Assuming it is running iOS, it will be really interesting to see if it can/will be jailbroken and then more features added to it, like ATVFlash does now for the old AppleTV. might be a lot of possibilities here, if it has the basic amount of RAM that would need.
I think that since the iPad can stream movies to the AppleTV then why not video games? Use the iPod Touch, iPhone or iPad as the controller and stream directly--and wirelessly to the AppleTV?
It'd take a ton of wireless bandwidth but since you're already streaming movies that are HD (granted lower end HD for now) then games could theoretically be possible..
At least that's my opinion... Imagine this replacing the XBOX or PS3 eventually... The iPhone and iPad and iPod Touch supposedly are making the PSP and Nintendo DSi obsolete....
Just because you can't see the difference. The ellipses are implied.
Also implied is that I don't find it worth anything. It's perfectly fine for people with no 1080 content.
I can't believe how many people can't seem to see a difference between 720 and 1080. It boggles the mind.
Ah, the implication here is that I'm merely twirling my metaphorical digital wang, yes? Try again. I've never understood any of this nonsense about viewing distances, screen sizes, and 720 vs. 1080.
There is a visible difference. I can see it. This truth makes the difference in this product for me. Therefore the Apple TV serves me no purpose.
It's a matter of what resolution is needed for one to comfortably view programming and not have it be an impediment to enjoying said programming. Watching a 32-inch 720p monitor at a fairly close distance, I'm satisfied with the results. When I'm unhappy with the picture I'm getting it's not because I lack 1080p resolution but rather that a seriously compressed cable signal falls apart at the first hint of movement.
Sorry to say that if you are seeing a difference between 720p and 1080p regardless of viewing distance, that difference is strictly a product of your imagination. Viewing distance is absolutely critical to this discussion, not just nonsense. The further away you are from a screen, the less able you are to discern the individual elements that make up the picture. It doesn't take a Phd in physics to figure out why that is. If you find 720p video unwatchable, you're in an exceedingly small minority. Apple may have a reputation of being a premium brand but it hardly worries about catering to an exceedingly tiny segment of the population. No offence, but the number of folks like yourself who can't stomach 720p is so small as to be not worth giving a second thought to.
I think that if the Apple TV never offers 1080p, it will be no great loss. Most of us just don't care. For that matter, most consumers haven't got a clue what those numbers mean. They just know that more is more so 1080p has to be better than 720p. Don't get me wrong. It is better, certainly, but not so that it has an impact on one's enjoyment of video content. Go from standard definition to 720p and the difference is spectacular. Go from 720p to 1080p and the difference isn't worth bothering over. This is how it is for the vast majority of consumers and Apple is not building a custom product for a select few. They're building a TV device for mass consumption.
When is that last time you had an eye exam? Do you need glasses? Are you sure?
He's right, because the level of compression often applied wipes out the difference. In theory, 1080i has the same resolution as 1080p, it just doesn't handle quick movement as well. But when I watch a Blu-Ray movie, it looks much better than a 1080i Tv show. That's assuming I want to get close enough to tell the difference.
In practice, I don't see much difference between 720p and 1080i broadcasts. There's a lot of debate as to whether one is better than the other. It's not a cut and dry thing. 720p actually takes more bandwidth if the amount of compression is the same, and has a denser image. It deals better with sports. 1080p would be best, if they didn't overcompress it, but we won't see that for some time because of the bandwidth.
basically you would want to mirror the iThing's display simultaneously on your TV via ATV2. simple idea but probably takes more processing power than the A4 chip now has. but the next generation ...
Think about it. If you're renting, and streaming from your computer, why would you NEED storage?
If you live in an apartment or condo where you can regularly see 15+ networks , you might not want to stream, but want local storage. Streaming does not work in all situations.
There may not be any commercial 1080p streaming content, but you are ignoring the fact that you can easily stream 1080p h.264 content over 802.11n from your own file server.
If someone is looking for an all-in-one head-end device to connect to their TV for internet and local streaming content, not having an option for 1080p could lead many to other solutions.
Oh good grief. This is just a $99 device. Its not high end audio video. Those folks SHOULD look for other solutions.
Apple gotta load the firmware/OS and test it all somehow ...
That's what diagnostic means. They likely add the firmware and software before the device is assembled. When they add the OS and software to a computer, they put it directly on the Hdd in a bay with a lot of other HDDs. Then the loaded HDD is added to the machine. It's likely done that way here too with the Flash, or eproms.
There are few 1080p streams available, and if you go to the forums you will see that there are problems with downloading and playing them for many people. It's not ready for primetime yet.
If people are trying to stream 1080p over their crappy connection then ask why it looks jerky I am not. Netflix among others should start to rent 1080p video next year and this -again arbitrary- hardware limitation will soon looks plain retarded.
As posted by others above, there are many variables such as seating distance, etc. that factor in. It reminds me of the argument over the difference between 128kb and 256kb audio; there is a technical difference, but in blind tests a majority can't tell the difference in most common setups. If those that can prefer one over the other, that's great for them. Somebody has to keep Monster in business.
You probably can tell a 720p signal from a 1080p one if you look hard enough. I would bet the compression of the signal matters more, but then again, I've enjoyed my Apple TV since the first model came out. On my 52" Sharp Aquos, everything looks pretty darn nice.
I will say this..I've seen a blue-ray disc movie and it did show really well. The interface was horrible, however, and waiting 25 minutes to wade through ads and previews before my movie would ruin the experience more than a 'drop' in quality from 1080p to 720p.
No thanks. I'll suffer with 720p and my instantly available movie (with zero ads) and TV shows (with zero commercials).
Getting into a resolution battle is great for people who love technology, but there are other factors for content viewers that are at least as important.
I'm buying the new Apple TV so I can put one in my workout room.
It's the same piece-of-shit software and interface that is on the current (old) Apple TV. This is not an improvement. Did Apple buy a bunch of these little boxes from some liquidator in China and slap the Apple logo on it? It sure seems like it.
I was all ready to go buy one of these things. Not anymore. I'll stick with the crappy older model, which is still better than this new one.
Gotta love the whole "you can't see a difference with 1080p" argument. I'll bet these are the same people who rave about the retina display and how crystal clear it is. Fact is 1080p is larger, therefore one can assume that if you view the same movie, on the same screen, 1080p will look sharper, and clearer, than it would in 720p. Exactly the same as how the retina display looks much nicer. Just because one person has poor eyesight doesn't mean the rest of us do. There is a completely valid reason for wanting 1080p.
Having said all that. It's pretty clear why Apple didn't include it. iTunes and most streaming services do not offer 1080p. This new AppleTV is gearing towards online content, they don't care if you have a library with hundreds of movies in 1080p. Pretty obvious considering they buried all user content under several sub menus. Before it was right up front, not anymore. I suppose it's funny when you think about it. When they first introduced the AppleTV, it's sole purpose was to bring your iTunes content from your mac/pc to your tv. Now they've made it even harder to do it's original purpose. At least they still consider it a hobby, and it will remain that way until they get their heads out of their asses.
The new one is great for new customers who have no content, but those of us who have spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on content, it's a slap in the face.
If you live in an apartment or condo where you can regularly see 15+ networks , you might not want to stream, but want local storage. Streaming does not work in all situations.
I still don't see why. You aren't being limited to seeing something the moment it's being broadcast. You can see it any time you want. You don't need to have all the channels available to you at once, as you're just looking at one Tv show or movie at once. Is there something I'm missing in what you're saying?
I've got cable now, with 900+ channels. Sometimes I want to record three things at once. But that's only because there's no rebroadcast for much of it. But if all the shows are available all the time, I just have to select what I want at any moment. I could watch those three shows that Re broadcast at once, one after the other, or on different days. Or I could wait fir the month to end and watch four, one after the other.
It's the same piece-of-shit software and interface that is on the current (old) Apple TV. This is not an improvement. Did Apple buy a bunch of these little boxes from some liquidator in China and slap the Apple logo on it? It sure seems like it.
I was all ready to go buy one of these things. Not anymore. I'll stick with the crappy older model, which is still better than this new one.
Good! Then I won't have to worry about them being sold out as long as there is that ONE left...honestly, you sound like a little baby who didn't get what she wanted for Christmas...
Comments
I think that since the iPad can stream movies to the AppleTV then why not video games? Use the iPod Touch, iPhone or iPad as the controller and stream directly--and wirelessly to the AppleTV?
It'd take a ton of wireless bandwidth but since you're already streaming movies that are HD (granted lower end HD for now) then games could theoretically be possible..
At least that's my opinion... Imagine this replacing the XBOX or PS3 eventually... The iPhone and iPad and iPod Touch supposedly are making the PSP and Nintendo DSi obsolete....
Chris Powers
[email protected]
www.powersbydesign.com
This is already possible for limited use.
Apple would use it for diagnostic testing.
Apple gotta load the firmware/OS and test it all somehow ...
I rather doubt that.
Just because you can't see the difference. The ellipses are implied.
Also implied is that I don't find it worth anything. It's perfectly fine for people with no 1080 content.
I can't believe how many people can't seem to see a difference between 720 and 1080. It boggles the mind.
Ah, the implication here is that I'm merely twirling my metaphorical digital wang, yes? Try again. I've never understood any of this nonsense about viewing distances, screen sizes, and 720 vs. 1080.
There is a visible difference. I can see it. This truth makes the difference in this product for me. Therefore the Apple TV serves me no purpose.
It's a matter of what resolution is needed for one to comfortably view programming and not have it be an impediment to enjoying said programming. Watching a 32-inch 720p monitor at a fairly close distance, I'm satisfied with the results. When I'm unhappy with the picture I'm getting it's not because I lack 1080p resolution but rather that a seriously compressed cable signal falls apart at the first hint of movement.
Sorry to say that if you are seeing a difference between 720p and 1080p regardless of viewing distance, that difference is strictly a product of your imagination. Viewing distance is absolutely critical to this discussion, not just nonsense. The further away you are from a screen, the less able you are to discern the individual elements that make up the picture. It doesn't take a Phd in physics to figure out why that is. If you find 720p video unwatchable, you're in an exceedingly small minority. Apple may have a reputation of being a premium brand but it hardly worries about catering to an exceedingly tiny segment of the population. No offence, but the number of folks like yourself who can't stomach 720p is so small as to be not worth giving a second thought to.
I think that if the Apple TV never offers 1080p, it will be no great loss. Most of us just don't care. For that matter, most consumers haven't got a clue what those numbers mean. They just know that more is more so 1080p has to be better than 720p. Don't get me wrong. It is better, certainly, but not so that it has an impact on one's enjoyment of video content. Go from standard definition to 720p and the difference is spectacular. Go from 720p to 1080p and the difference isn't worth bothering over. This is how it is for the vast majority of consumers and Apple is not building a custom product for a select few. They're building a TV device for mass consumption.
Absolutely worthless.
No 1080p hardware support.
Guess I'll be waiting another four years for Apple to make a product worth buying.
Guess it sucks to be you then
Absolutely worthless.
No 1080p hardware support.
Guess I'll be waiting another four years for Apple to make a product worth buying.
And where are you streaming full 1080p video from now?
When is that last time you had an eye exam? Do you need glasses? Are you sure?
He's right, because the level of compression often applied wipes out the difference. In theory, 1080i has the same resolution as 1080p, it just doesn't handle quick movement as well. But when I watch a Blu-Ray movie, it looks much better than a 1080i Tv show. That's assuming I want to get close enough to tell the difference.
In practice, I don't see much difference between 720p and 1080i broadcasts. There's a lot of debate as to whether one is better than the other. It's not a cut and dry thing. 720p actually takes more bandwidth if the amount of compression is the same, and has a denser image. It deals better with sports. 1080p would be best, if they didn't overcompress it, but we won't see that for some time because of the bandwidth.
This is already possible for limited use.
basically you would want to mirror the iThing's display simultaneously on your TV via ATV2. simple idea but probably takes more processing power than the A4 chip now has. but the next generation ...
Think about it. If you're renting, and streaming from your computer, why would you NEED storage?
If you live in an apartment or condo where you can regularly see 15+ networks , you might not want to stream, but want local storage. Streaming does not work in all situations.
There may not be any commercial 1080p streaming content, but you are ignoring the fact that you can easily stream 1080p h.264 content over 802.11n from your own file server.
If someone is looking for an all-in-one head-end device to connect to their TV for internet and local streaming content, not having an option for 1080p could lead many to other solutions.
Oh good grief. This is just a $99 device. Its not high end audio video. Those folks SHOULD look for other solutions.
Apple gotta load the firmware/OS and test it all somehow ...
That's what diagnostic means. They likely add the firmware and software before the device is assembled. When they add the OS and software to a computer, they put it directly on the Hdd in a bay with a lot of other HDDs. Then the loaded HDD is added to the machine. It's likely done that way here too with the Flash, or eproms.
There are few 1080p streams available, and if you go to the forums you will see that there are problems with downloading and playing them for many people. It's not ready for primetime yet.
If people are trying to stream 1080p over their crappy connection then ask why it looks jerky I am not. Netflix among others should start to rent 1080p video next year and this -again arbitrary- hardware limitation will soon looks plain retarded.
Sums up my opinion on HDTV pretty well.
As posted by others above, there are many variables such as seating distance, etc. that factor in. It reminds me of the argument over the difference between 128kb and 256kb audio; there is a technical difference, but in blind tests a majority can't tell the difference in most common setups. If those that can prefer one over the other, that's great for them. Somebody has to keep Monster in business.
I will say this..I've seen a blue-ray disc movie and it did show really well. The interface was horrible, however, and waiting 25 minutes to wade through ads and previews before my movie would ruin the experience more than a 'drop' in quality from 1080p to 720p.
No thanks. I'll suffer with 720p and my instantly available movie (with zero ads) and TV shows (with zero commercials).
Getting into a resolution battle is great for people who love technology, but there are other factors for content viewers that are at least as important.
I'm buying the new Apple TV so I can put one in my workout room.
It's the same piece-of-shit software and interface that is on the current (old) Apple TV. This is not an improvement. Did Apple buy a bunch of these little boxes from some liquidator in China and slap the Apple logo on it? It sure seems like it.
I was all ready to go buy one of these things. Not anymore. I'll stick with the crappy older model, which is still better than this new one.
Gotta agree. Do not like the new model at all.
Having said all that. It's pretty clear why Apple didn't include it. iTunes and most streaming services do not offer 1080p. This new AppleTV is gearing towards online content, they don't care if you have a library with hundreds of movies in 1080p. Pretty obvious considering they buried all user content under several sub menus. Before it was right up front, not anymore. I suppose it's funny when you think about it. When they first introduced the AppleTV, it's sole purpose was to bring your iTunes content from your mac/pc to your tv. Now they've made it even harder to do it's original purpose. At least they still consider it a hobby, and it will remain that way until they get their heads out of their asses.
The new one is great for new customers who have no content, but those of us who have spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on content, it's a slap in the face.
Absolutely worthless.
No 1080p hardware support.
Guess I'll be waiting another four years for Apple to make a product worth buying.
HDTV broadcast = 1080i (not as good as 720P) or 720P. No 1080P.
HDTV over CableTV or Satellite 1080i or 720P... no 1080P.
Netflix streaming HD = "HD" most certainly 720P with fast connection.
The ONLY source you'll see 1080P is Bluray.
So if you're avoiding products that don't do 1080P, you don't watch anything but SD or Bluray discs.
If you live in an apartment or condo where you can regularly see 15+ networks , you might not want to stream, but want local storage. Streaming does not work in all situations.
I still don't see why. You aren't being limited to seeing something the moment it's being broadcast. You can see it any time you want. You don't need to have all the channels available to you at once, as you're just looking at one Tv show or movie at once. Is there something I'm missing in what you're saying?
I've got cable now, with 900+ channels. Sometimes I want to record three things at once. But that's only because there's no rebroadcast for much of it. But if all the shows are available all the time, I just have to select what I want at any moment. I could watch those three shows that Re broadcast at once, one after the other, or on different days. Or I could wait fir the month to end and watch four, one after the other.
It's the same piece-of-shit software and interface that is on the current (old) Apple TV. This is not an improvement. Did Apple buy a bunch of these little boxes from some liquidator in China and slap the Apple logo on it? It sure seems like it.
I was all ready to go buy one of these things. Not anymore. I'll stick with the crappy older model, which is still better than this new one.
Good! Then I won't have to worry about them being sold out as long as there is that ONE left...honestly, you sound like a little baby who didn't get what she wanted for Christmas...