Jobs knows what he's doing. And no, Blu-Ray is not thriving. Search "blu-ray poor sales" on Google.
What is that meant to mean? You can search for anything, that doesn't mean you will find anything relevant. All the results from that search are two years old. Blu-ray sales are continuing to increase, what isn't thriving is your thoughts of blu-ray, not blu-ray itself.
For starters, The AppleTV doesn't use FrontRow, that is only on Mac OS X. I don't understand why you'd jump from the AppleTV to the Mac so I'm going to ignore that and assume you were referring to BackRow.
Doesn't AppleTV have an interface that is 90% like Front Row, even if it might not be called that on the AppleTV?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
What about all the stuff you *can't* get on cable though?
What about programs from other countries that we currently can't access without super-expensive equipment?
What about programs that are tailored to what a smaller set of viewers want, instead of just a lot of dreck that the masses find acceptable?
In many ways the argument for Internet TV is the same as the original argument for podcasting. For instance I recently got cable TV after living without it for ten years or so, and it's all shite to me. Endless re-runs of junk like Family guy and the Simpsons. MASH and Barney Miller over and over and over again. I wouldn't *choose* to watch any of that if it wasn't streaming into my living room. With podcasting and Internet TV stations, the information can be tailored to the audience.
Isn't it better to pick and choose what you want to watch and when you are going to watch it?
It's basically a choice between a big pipe full of crap vs. a smaller pipe with just what you want to watch.
That's a great concept, but if the content owners aren't selling it to Apple or distributing it by podcast, then you're still SOL. Big pipe, small pipe, plenty of media just isn't going to be made conveniently available except through illegal means. So no, I don't expect Apple to be able to upturn the video industry's reluctance to allow internet distribution in a timely manner.
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?!
Well, this topic has certainly kicked off. I doubt anyone will read this post, languishing as it will on page 6 or 7... Anyway, here's my £0.0129 (approx 2 cents at time of writing!). And I say this as a current ATV owner, who has previously owned (endured) a Win Media Centre (Vista, as it goes). I also subscribe to an HD satellite service (not too much cable in the UK), and have a fairly ancient now Sharp LCD TV (must be getting on for about 7 years old now, HDCP compliant DVI-D input only and only 720p capable).
I think rather than worrying about whether an ATV should have a DVR and/or Blu-Ray/DVD/whatever drive built in, we should focus on the what people want to consume -- TV programmes, films, and photos predominantly. If it can also play music, YouTube and at a pinch, surf the web, then even better.
At the moment, to fit in with people's lifestyles, that generally means getting a PVR to record and playback shows. However, if all the viewing you want to do is via video on demand, then there's no need to record anything. It's there and available anyway.
Most of the TV I watch is from the likes of the BBC and Channel 4 in the UK. My wife tends to watch a lot of the police/medical dramas from the US (House, CSI somewhere, etc.). Pretty much everything we watch is also available on iTunes (we often use iTunes as a backup for failed PVR recordings). At the moment, the price of individual programmes doesn't make it economically viable to ditch the satellite TV. However, if Apple were to offer TV show rental or sensibly priced 'season passes', then I'd be interested.
The next problem I have is knowing what to watch. On TV you get trailers and the like, and much as I hate to admit it, they're a good source of discovery. With a la carte programming, this may be difficult. However, here's where Apple's Genius feature comes in -- iTunes can recommend viewing based upon your previous viewing.
The other snag with iTunes is that all the free to air BBC and Channel 4 content costs money. BBC stuff is generally free to view via the iPlayer (which works fantastically well via the iPad), so commercially I see no reason for them not to extend this to iTunes if it can be technically achieved (I assume the BBC would need the necessary reporting back from Apple, and location restrictions to stop it being viewed for free outside of the UK -- on account of their current licensing arrangements). Channel 4 (mostly ad funded) can re-insert targeted adverts using iAds. More free to me content. Splendid.
The final hurdle is my films (let's assume the current iTunes model for films covers off the Blockbuster/Amazon/Netflicks use cases). As a long time media centre user, all my films are ripped to a large external disc (handily, I chose MPEG4 video from the outset -- phew). At the moment, I can view this from my ATV only when my MacBook Pro is on and running iTunes. This is a bit of a hassle. The ATV needs to be able to stream directly from Airport Disc (or at least appear to -- I'm happy for my iTunes account to be aware of the video and music content I own, and actually stream the stuff direct from the NC data centre. The key thing is that it appears to be coming from my own personal storage).
Photos can be streamed from my Mac, other iDevice, MobileMe, Flickr, where ever. Job done.
YouTube. Great. Same as the current ATV.
Opening up the App Store to the ATV will also be a great way of getting new content on there -- think Hulu, games, etc. Browsing the web on a TV is generally a pretty horrible experience, so I wouldn't be surprised if the ATV didn't ship with Safari. The WebKit framework however will be there to render web content 'channels' such as Hulu, iPlayer, and maybe NetFlix.
The final part is extending the usefulness of the ATV using an iPad or iPhone (or Touch) as a wifi controller. The Remote app that currently controls the ATV is pretty good; but I can see this being extended into something fantastic.
The only really issue I see (and has been pointed out by others) is getting live news and events (such as sports). This is very achievable technically, and indeed, I already do it on my iPad (via the iPad TV Catchup website -- http://www.tvcatchup.com/ipad.html). Apps could also be made available via the rights holders. So, technically it's achievable, commercially maybe a few hurdles. On the basis that I've stopped paying my Satellite provider for sports (it was getting stupidly expensive), I'm okay with the free to air alternatives. YMMV.
The final question is: will this be available on the existing ATV? Well, despite the fact that the current set up is Tiger based, and runs on top of x86 hardware, my understanding is that the iOS UI is sufficiently abstracted from the kernel and hardware as to make this theoretically possible. If the new ATV really is $99 (£79 to £89 inc VAT? Please Apple!), then I think the effort to do this, versus people's willingness to just buy a new device will weigh in favour of the new ATV software not being available for the old ATV.
@RichyS - Excellent and thoughtful description. Although the details of content distribution affecting you in the U.K. are quite different from the U.S., it does underscore a common point that Steve Jobs made this spring at the All Things Digital D8 conference - television is balkanized.
If there were a single, technological solution to the Gordian knot of the competing interests involved in content creation, ownership, licensing and distribution, Apple and Jobs would be the likely sword wielders who could slice that knot apart. Unfortunately, the competing interests are powered by greed and fear for their very survival. They aren't about to be brought into agreement easily.
If a new device from Apple doesn't measure up to all of our most hopeful expectations, don't be too disappointed or blame Apple. Strolling through the television junkyard and sorting things out is still - as Jobs puts it - a hobby.
... A related additional thought: The question has been at been at the back of my mind for months - why would Apple drop $1 billion into a cloud computing complex in North Carolina when there are dozens of other companies that could do the same thing? Now it's struck me. Apple doesn't plan to do the same thing. The future television user experience will have to stand on two legs - a new Apple TV device (iTV) with advanced viewing management capability AND a content manager/distributor who can unify and organize the creative material. The North Carolina site brings under Apple's roof the hardware capability to keep their proprietary distribution plan under wraps and in tight control.
Kevin Rose is wrong most of the time. Else we'd have had an iPhone with two batteries (his prediction for the 2G) and we'd have front facing cameras on most iDevices for the last 3 years. What he does is talk to a lot of people, chinese whispers ocurr and he then passes it off as first hand "news". He has been right, maybe 3 out of the last 10 predisction he's made. Plus, cut and paste was touted by him for both iPhone OS 2.0 and 3.0, so he proves the point - anyone can make the same guess until it happens.
I truely hope it is not called the iTV, else the poop will be hitting the spinny air cooling device. What American readers seem to miss is, ITV is not about money - they wouldn't likely be allowed to sell their name. It just really is not going to happen. Steve Jobs could write them a multi billion dollar cheque, but if they are not allowed to accept it by the ITC, they are not allowed to accept it. It would be way complicated, parliment would get involved - it would cause a big stink.
Man, I can't wait to see what RealRacing HD and Madden NFL look like on my Samsung.
I can answer that, they'll look like Playstation 1 games at best.
Compare some screen shots of Real Racing (which is a fun game for sure, but graphically a very simple one) to Gran Turismo 5. The difference is akin to going from VHS to blu-ray.
Care to name a "personal" computer that was marketed as such before apple?
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking
Flash based music players existed with the iPod
Yup (not that the first iPad was flash based), but apple redefined the landscape and made them mainstream and were the first to integrate them with an online music store[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking
Cell phones existed before the iPhone
Yes they did, but Apple produced the first mainstream "smart" phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking
Tablets existed before the iPad
Yes, they did, but the iPod is not marketed as a tablet computer, different name, different functions, different customer base, new product type.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking
App stores existed before iTunes
There was no app store integrated with hardware devices from the same manufacturer before the iPod/iTunes
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking
So what new industry dud SJ create that did no exist before
Most of the TV I watch is from the likes of the BBC and Channel 4 in the UK. My wife tends to watch a lot of the police/medical dramas from the US (House, CSI somewhere, etc.). Pretty much everything we watch is also available on iTunes (we often use iTunes as a backup for failed PVR recordings). At the moment, the price of individual programmes doesn't make it economically viable to ditch the satellite TV. However, if Apple were to offer TV show rental or sensibly priced 'season passes', then I'd be interested.
I'm in the UK too and I toyed with the idea of ditching cable and just using iTunes, but it just doesn't work at the moment. An HD season pass is, what, £40 or so? It's about twice what it costs in the US, and that's if a certain show is even on iTunes (and in HD). The current selection is pretty weak and isn't getting noticeably better. If anything it's getting worse, as Fox recently pulled all HD content from iTunes UK. Plus there are delays on new content appearing which ranges from a week or two (in the case of BBC content), to a year or more. (HBO content for example)
My monthly cable bill is about £25 or so, and for that I get a decent range of HD channels which cover most of my interests. Plus it's 1080i at around 15-20mbits with 5.1 audio. iTunes is, at best, 720p at 5mbits usually with stereo audio. Quality wise it's a pale imitation of cable, and I don't even think HD cable looks all that good. (compared to BD)
Apple will no doubt sort the content out first in the US as it has always done, leaving the UK with the same hotch potch mess we have now for a long time to come. Without compelling content deals in place, what would a new ATV offer the non-US customer? The ability to play a few iPhone games blown up way too large on a 50" plasma? If I want to play games on my Kuro, I use my 360 or PS3. My PS3 also plays blu-rays, and has iPlayer access. How can Apple possibly compete?
Doesn't AppleTV have an interface that is 90% like Front Row, even if it might not be called that on the AppleTV?
I wouldn’t be able to give it a specific percentage and back it up with valid reasoning, but I would say the percentage would be much lower than that.
I think it’s safe to say that BackRow for the AppleTV started as FrontRow, but BackRow has seen two major revisions to the UI while FrontRow has seen nothing but some minor bug fixes. BackRow has access to YouTube and many other features that would be nice to have on FrontRow if one were so inclined to use a Mac an HTPC
The only thing I’d say they have in common is coming from the same code base and being 10-foot UIs.
Mac OS X makes a for a horrible HTPC. There is just too much that has to be done to it to make it usable with a remote control. It’s simply not something the average person is going to use in their living room.
But the Apply TV isn't and the upcoming iTV doesn't sound like it's in the league of Microsoft's Media Center.
Are you kidding me, I have been playing with HTPC for years and WMC is the worst possible choice for it. Open source apps like XBMC beat the crap of it anyday. There are also decents WMC add-on that will gap its huge holes.
imo its a good choice to keep the hardware simple to reduce cost. They could add PvR and ATSC tuner, but the box will be too expensive and wont sell. Its a device to stream from the internet or your homenetwork.
I'm looking to ditch Comcast. I pay $130 a month and watch a fraction of the stations. But it is the fraction that are important to my kids and wife. If we went with any cheaper plan then they miss their stations. I'd like an "a la carte" style of getting television but at a subscription price. My hope is that the new AppleTV (keep the name) will be just that.
The final price is not important. As of now, you pay for lots of stations you never watch. All that is waste.
But with a la carte, you pay ONLY for what you watch, even if at the end of the month you are paying more, there is no waste, and you get exactly what you pay for.
Steve Jobs still doesn't get it. Unless the iTV has a tuner and capable of connection to cable or off the air TV, it's not going to be mainstream. Why pay ABC, NBC or CBS for access through iTV when you can get it for free off the air? Same for the rest of the programming. Cable and satellite do it better and probably cheaper. This is one area where Microsoft is far superior. Their Media Center is where it's at. My Media Center can connect to off the air, cable, satellite, DVD, Blu-Ray or Internet sources. It's got a built in DVR as well for all those sources. iTV is simply an iTunes pay per view (or subscription) box. Even if some programmers utilize advertising as a revenue stream instead of subscription fees, we'll see how long that lasts. I love Apple products and own quite a few. I find Apple OS far superior to Microsoft. But the Apply TV isn't and the upcoming iTV doesn't sound like it's in the league of Microsoft's Media Center.
7 months ago this is how your post would have read?
Steve Jobs still doesn't get it. Unless the [iPad] has a [full version of Mac OS X, USB, Ethernet and HDMI ports], it's not going to be mainstream. Why pay for a [hobbled tablet] when you can [a tablet with more ports and a full OS]? Same for the rest of the [netbook market]. [Everyone else has been doing] it better and probably cheaper. This is one area where Microsoft is far superior. Their [Windows with built-in touchscreen support] is where it's at. My [Windows tablet] can [do anything my Windows PC can]. It's got [a whole bunch of ports that?ll never use] as well [. just in case. iPad] is simply an iTunes pay per view (or subscription) [tablet]. Even if some [fanboys say reading books on it is great the Kindle is so much better,] we'll see how long that lasts. I love Apple products and own quite a few. I find Apple OS far superior to Microsoft. But the upcoming [iPad] doesn't sound like it's in the league of [tablets using Windows 7].
Granted, I tried to add some flare at an attempt at comedy and don?t know you well on enough on these boards to know your feelings on the iPad then or now, so take it with a grain of salt, Cinemagic, but my point that we shouldn?t judge anything so harshly before it?s had a chance to be tested and use (especially one that is still a rumour) stands.
1) I can’t quite wrap my head around this $99 AppleTV. Even with only a couple GB for the OS and apps and a potential size of that of an iPod Nano with the relative performance of the iPad, the best I can see is $149, even if they are trying to get a shoe in the home entertainment market.
2) I can’t see this being the only TV they would offer. I can see a larger, hub-like media extender for the main widescreen HDTV that does 1080p, has plenty of local storage, apps, etc. (maybe built into the new Mac Mini case) for a several hundred dollars, with a much simpler TV for the many other TVs in a home that I’d assume would be common to those who tend to buy Apple’s products.
3) We have to watch out for cable companies being delegated to ISPs. They have contracts with the networks. If, for example, they lose half their revenue of paid cable they may still have to pay the full contract amount to these networks along with the support costs. That means to maintain their margins they’d have to double their prices for those sticking with cable TV (which is unlikely), or bump the cost of your internet per GB and potentially adding data caps so that heavy users pay more (very likely).
Do you think there is any remote possibility (no pun intended lol) 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 (from hard drives ' flash) as 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 or low rez proxies. When you go to watch the list you set up they are simply streamed to you as your own personal recordings. Any device you wish that is authorized can watch any of the cloud based material and even sync ... as in watch on another device where you left off on the previous one.
Comments
Digg founder says Apple iTV launch in September will 'change everything'
oh god, not again.
Jobs knows what he's doing. And no, Blu-Ray is not thriving. Search "blu-ray poor sales" on Google.
What is that meant to mean? You can search for anything, that doesn't mean you will find anything relevant. All the results from that search are two years old. Blu-ray sales are continuing to increase, what isn't thriving is your thoughts of blu-ray, not blu-ray itself.
For starters, The AppleTV doesn't use FrontRow, that is only on Mac OS X. I don't understand why you'd jump from the AppleTV to the Mac so I'm going to ignore that and assume you were referring to BackRow.
Doesn't AppleTV have an interface that is 90% like Front Row, even if it might not be called that on the AppleTV?
What about all the stuff you *can't* get on cable though?
What about programs from other countries that we currently can't access without super-expensive equipment?
What about programs that are tailored to what a smaller set of viewers want, instead of just a lot of dreck that the masses find acceptable?
In many ways the argument for Internet TV is the same as the original argument for podcasting. For instance I recently got cable TV after living without it for ten years or so, and it's all shite to me. Endless re-runs of junk like Family guy and the Simpsons. MASH and Barney Miller over and over and over again. I wouldn't *choose* to watch any of that if it wasn't streaming into my living room. With podcasting and Internet TV stations, the information can be tailored to the audience.
Isn't it better to pick and choose what you want to watch and when you are going to watch it?
It's basically a choice between a big pipe full of crap vs. a smaller pipe with just what you want to watch.
That's a great concept, but if the content owners aren't selling it to Apple or distributing it by podcast, then you're still SOL. Big pipe, small pipe, plenty of media just isn't going to be made conveniently available except through illegal means. So no, I don't expect Apple to be able to upturn the video industry's reluctance to allow internet distribution in a timely manner.
I think rather than worrying about whether an ATV should have a DVR and/or Blu-Ray/DVD/whatever drive built in, we should focus on the what people want to consume -- TV programmes, films, and photos predominantly. If it can also play music, YouTube and at a pinch, surf the web, then even better.
At the moment, to fit in with people's lifestyles, that generally means getting a PVR to record and playback shows. However, if all the viewing you want to do is via video on demand, then there's no need to record anything. It's there and available anyway.
Most of the TV I watch is from the likes of the BBC and Channel 4 in the UK. My wife tends to watch a lot of the police/medical dramas from the US (House, CSI somewhere, etc.). Pretty much everything we watch is also available on iTunes (we often use iTunes as a backup for failed PVR recordings). At the moment, the price of individual programmes doesn't make it economically viable to ditch the satellite TV. However, if Apple were to offer TV show rental or sensibly priced 'season passes', then I'd be interested.
The next problem I have is knowing what to watch. On TV you get trailers and the like, and much as I hate to admit it, they're a good source of discovery. With a la carte programming, this may be difficult. However, here's where Apple's Genius feature comes in -- iTunes can recommend viewing based upon your previous viewing.
The other snag with iTunes is that all the free to air BBC and Channel 4 content costs money. BBC stuff is generally free to view via the iPlayer (which works fantastically well via the iPad), so commercially I see no reason for them not to extend this to iTunes if it can be technically achieved (I assume the BBC would need the necessary reporting back from Apple, and location restrictions to stop it being viewed for free outside of the UK -- on account of their current licensing arrangements). Channel 4 (mostly ad funded) can re-insert targeted adverts using iAds. More free to me content. Splendid.
The final hurdle is my films (let's assume the current iTunes model for films covers off the Blockbuster/Amazon/Netflicks use cases). As a long time media centre user, all my films are ripped to a large external disc (handily, I chose MPEG4 video from the outset -- phew). At the moment, I can view this from my ATV only when my MacBook Pro is on and running iTunes. This is a bit of a hassle. The ATV needs to be able to stream directly from Airport Disc (or at least appear to -- I'm happy for my iTunes account to be aware of the video and music content I own, and actually stream the stuff direct from the NC data centre. The key thing is that it appears to be coming from my own personal storage).
Photos can be streamed from my Mac, other iDevice, MobileMe, Flickr, where ever. Job done.
YouTube. Great. Same as the current ATV.
Opening up the App Store to the ATV will also be a great way of getting new content on there -- think Hulu, games, etc. Browsing the web on a TV is generally a pretty horrible experience, so I wouldn't be surprised if the ATV didn't ship with Safari. The WebKit framework however will be there to render web content 'channels' such as Hulu, iPlayer, and maybe NetFlix.
The final part is extending the usefulness of the ATV using an iPad or iPhone (or Touch) as a wifi controller. The Remote app that currently controls the ATV is pretty good; but I can see this being extended into something fantastic.
The only really issue I see (and has been pointed out by others) is getting live news and events (such as sports). This is very achievable technically, and indeed, I already do it on my iPad (via the iPad TV Catchup website -- http://www.tvcatchup.com/ipad.html). Apps could also be made available via the rights holders. So, technically it's achievable, commercially maybe a few hurdles. On the basis that I've stopped paying my Satellite provider for sports (it was getting stupidly expensive), I'm okay with the free to air alternatives. YMMV.
The final question is: will this be available on the existing ATV? Well, despite the fact that the current set up is Tiger based, and runs on top of x86 hardware, my understanding is that the iOS UI is sufficiently abstracted from the kernel and hardware as to make this theoretically possible. If the new ATV really is $99 (£79 to £89 inc VAT? Please Apple!), then I think the effort to do this, versus people's willingness to just buy a new device will weigh in favour of the new ATV software not being available for the old ATV.
All in all, I'm pretty excited.
http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/w...at-d8-2010062/
If there were a single, technological solution to the Gordian knot of the competing interests involved in content creation, ownership, licensing and distribution, Apple and Jobs would be the likely sword wielders who could slice that knot apart. Unfortunately, the competing interests are powered by greed and fear for their very survival. They aren't about to be brought into agreement easily.
If a new device from Apple doesn't measure up to all of our most hopeful expectations, don't be too disappointed or blame Apple. Strolling through the television junkyard and sorting things out is still - as Jobs puts it - a hobby.
... A related additional thought: The question has been at been at the back of my mind for months - why would Apple drop $1 billion into a cloud computing complex in North Carolina when there are dozens of other companies that could do the same thing? Now it's struck me. Apple doesn't plan to do the same thing. The future television user experience will have to stand on two legs - a new Apple TV device (iTV) with advanced viewing management capability AND a content manager/distributor who can unify and organize the creative material. The North Carolina site brings under Apple's roof the hardware capability to keep their proprietary distribution plan under wraps and in tight control.
... To answer your question, I would argue that Ford invented the auto industry because he invented the production line. ...
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.
Kevin Rose is wrong most of the time. Else we'd have had an iPhone with two batteries (his prediction for the 2G) and we'd have front facing cameras on most iDevices for the last 3 years. What he does is talk to a lot of people, chinese whispers ocurr and he then passes it off as first hand "news". He has been right, maybe 3 out of the last 10 predisction he's made. Plus, cut and paste was touted by him for both iPhone OS 2.0 and 3.0, so he proves the point - anyone can make the same guess until it happens.
I truely hope it is not called the iTV, else the poop will be hitting the spinny air cooling device. What American readers seem to miss is, ITV is not about money - they wouldn't likely be allowed to sell their name. It just really is not going to happen. Steve Jobs could write them a multi billion dollar cheque, but if they are not allowed to accept it by the ITC, they are not allowed to accept it. It would be way complicated, parliment would get involved - it would cause a big stink.
Man, I can't wait to see what RealRacing HD and Madden NFL look like on my Samsung.
I can answer that, they'll look like Playstation 1 games at best.
Compare some screen shots of Real Racing (which is a fun game for sure, but graphically a very simple one) to Gran Turismo 5. The difference is akin to going from VHS to blu-ray.
What new industry did SJ create?
Personal computers existed before the Mac
Care to name a "personal" computer that was marketed as such before apple?
Flash based music players existed with the iPod
Yup (not that the first iPad was flash based), but apple redefined the landscape and made them mainstream and were the first to integrate them with an online music store[/QUOTE]
Cell phones existed before the iPhone
Yes they did, but Apple produced the first mainstream "smart" phone.
Tablets existed before the iPad
Yes, they did, but the iPod is not marketed as a tablet computer, different name, different functions, different customer base, new product type.
App stores existed before iTunes
There was no app store integrated with hardware devices from the same manufacturer before the iPod/iTunes
So what new industry dud SJ create that did no exist before
See above...
Most of the TV I watch is from the likes of the BBC and Channel 4 in the UK. My wife tends to watch a lot of the police/medical dramas from the US (House, CSI somewhere, etc.). Pretty much everything we watch is also available on iTunes (we often use iTunes as a backup for failed PVR recordings). At the moment, the price of individual programmes doesn't make it economically viable to ditch the satellite TV. However, if Apple were to offer TV show rental or sensibly priced 'season passes', then I'd be interested.
I'm in the UK too and I toyed with the idea of ditching cable and just using iTunes, but it just doesn't work at the moment. An HD season pass is, what, £40 or so? It's about twice what it costs in the US, and that's if a certain show is even on iTunes (and in HD). The current selection is pretty weak and isn't getting noticeably better. If anything it's getting worse, as Fox recently pulled all HD content from iTunes UK. Plus there are delays on new content appearing which ranges from a week or two (in the case of BBC content), to a year or more. (HBO content for example)
My monthly cable bill is about £25 or so, and for that I get a decent range of HD channels which cover most of my interests. Plus it's 1080i at around 15-20mbits with 5.1 audio. iTunes is, at best, 720p at 5mbits usually with stereo audio. Quality wise it's a pale imitation of cable, and I don't even think HD cable looks all that good. (compared to BD)
Apple will no doubt sort the content out first in the US as it has always done, leaving the UK with the same hotch potch mess we have now for a long time to come. Without compelling content deals in place, what would a new ATV offer the non-US customer? The ability to play a few iPhone games blown up way too large on a 50" plasma? If I want to play games on my Kuro, I use my 360 or PS3. My PS3 also plays blu-rays, and has iPlayer access. How can Apple possibly compete?
Goodbye monthly cable bill. You have just been replaced by an equally expensive monthly Internet bill.
ha ha. yes. meet the new boss, same as the old boss....
I should know. I was gaming by the time arcades were still popular in the 80's.
The first time I played a game on a computer was around 1970-something. I saved my place using punched paper tape.
Doesn't AppleTV have an interface that is 90% like Front Row, even if it might not be called that on the AppleTV?
I wouldn’t be able to give it a specific percentage and back it up with valid reasoning, but I would say the percentage would be much lower than that.
I think it’s safe to say that BackRow for the AppleTV started as FrontRow, but BackRow has seen two major revisions to the UI while FrontRow has seen nothing but some minor bug fixes. BackRow has access to YouTube and many other features that would be nice to have on FrontRow if one were so inclined to use a Mac an HTPC
The only thing I’d say they have in common is coming from the same code base and being 10-foot UIs.
Mac OS X makes a for a horrible HTPC. There is just too much that has to be done to it to make it usable with a remote control. It’s simply not something the average person is going to use in their living room.
But the Apply TV isn't and the upcoming iTV doesn't sound like it's in the league of Microsoft's Media Center.
Are you kidding me, I have been playing with HTPC for years and WMC is the worst possible choice for it. Open source apps like XBMC beat the crap of it anyday. There are also decents WMC add-on that will gap its huge holes.
imo its a good choice to keep the hardware simple to reduce cost. They could add PvR and ATSC tuner, but the box will be too expensive and wont sell. Its a device to stream from the internet or your homenetwork.
believe it.
plus +1
I'm looking to ditch Comcast. I pay $130 a month and watch a fraction of the stations. But it is the fraction that are important to my kids and wife. If we went with any cheaper plan then they miss their stations. I'd like an "a la carte" style of getting television but at a subscription price. My hope is that the new AppleTV (keep the name) will be just that.
The final price is not important. As of now, you pay for lots of stations you never watch. All that is waste.
But with a la carte, you pay ONLY for what you watch, even if at the end of the month you are paying more, there is no waste, and you get exactly what you pay for.
Steve Jobs still doesn't get it. Unless the iTV has a tuner and capable of connection to cable or off the air TV, it's not going to be mainstream. Why pay ABC, NBC or CBS for access through iTV when you can get it for free off the air? Same for the rest of the programming. Cable and satellite do it better and probably cheaper. This is one area where Microsoft is far superior. Their Media Center is where it's at. My Media Center can connect to off the air, cable, satellite, DVD, Blu-Ray or Internet sources. It's got a built in DVR as well for all those sources. iTV is simply an iTunes pay per view (or subscription) box. Even if some programmers utilize advertising as a revenue stream instead of subscription fees, we'll see how long that lasts. I love Apple products and own quite a few. I find Apple OS far superior to Microsoft. But the Apply TV isn't and the upcoming iTV doesn't sound like it's in the league of Microsoft's Media Center.
7 months ago this is how your post would have read?Granted, I tried to add some flare at an attempt at comedy and don?t know you well on enough on these boards to know your feelings on the iPad then or now, so take it with a grain of salt, Cinemagic, but my point that we shouldn?t judge anything so harshly before it?s had a chance to be tested and use (especially one that is still a rumour) stands.
1) I can’t quite wrap my head around this $99 AppleTV. Even with only a couple GB for the OS and apps and a potential size of that of an iPod Nano with the relative performance of the iPad, the best I can see is $149, even if they are trying to get a shoe in the home entertainment market.
2) I can’t see this being the only TV they would offer. I can see a larger, hub-like media extender for the main widescreen HDTV that does 1080p, has plenty of local storage, apps, etc. (maybe built into the new Mac Mini case) for a several hundred dollars, with a much simpler TV for the many other TVs in a home that I’d assume would be common to those who tend to buy Apple’s products.
3) We have to watch out for cable companies being delegated to ISPs. They have contracts with the networks. If, for example, they lose half their revenue of paid cable they may still have to pay the full contract amount to these networks along with the support costs. That means to maintain their margins they’d have to double their prices for those sticking with cable TV (which is unlikely), or bump the cost of your internet per GB and potentially adding data caps so that heavy users pay more (very likely).
Do you think there is any remote possibility (no pun intended lol) 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 (from hard drives ' flash) as 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 or low rez proxies. When you go to watch the list you set up they are simply streamed to you as your own personal recordings. Any device you wish that is authorized can watch any of the cloud based material and even sync ... as in watch on another device where you left off on the previous one.