Look at what Apple charges you for an iPOd dock with usb wall charger & remote and a set of AV cables. $50 for the latter and $50 for the former. $100!!!
There's pent-up demand for this connectivity as not many bit on that excessive apple ipod tax.
And now at $99 you get all that. Don't have to transfer to and from from your iPod nor plug in your iPod and take it out etc. And video watching won't be stuttering with an underpowered iPOd trying to play ~ DVD-quality content on a big screen. plus it will look better.
On top of it you are going to be able to rent/buy movies and buy tv shows from iTunes.
For $99 that is already a buy in my book. Big appeal to the average consumer who doesn't list tech as one of their hobbies.
IF Apple obtains and offers more options on content pricing and more content and opens it up to apps including stuff like Netflix and Amazon-on-demand and Hulu along with stuff no one has yet thought of then value and appeal goes through the roof.
Add on a Magic Trackpad or i-Device for full iOS compatibility.
They aren't going to include the Magic Trackpad because it would suck as a combined TV/game controller. Apple aren't in the game of releasing products that suck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel
What about if the iTV is able to connect with your iPhone, iPod or iPad and transmit the same image it is sending to your tv*.
That would also suck. A lot. And it would be too expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
We?re talking about adding a mouse pointer to an OS that so far has never had one. I just don?t see it.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashi
On the control front if we have an iDevice (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad or even Trackpad) with our fingers on it then why would the new Apple TV not show the finger positions as translucent overlaps on the TV screen.
Displaying the touch points on the TV is probably the closest thing I've heard to making the iPod/iPhone/Magic Trackpad work as a controller without totally sucking. It would just mildly suck.
So what is my "iTV" remote control prediction??
The main controller will be a WiiMote-like device
A touch sensitive surface (magic mouse style) around the thumb area will allow limited gestures (like up-down, left-right swiping/scrolling)
Other buttons on the device will be physical (e.g. see point 1)
Other iDevices will be able to sync to the iTV for gaming or remote keyboards
It seems likely that $99 will get you the entry version. For only $50 more you get XXX additional storage; for $100 more you get XXXXX additional storage, etc. To be able to keep 720HD video on your device you will need a fair amount of storage, at least 200GB.
My iPad plays 1280x720 video, which classifies it as HD.
But the final price isn't really what martters most. With cable, you are forced to subscribe to huge amounts of channels that you never watch. That is just pure waste.
With Steve, you pay ONLY for what you watch, so it is much thriftier.
That way, even if you might pay a couple of dollars more, it is still better because you only pay for exactly what you want to watch.
apparently you and I have a completely different defninition of the word thrifty. I expect things to be less exprensive when I am thrifty.
I think cmf2 may be correct saying
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2
If you want to look at the whole picture, it would be Hulu, Netflix, and other apps supplemented by $0.99 rentals in iTunes. $0.99 rentals would not be the primary way of watching TV for most people.
but then this must even be supplimented by more networks joining the abc and cbs bandwagon of having ether an app or website that supports the HTML5 stucture that I am sure that this iOS iTV will run. I droped cable a while ago and I have yet to hear the end of it from my wife not being able to watch the CW or HBO.
But the final price isn't really what martters most. With cable, you are forced to subscribe to huge amounts of channels that you never watch. That is just pure waste.
With Steve, you pay ONLY for what you watch, so it is much thriftier.
That way, even if you might pay a couple of dollars more, it is still better because you only pay for exactly what you want to watch.
It is not necessarily thriftier. (you use both paying more and thrifty in the same post too btw.)
Per-channel prices in a cable package are negotiated with channel creators based on how many customers the channel reaches (prices go down) and how popular the channel is (prices go up.)
Cable delivers low-per channel prices because of this packaging.
Prices per channel per show will go up without packages.
YOu could easily pay more. Of course it depends heavily on what you watch and how much you watch. IF you only watch 2 shows that require an expensive cable package then sure you save money. Alot of it.
Also buying on a per show basis will let us experience how popular shows will increase their price because they know folks can't do without it.
Look at the Sopranos. Look at them splitting Season Six onto 2 different disc sets and charging full price for each. That's what you can expect with ala carte show buying.
Now not saying we shouldn't have the option. Just don't expect it all to be a big rosy grass is greener happy ever after ending.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
Note that the current TV running Mac OS X but using the BackRow UI doesn?t have a cursor.
but then this must even be supplimented by more networks joining the abc and cbs bandwagon of having ether an app or website that supports the HTML5 stucture that I am sure that this iOS iTV will run. I droped cable a while ago and I have yet to hear the end of it from my wife not being able to watch the CW or HBO.
Yeah, the success of Apple TV running iOS would be completely dependent on the support it recieves. if major networks hold out, it won't be as useful as it could be. It's not even a given that hulu would make it onto this device.
It has been going for 3.5 years now on the same HW and has had 3 rich updates (though I absolutely hated the Take 2 UI so I we can discount that one if you like). I?d say the best we can expect are some minor tweaks and final bug updates. I can?t see anyone else supporting such old equipment for that long.
While old, I think the equipment is more than capable. Doesn't the current model sport a Pentium M 1GHz with 64 MB VRAM and 256 MB RAM? It outputs to 720P and seems to have the horsepower needed (my guess on needed HP).
I understand them not wanting to support two different OS's (Intel vs. Arm) but surely they have to consider the AppleTV's being sold today? After all, three years old or not, to someone who just purchased an AppleTV three months ago it is three months old.
I think it would be best if it only played the codecs that Steve gives us in the iTunes store. Otherwise, it is needlessly complex with no real benefit to the vast majority of users.
If it did the app store and it allowed the AirVideo app, it would be a non issue. It streams just about any video format to the iDevice.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
A cursor isn't that great for navigating a tv screen. The UI has to be simple enough that you can arrow through buttons, with the active one highlighted (or just have all the controls mirrored on an iPad). Games that require you to point at a specific point on the screen would require a cursor of some sort, but that would be built into the game, not the OS.
Higlighting buttons is how they've always done TV UI's. I doubt that will change.
That is the beauty of it. Nice. Simple. You can rest assured that your 4 year old will not see anything racy.
And your 4 year old will actually be able to use it. Not like a DVR!!
You are kidding right? You do realize with DVR, you select the movie and hit the select button, you know, like Appletv except no switching TV input because you are already on cable TV.
Note that the current ATV running Mac OS X but using the BackRow UI doesn?t have a cursor.
You know what? I discounted the idea that they would just release an iOS clone of the current AppleTV so long ago that it doesn't even cross my mind any more.
I suppose they could just stick with the current remote, but I think that would mean no applications/games... or at least very limited applications/games.
You know what? I discounted the idea that they would just release an iOS clone of the current AppleTV so long ago that it doesn't even cross my mind any more.
I suppose they could just stick with the current remote, but I think that would mean no applications/games... or at least very limited applications/games.
I love this idea and expected, like others, that this was what they would have done from the beginning.
A cursor isn't that great for navigating a tv screen. The UI has to be simple enough that you can arrow through buttons, with the active one highlighted (or just have all the controls mirroed on an iPad). Games that require you to point at a specific point on the screen would require a cursor of some sort, but that would be built into the game, not the OS.
Higlighting buttons is how they've always done TV UI's. I doubt that will change.
PC owner circa 1984... "why the hell would I want one of those mouse things when I've got perfectly good arrow keys on my keyboard that I can cycle through options with?!?! We've always highlighted options with our keyboards and I doubt that is going to change."
PC owner circa 1984... "why the hell would I want one of those mouse things when I've got perfectly good arrow keys on my keyboard that I can cycle through options with?!?! We've always highlighted options with our keyboards and I doubt that is going to change."
I have my mac connected to my TV. I know what using a cursor on a tv is like, it's alright with a mouse, but you don't always have a flat surface to mouse on. Using a trackpad on your lap is acceptable, but a simpler UI that didn't need a cursor would be better. wii like accelerometer based cursor movement also doesn't make a very good primary navigation method.
Consider the following:
Front Row doesn't use a cursor
Apple TV doesn't use a cursor
Plex doesn't need a cursor
XBMC doesn't need a cursor
Cable boxes don't use a cursor
Game consoles try to avoid cursors
etc.
Safari would benefit from a cursor, because websites aren't fomatted for the TV. Such an implementation wouldn't need to be OS wide though. Including a remote with a touch screen display that could mirror the display on the screen when needed would solve that issue completely though.
I really doubt that the OS will be centered around a cursor, but I guess they could include it as a fallback in certain applications.
Safari would benefit from a cursor, because websites aren't fomatted for the TV. Such an implementation wouldn't need to be OS wide though. Including a remote with a touch screen display that could mirror the display on the screen when needed would solve that issue completely though.
I really doubt that the OS will be centered around a cursor, but I guess they could include it as a fallback in certain applications.
I've yet to be sold on the idea of browsing the web on the TV anyway. I've got it on the PS3, but think it's hopeless. Just find reading text like that on something so far away weird!
Comments
Look at what Apple charges you for an iPOd dock with usb wall charger & remote and a set of AV cables. $50 for the latter and $50 for the former. $100!!!
There's pent-up demand for this connectivity as not many bit on that excessive apple ipod tax.
And now at $99 you get all that. Don't have to transfer to and from from your iPod nor plug in your iPod and take it out etc. And video watching won't be stuttering with an underpowered iPOd trying to play ~ DVD-quality content on a big screen. plus it will look better.
On top of it you are going to be able to rent/buy movies and buy tv shows from iTunes.
For $99 that is already a buy in my book. Big appeal to the average consumer who doesn't list tech as one of their hobbies.
IF Apple obtains and offers more options on content pricing and more content and opens it up to apps including stuff like Netflix and Amazon-on-demand and Hulu along with stuff no one has yet thought of then value and appeal goes through the roof.
Add on a Magic Trackpad or i-Device for full iOS compatibility.
They aren't going to include the Magic Trackpad because it would suck as a combined TV/game controller. Apple aren't in the game of releasing products that suck.
What about if the iTV is able to connect with your iPhone, iPod or iPad and transmit the same image it is sending to your tv*.
That would also suck. A lot. And it would be too expensive.
We?re talking about adding a mouse pointer to an OS that so far has never had one. I just don?t see it.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
On the control front if we have an iDevice (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad or even Trackpad) with our fingers on it then why would the new Apple TV not show the finger positions as translucent overlaps on the TV screen.
Displaying the touch points on the TV is probably the closest thing I've heard to making the iPod/iPhone/Magic Trackpad work as a controller without totally sucking. It would just mildly suck.
So what is my "iTV" remote control prediction??
- The main controller will be a WiiMote-like device
- A touch sensitive surface (magic mouse style) around the thumb area will allow limited gestures (like up-down, left-right swiping/scrolling)
- Other buttons on the device will be physical (e.g. see point 1)
- Other iDevices will be able to sync to the iTV for gaming or remote keyboards
Look here for the WiiMote patent.My iPad plays 1280x720 video, which classifies it as HD.
But the final price isn't really what martters most. With cable, you are forced to subscribe to huge amounts of channels that you never watch. That is just pure waste.
With Steve, you pay ONLY for what you watch, so it is much thriftier.
That way, even if you might pay a couple of dollars more, it is still better because you only pay for exactly what you want to watch.
apparently you and I have a completely different defninition of the word thrifty. I expect things to be less exprensive when I am thrifty.
I think cmf2 may be correct saying
If you want to look at the whole picture, it would be Hulu, Netflix, and other apps supplemented by $0.99 rentals in iTunes. $0.99 rentals would not be the primary way of watching TV for most people.
but then this must even be supplimented by more networks joining the abc and cbs bandwagon of having ether an app or website that supports the HTML5 stucture that I am sure that this iOS iTV will run. I droped cable a while ago and I have yet to hear the end of it from my wife not being able to watch the CW or HBO.
But the final price isn't really what martters most. With cable, you are forced to subscribe to huge amounts of channels that you never watch. That is just pure waste.
With Steve, you pay ONLY for what you watch, so it is much thriftier.
That way, even if you might pay a couple of dollars more, it is still better because you only pay for exactly what you want to watch.
It is not necessarily thriftier. (you use both paying more and thrifty in the same post too btw.)
Per-channel prices in a cable package are negotiated with channel creators based on how many customers the channel reaches (prices go down) and how popular the channel is (prices go up.)
Cable delivers low-per channel prices because of this packaging.
Prices per channel per show will go up without packages.
YOu could easily pay more. Of course it depends heavily on what you watch and how much you watch. IF you only watch 2 shows that require an expensive cable package then sure you save money. Alot of it.
Also buying on a per show basis will let us experience how popular shows will increase their price because they know folks can't do without it.
Look at the Sopranos. Look at them splitting Season Six onto 2 different disc sets and charging full price for each. That's what you can expect with ala carte show buying.
Now not saying we shouldn't have the option. Just don't expect it all to be a big rosy grass is greener happy ever after ending.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
Note that the current TV running Mac OS X but using the BackRow UI doesn?t have a cursor.
but then this must even be supplimented by more networks joining the abc and cbs bandwagon of having ether an app or website that supports the HTML5 stucture that I am sure that this iOS iTV will run. I droped cable a while ago and I have yet to hear the end of it from my wife not being able to watch the CW or HBO.
Yeah, the success of Apple TV running iOS would be completely dependent on the support it recieves. if major networks hold out, it won't be as useful as it could be. It's not even a given that hulu would make it onto this device.
iOS merely provides the platform for change.
It has been going for 3.5 years now on the same HW and has had 3 rich updates (though I absolutely hated the Take 2 UI so I we can discount that one if you like). I?d say the best we can expect are some minor tweaks and final bug updates. I can?t see anyone else supporting such old equipment for that long.
While old, I think the equipment is more than capable. Doesn't the current model sport a Pentium M 1GHz with 64 MB VRAM and 256 MB RAM? It outputs to 720P and seems to have the horsepower needed (my guess on needed HP).
I understand them not wanting to support two different OS's (Intel vs. Arm) but surely they have to consider the AppleTV's being sold today? After all, three years old or not, to someone who just purchased an AppleTV three months ago it is three months old.
I think it would be best if it only played the codecs that Steve gives us in the iTunes store. Otherwise, it is needlessly complex with no real benefit to the vast majority of users.
If it did the app store and it allowed the AirVideo app, it would be a non issue. It streams just about any video format to the iDevice.
It will have a cursor, regardless of input device they use. Just like a normal PC interface doesn't work with a touch screen, a touch screen interface doesn't work with a TV.
A cursor isn't that great for navigating a tv screen. The UI has to be simple enough that you can arrow through buttons, with the active one highlighted (or just have all the controls mirrored on an iPad). Games that require you to point at a specific point on the screen would require a cursor of some sort, but that would be built into the game, not the OS.
Higlighting buttons is how they've always done TV UI's. I doubt that will change.
That is the beauty of it. Nice. Simple. You can rest assured that your 4 year old will not see anything racy.
And your 4 year old will actually be able to use it. Not like a DVR!!
You are kidding right? You do realize with DVR, you select the movie and hit the select button, you know, like Appletv except no switching TV input because you are already on cable TV.
Note that the current ATV running Mac OS X but using the BackRow UI doesn?t have a cursor.
You know what? I discounted the idea that they would just release an iOS clone of the current AppleTV so long ago that it doesn't even cross my mind any more.
I suppose they could just stick with the current remote, but I think that would mean no applications/games... or at least very limited applications/games.
You know what? I discounted the idea that they would just release an iOS clone of the current AppleTV so long ago that it doesn't even cross my mind any more.
I suppose they could just stick with the current remote, but I think that would mean no applications/games... or at least very limited applications/games.
I love this idea and expected, like others, that this was what they would have done from the beginning.
A cursor isn't that great for navigating a tv screen. The UI has to be simple enough that you can arrow through buttons, with the active one highlighted (or just have all the controls mirroed on an iPad). Games that require you to point at a specific point on the screen would require a cursor of some sort, but that would be built into the game, not the OS.
Higlighting buttons is how they've always done TV UI's. I doubt that will change.
PC owner circa 1984... "why the hell would I want one of those mouse things when I've got perfectly good arrow keys on my keyboard that I can cycle through options with?!?! We've always highlighted options with our keyboards and I doubt that is going to change."
I love this idea and expected, like others, that this was what they would have done from the beginning.
That would essentially rule them out of gaming though.
I was thinking more of this with a "Magic Mouse"-like touch sensitive area around the thumb position to enable "swiping" through lists.
That would essentially rule them out of gaming though.
I was thinking more of this with a "Magic Mouse"-like touch sensitive area around the thumb position to enable "swiping" through lists.
They could also allow for a D-pad controller or something more elegant to an aftermarket remote with accelerometers, like Wii controllers.
PC owner circa 1984... "why the hell would I want one of those mouse things when I've got perfectly good arrow keys on my keyboard that I can cycle through options with?!?! We've always highlighted options with our keyboards and I doubt that is going to change."
I have my mac connected to my TV. I know what using a cursor on a tv is like, it's alright with a mouse, but you don't always have a flat surface to mouse on. Using a trackpad on your lap is acceptable, but a simpler UI that didn't need a cursor would be better. wii like accelerometer based cursor movement also doesn't make a very good primary navigation method.
Consider the following:
Front Row doesn't use a cursor
Apple TV doesn't use a cursor
Plex doesn't need a cursor
XBMC doesn't need a cursor
Cable boxes don't use a cursor
Game consoles try to avoid cursors
etc.
Safari would benefit from a cursor, because websites aren't fomatted for the TV. Such an implementation wouldn't need to be OS wide though. Including a remote with a touch screen display that could mirror the display on the screen when needed would solve that issue completely though.
I really doubt that the OS will be centered around a cursor, but I guess they could include it as a fallback in certain applications.
Safari would benefit from a cursor, because websites aren't fomatted for the TV. Such an implementation wouldn't need to be OS wide though. Including a remote with a touch screen display that could mirror the display on the screen when needed would solve that issue completely though.
I really doubt that the OS will be centered around a cursor, but I guess they could include it as a fallback in certain applications.
I've yet to be sold on the idea of browsing the web on the TV anyway. I've got it on the PS3, but think it's hopeless. Just find reading text like that on something so far away weird!
I wonder if Apple is ever going to be able to annonced something that didnt leak all over the net before the event.
Hey, wasn't the battery charger good enough for you the last time around?