over 720 (AppleTV) because 1080 is bigger than 720. I own both AppleTV and Blu-ray, and the picture quality is close but it just feels good buying a higher resolution movie, especially considering how cheap many of the Blu-ray movies are on Amazon.
1080i and 1080p are two very different viewing experiences on a large TV. Don't conflate the two.
The new Mac Mini (with HDMI) can practically be thought of as the "Apple TV Pro." As long as it still exists and satisfies the needs of higher income people with ridiculously large TVs, the iTV can slot in and satisfy most people. Think of the iTV like an "iPod Mini" and you're on the right track.
It also makes sense for Apple to introduce a lower cost living room device to preemptively defend it's extremely lucrative iTunes franchise against the likes of Amazon, which already streams movies and TV shows to many people's set-top boxes and Blu-Ray players. (I'm a die-hard Mac and iPhone user, but I've stopped buying/renting video from iTunes because, with Amazon, I can buy a video once and then watch it on my Mac or on my TV with the $150 Sony BD player I have and could afford vs. the $600 Mac Mini with HDMI I would prefer but couldn't justify.)
Price an iTV at $99 or $149 and a lot of people like me will come back to the iTunes fold for buying/renting movies and TV episodes.
Yeah, just like fewer and fewer people can tell the difference between Mac OS X and Windows 7
I use both in my office and I can unequivocally say that W7 is pathetic. Its only saving grace is that it uses less space than XP.