Do you think there is any remote possibility that the new upcoming Apple cloud may be related to this. Perhaps each user has the ability to store shows they want there rather than on a local drive freeing up the hardware to streaming only. In reality no storage space is used as such since the shows you 'store (by which I mean 'record' or 'tivo' if you will) are pointers only. When you go to watch the list you set up they are simply streamed to you as your own personal recordings.
I think the WAN cloud is great for a mobile device, but for something like the AppleTV that would be in the home I think a LAN cloud is better. Have it pull your data from an Apple Home Server, Time Capsule or your Mac. It?s faster and simpler.
Now, if Apple has a game plan for replacing your cable TV with subscriptions then a WAN cloud would have to be in play, but for your own data local is still the most viable option.
My deep hope is that Apple is following Dropbox/Amazon S3 on the way data is stored. They already do this for their TimeMachine sparse bundles so it shouldn?t be a big jump for Apple to do the same.
I moved to Silicon Valley (Saratoga) in June of 1973. I worked for the IBM Palo Alto Systems Center on Page Mill Road-- across the street from HP, down the street from CMos, Commodore, Fairchild Semi, Xerox Parc, etc.
There were 4 computer stores in the area (1974-1978): Byte Shop Palo Alto (Bob Moody); ComputerLand Los Altos (Sarkus Kasugian); Byte Shop Mountain View (Boyd something); Recreational Computing Sunnyvale (Tom Vander something. Later A ComputerLand San Jose.
Working for IBM, a friend and I took long lunch walks down and up El Camino. We discovered microcomputers-- Pets, Apple 1, Cromemcos, etc. I was enthralled. Bought my Apple ][ in June 1978 and (with two partners) opened Computer, Plus Inc. Sunnyvale CA. in December 1978. Sold the stores and retired in 1989.
In all that time I never heard of the "Micral N".
Everyone I knew (including Woz, Jim Warren, John Draper) and other pioneers considered the Altair as the defining moment in microcomputers.
I am sure there were lots of concurrent systems being built/sold, but the Altair was the Model T -- it made the microcomputer popular.
.
Wow you were there where it all happened ... so cool. I was following along in the UK a few years later and opened an Apple ][ business reselling via the then only Apple importer run by Mike Brewer and his brother, Microsence I think was the name. The late 1970's were fun times to be involved for sure. I was over in the States every chance I could to breath in the rarified micro computing air. I brought back a first edition IBM PC and will never forget the sound of those floppy disk drives lol.
You know what I think? That it's not such a good strategy to making such declarations even before launching the product. It grows the expectations, but what if the product isnt actually that much of a game changer?!
Steve never releases a new product unless and until it will be a game changer.
Not even close. Some might argue that the Altair 8800 was the first personal computer (it appeared in the January 1975 issue of Popular Science -- this was before the 6502 used in the Apple I was even created). However, there were various 8008 kits you could buy before that (circa 1974). Some might even argue that the first "personal" computers were PDP-8 systems, as several well-off enthusiasts had these machines sitting at home prior to the microcomputer explosion.
The Apple I appeared in the middle of a bunch of microcomputer system introductions. About the only thing really unique about the Apple I (other than its $666 price tag) was the fact that it incorporated on-board video. The Apple II, which followed shortly thereafter, introduced on-board bit-mapped color graphics that could connect to a TV set (quite rare at the time).
I think the WAN cloud is great for a mobile device, but for something like the AppleTV that would be in the home I think a LAN cloud is better. Have it pull your data from an Apple Home Server, Time Capsule or your Mac. It?s faster and simpler.
Now, if Apple has a game plan for replacing your cable TV with subscriptions then a WAN cloud would have to be in play, but for your own data local is still the most viable option.
My deep hope is that Apple is following Dropbox/Amazon S3 on the way data is stored. They already do this for their TimeMachine sparse bundles so it shouldn?t be a big jump for Apple to do the same.
What's your take on VDSL appearing and making the WAN useable for actual content?
I've long heard the arguments "I'll be interested when Apple TV does [something that another component already does]."
Why do you need your Apple TV to be a DVR, Blu-ray player, video game console or OTA tuner? The whole "one machine to rule them all" approach doesn't work and you know it. Equally as tired is the whole argument that you don't want another remote. So let me get this straight: Instead of holding a remote specifically designed for the component you're operating, you want to have an expensive confusing remote with 200 buttons? Or a backlit color touchscreen with menus that you must peruse?
It is frustrating trying to describe the Apple TV to somebody who has never used one. This is because it doesn't do what anything in their TV cabinet already does, and people have a hard time understanding something if it doesn't directly replace something else. The best thing I've come up with: It's an iPod for your TV with iTunes Store built in.
I agree with the argument that people do not want to "own" their TV shows, much less pay $1.99 per episode. But what is the alternative? You want to pay a monthly fee just to have those shows pass you by? Or you want to "rent" them so that you must download them all the same, yet then they become unauthorized at some arbitrary point in the future? Buying them and keeping them on your own media isn't attractive but it is much more attractive than the alternatives.
Apple TV allows me to purchase shows from a catalog for instant viewing, without commercials, on a pay-as-I-go basis. This is great for those of us who were frustrated paying $130/mo for Cable TV only to find that we go days without watching it and then, when we do want to watch it, nothing's on.
Goodbye monthly cable bill. You have just been replaced by an equally expensive monthly Internet bill.
Exactly. I've been saying this for the past 10 years but streaming content is NOT going to replace TV anytime in the near future. You'll just pay more for the bandwidth and the quality won't be as good. I mean, why get a beautiful new 1080p TV and feed it only 720p content? That makes absolutely no sense.
Exactly. I've been saying this for the past 10 years but streaming content is NOT going to replace TV anytime in the near future. You'll just pay more for the bandwidth and the quality won't be as good. I mean, why get a beautiful new 1080p TV and feed it only 720p content? That makes absolutely no sense.
I really do hope these iTV rumors don't pan out.
it pretty much already has been replaced if you are young. kids watch more streaming media than tv nowadays. only old people are glued to the tv.
For the last few weeks, my modem needs to be reset whenever I'm not using it for more than a couple hours. I can just imagine trying to stream all my TV shows with that type of reliability (Time Warner). No thanks.
It is a great boom box and works with all iPhones.
We use it infrequently -- mainly outdoor parties.
Once, the neighbor over the back fence was jamming his amateur band for the second weekend in a row (10 AM til 11 PM). They only knew 2 songs. We asked nicely... called the cops... no relief.
Mmmm....
I got on iTunes, downloaded some Circus marches and Fanfares....
Set the iPad Hi-Fi on the back patio and fired her up at full volume...
After a minut or so, I turned it off....
Silence... except for the clapping of nearby neighbors.
So, while not a game changer... it certainly was a rehearsal changer!
it pretty much already has been replaced if you are young. kids watch more streaming media than tv nowadays. only old people are glued to the tv.
I don't have any kids so I can't say that for sure, but I find that hard to believe. Sure, they may do that sometimes on their laptops but most of them are not streaming anything to the TV. I base that on what I hear from most other parents and just because most teens do not have that much money to spend on the necessary devices.
Actually, also a "game changer" in the sense that when it came out no one did stuff like this, and now the most popular way to share iPods outside of sharing earbuds is to plug one into the top of some mini stereo system like this.
So while the product failed, the concept was ahead of it's time and caught on like wildfire (a few years later), actually.
Comments
I simply asked the poster to say which industry SJ invented.
The MODERN telephone industry.
The MODERN music industry.
The MODERN book publishing industry.
The MODERN magazine publishing industry.
And now, the MODERN TV industry.
Do you think there is any remote possibility that the new upcoming Apple cloud may be related to this. Perhaps each user has the ability to store shows they want there rather than on a local drive freeing up the hardware to streaming only. In reality no storage space is used as such since the shows you 'store (by which I mean 'record' or 'tivo' if you will) are pointers only. When you go to watch the list you set up they are simply streamed to you as your own personal recordings.
I think the WAN cloud is great for a mobile device, but for something like the AppleTV that would be in the home I think a LAN cloud is better. Have it pull your data from an Apple Home Server, Time Capsule or your Mac. It?s faster and simpler.
Now, if Apple has a game plan for replacing your cable TV with subscriptions then a WAN cloud would have to be in play, but for your own data local is still the most viable option.
My deep hope is that Apple is following Dropbox/Amazon S3 on the way data is stored. They already do this for their TimeMachine sparse bundles so it shouldn?t be a big jump for Apple to do the same.
Interesting...
I moved to Silicon Valley (Saratoga) in June of 1973. I worked for the IBM Palo Alto Systems Center on Page Mill Road-- across the street from HP, down the street from CMos, Commodore, Fairchild Semi, Xerox Parc, etc.
There were 4 computer stores in the area (1974-1978): Byte Shop Palo Alto (Bob Moody); ComputerLand Los Altos (Sarkus Kasugian); Byte Shop Mountain View (Boyd something); Recreational Computing Sunnyvale (Tom Vander something. Later A ComputerLand San Jose.
Working for IBM, a friend and I took long lunch walks down and up El Camino. We discovered microcomputers-- Pets, Apple 1, Cromemcos, etc. I was enthralled. Bought my Apple ][ in June 1978 and (with two partners) opened Computer, Plus Inc. Sunnyvale CA. in December 1978. Sold the stores and retired in 1989.
In all that time I never heard of the "Micral N".
Everyone I knew (including Woz, Jim Warren, John Draper) and other pioneers considered the Altair as the defining moment in microcomputers.
I am sure there were lots of concurrent systems being built/sold, but the Altair was the Model T -- it made the microcomputer popular.
.
Wow you were there where it all happened ... so cool. I was following along in the UK a few years later and opened an Apple ][ business reselling via the then only Apple importer run by Mike Brewer and his brother, Microsence I think was the name. The late 1970's were fun times to be involved for sure. I was over in the States every chance I could to breath in the rarified micro computing air. I brought back a first edition IBM PC and will never forget the sound of those floppy disk drives lol.
You know what I think? That it's not such a good strategy to making such declarations even before launching the product. It grows the expectations, but what if the product isnt actually that much of a game changer?!
Steve never releases a new product unless and until it will be a game changer.
Well, since Henry Ford did not invent the production line de novo, your argument would fall a bit short of being convincing, based on your criteria.
It is all too common for people to make factual assertions that are incorrect.
You hear it all the time. Most Europeans think that Marconi invented the radio.
Steve never releases a new product unless and until it will be a game changer.
Never truer words said ...
the frist personal computer was the Apple 1
Not even close. Some might argue that the Altair 8800 was the first personal computer (it appeared in the January 1975 issue of Popular Science -- this was before the 6502 used in the Apple I was even created). However, there were various 8008 kits you could buy before that (circa 1974). Some might even argue that the first "personal" computers were PDP-8 systems, as several well-off enthusiasts had these machines sitting at home prior to the microcomputer explosion.
The Apple I appeared in the middle of a bunch of microcomputer system introductions. About the only thing really unique about the Apple I (other than its $666 price tag) was the fact that it incorporated on-board video. The Apple II, which followed shortly thereafter, introduced on-board bit-mapped color graphics that could connect to a TV set (quite rare at the time).
I think the WAN cloud is great for a mobile device, but for something like the AppleTV that would be in the home I think a LAN cloud is better. Have it pull your data from an Apple Home Server, Time Capsule or your Mac. It?s faster and simpler.
Now, if Apple has a game plan for replacing your cable TV with subscriptions then a WAN cloud would have to be in play, but for your own data local is still the most viable option.
My deep hope is that Apple is following Dropbox/Amazon S3 on the way data is stored. They already do this for their TimeMachine sparse bundles so it shouldn?t be a big jump for Apple to do the same.
What's your take on VDSL appearing and making the WAN useable for actual content?
I've long heard the arguments "I'll be interested when Apple TV does [something that another component already does]."
Why do you need your Apple TV to be a DVR, Blu-ray player, video game console or OTA tuner? The whole "one machine to rule them all" approach doesn't work and you know it. Equally as tired is the whole argument that you don't want another remote. So let me get this straight: Instead of holding a remote specifically designed for the component you're operating, you want to have an expensive confusing remote with 200 buttons? Or a backlit color touchscreen with menus that you must peruse?
It is frustrating trying to describe the Apple TV to somebody who has never used one. This is because it doesn't do what anything in their TV cabinet already does, and people have a hard time understanding something if it doesn't directly replace something else. The best thing I've come up with: It's an iPod for your TV with iTunes Store built in.
I agree with the argument that people do not want to "own" their TV shows, much less pay $1.99 per episode. But what is the alternative? You want to pay a monthly fee just to have those shows pass you by? Or you want to "rent" them so that you must download them all the same, yet then they become unauthorized at some arbitrary point in the future? Buying them and keeping them on your own media isn't attractive but it is much more attractive than the alternatives.
Apple TV allows me to purchase shows from a catalog for instant viewing, without commercials, on a pay-as-I-go basis. This is great for those of us who were frustrated paying $130/mo for Cable TV only to find that we go days without watching it and then, when we do want to watch it, nothing's on.
Are you suggesting you don't understand the difference between "preferred" and "sole"?
yes. that's exactly it. i'm suggesting i'm a friggin idiot. durrr duhh dee doo.
(it was a bait and switch reference)
Goodbye monthly cable bill. You have just been replaced by an equally expensive monthly Internet bill.
Exactly. I've been saying this for the past 10 years but streaming content is NOT going to replace TV anytime in the near future. You'll just pay more for the bandwidth and the quality won't be as good. I mean, why get a beautiful new 1080p TV and feed it only 720p content? That makes absolutely no sense.
I really do hope these iTV rumors don't pan out.
Exactly. I've been saying this for the past 10 years but streaming content is NOT going to replace TV anytime in the near future. You'll just pay more for the bandwidth and the quality won't be as good. I mean, why get a beautiful new 1080p TV and feed it only 720p content? That makes absolutely no sense.
I really do hope these iTV rumors don't pan out.
it pretty much already has been replaced if you are young. kids watch more streaming media than tv nowadays. only old people are glued to the tv.
Steve never releases a new product unless and until it will be a game changer.
I have an iPod Hi-Fi that proves you are wrong...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Hi-Fi
It is a great boom box and works with all iPhones.
We use it infrequently -- mainly outdoor parties.
Once, the neighbor over the back fence was jamming his amateur band for the second weekend in a row (10 AM til 11 PM). They only knew 2 songs. We asked nicely... called the cops... no relief.
Mmmm....
I got on iTunes, downloaded some Circus marches and Fanfares....
Set the iPad Hi-Fi on the back patio and fired her up at full volume...
After a minut or so, I turned it off....
Silence... except for the clapping of nearby neighbors.
So, while not a game changer... it certainly was a rehearsal changer!
.
it pretty much already has been replaced if you are young. kids watch more streaming media than tv nowadays. only old people are glued to the tv.
I don't have any kids so I can't say that for sure, but I find that hard to believe. Sure, they may do that sometimes on their laptops but most of them are not streaming anything to the TV. I base that on what I hear from most other parents and just because most teens do not have that much money to spend on the necessary devices.
it pretty much already has been replaced if you are young. kids watch more streaming media than tv nowadays. only old people are glued to the tv.
Oh, you mean people with half a brain?
I have an iPod Hi-Fi that proves you are wrong...
Actually, also a "game changer" in the sense that when it came out no one did stuff like this, and now the most popular way to share iPods outside of sharing earbuds is to plug one into the top of some mini stereo system like this.
So while the product failed, the concept was ahead of it's time and caught on like wildfire (a few years later), actually.
When the rumor comes from Kevin Rose? Knowing his track record, I'd much rather wait and see.
This is the same Kevin Rose that said the original iPhone would be on all carriers and would come with a slide-out keyboard if I'm not mistaken.
He said market not industry.. Just coz a certain device exist doesn't mean there's a market for it.
That makes no sense. If there's a device and/or service being purchased by consumers no matter how small the amount there's a market for it.