I would bet that the number of people willing to forgo all their other video devices is so small that it's delusional to expect there be no HDMI inputs. Especially with how clumsy the current AppleTV is currently.
You might be right. We'll see. If I know Apple, this thing will be locked down like Fort Knox. But yeah, it will need to be truly compelling to get people to put it in their living room, if it does indeed ship totally locked down, like I believe it will.
It's not "your job", but your input to these conversations is pointless if you're doing a bad or nonexistent job of persuading. As it is, you're basically just screaming into a corner.
But, if I had to bring up a download on the consumer end, I would say adding 1, 2 or any HDMI ports adds complexity.
People round here will argue that it wouldn't add complexity, but I believe it does.
It does, but sometimes it's unavoidable, and frankly, it's not a big deal. The iOS platform is a lot more complex than the current AppleTV and it hasn't held Apple back. Inputs are certainly simpler than iTune's media management system. If Apple is going to have non-linear or linear "channels", inputs can simply be an additional channel.
A significant number of Apple fans happen to have console systems and I don't see them appreciating such a move or going along with it. If Apple actually does have chops to convince even their current user base to forgo inputs, then they've totally failed to demonstrate any such chops with the current AppleTV lineage so far.
Don't get all worked up on someone speculating what the TV if they make one, might be like! It was just a comment someone made! My Mac does not have a ticker running along the bottom, why would a TV?
But no specific rules the screen needed to follow. They have to follow the aspect ratio and resolution of the competition.
Nope.
Originally Posted by justmeblue
Don't get all worked up on someone speculating what the TV if they make one, might be like! It was just a comment someone made! My Mac does not have a ticker running along the bottom, why would a TV?
Probably because your Mac isn't a TV. Your Mac doesn't have wheels on the bottom, why would a car? See how it doesn't work?
I don't know about the AR, but even though they like to depend on the Internet connection for everything, I don't think they'll implement anything higher res than 2MP. Though I wish we have 4MP, heck give me 8MP, but I think that's for our future generation to get. Many many program's, broadcasts, cameras are still below 1080p (2MP).
So, AR, yes, they could create something different than what is already out there. But there are so many ratios that I don't think they will be able to set a standard. Black bars, horizontal or vertical are here to stay.
So if Apple made a TV it wouldn't be 16:9 and 1920x1080?
i can see Apple remaining the TV display. They could make it new aspect ratio and/or higher resolution, both of which could possibly allow for pixel-perfect 1080p content whilst still allowing for s row/column for icons, data. etc. I'm not saying they will do that but I do think it's likely Apple has explored many options with the TV to see if they can come with a concept that is markedly better.
But there are so many ratios that I don't think they will be able to set a standard. Black bars, horizontal or vertical are here to stay.
Well, there are basically three for video content, 4:3, 16:9, and 21:9.
You hear about 2.39:1 as 2.35:1 and 2.40:1, and then there was that one old movie (forget the name) that was partially shot in 4:1 (yep!), but really it's almost down to those three.
Well, there are basically three for video content, 4:3, 16:9, and 21:9.
You hear about 2.39:1 as 2.35:1 and 2.40:1, and then there was that one old movie (forget the name) that was partially shot in 4:1 (yep!), but really it's almost down to those three.
Philips! That's it. Thanks.
Still not radically different from what's already out.
Well, there are basically three for video content, 4:3, 16:9, and 21:9.
You hear about 2.39:1 as 2.35:1 and 2.40:1, and then there was that one old movie (forget the name) that was partially shot in 4:1 (yep!), but really it's almost down to those three.
Philips! That's it. Thanks.
Wow, 4:1. That would probably be a worse experience than sitting front row at Wimbeldon.
Have you seen that Philips 21:9 Carousel vid on YouTube? I'd paste a link if I were able to copy it from the new YouTube app, but alas. Pretty cool though.
WOW, a new portmanteau! Sorry, couldn't resist¡
Wow, 4:1. That would probably be a worse experience than sitting front row at Wimbeldon.
Have you seen that Philips 21:9 Carousel vid on YouTube? I'd paste a link if I were able to copy it from the new YouTube app, but alas. Pretty cool though.
Philips was the first to consumer with HDTVs, nice seeing them pushing the bar again.
That are pretty much exactly a 21:9 aspect ratio, if not exactly 21:9. That's Philip's Cinema AR right there. Now combine that with 2560x1080 resolution and imagine that Apple has inked deals with studios for the CinemaScope (2560x1080) content for iTunes Store. Apple is starting to look like it may have found a way to get around the quality of Blu-ray by doing something Blu-ray can't yet compete with.
Would Blu-ray qualiy still be better? Well that depends. Blu-ray discs can hold 50GB of content on a single DL-disc so can get more data per frame but if you have 1920x1080 (or less than 1080) content being upscaled to fit on a 21:9 TV so it's not letterboxed Apple might be able to get away with smaller files — using the same codec, mind you, as H.265 isn't ready — that look equivalent if they are getting CinemaScope resolution data so there is no upscaling being done.
This could allow a column of icons or widgets showing other data (as an option) without affecting the pixel-to-pixel content when watching TV.
That are pretty much exactly a 21:9 aspect ratio, if not exactly 21:9. That's Philip's Cinema AR right there. Now combine that with 2560x1080 resolution and imagine that Apple has inked deals with studios for the CinemaScope (2560x1080) content for iTunes Store. Apple is starting to look like it may have found a way to get around the quality of Blu-ray by doing something Blu-ray can't yet compete with.
I captured a screenshot and it looks like it is 20:9, off by 50:0 pixels in order to come at 21:9 - so I think you're right. 2560*1080 = 19:8. For an AR of 21:9 it should be 2520*1080 but now I'm fucking ants (Dutch equivalent to splitting hairs).
Blu-ray, I can't find any documentation on a mandatory AR; is there one? Apple trailer you're showing is ? 20:9 and it is stated as "widescreen, 720p"
Would Blu-ray qualiy still be better? Well that depends. Blu-ray discs can hold 50GB of content on a single DL-disc so can get more data per frame...
I don't think the quality doesn't depend on the storage capacity, as they could always put the movie on 2 or more disc. Just like in the old days where you had to flip the vinyl to hear the rest of the song. lol I believe the frame rate limit for Blu-ray is 59.94p. Theoretically iTunes is not limited; a file size increase will only take longer to download.
Would be great if Apple made a 21:9 (or whatever widescreen) TV and create iTunes movie rentals/sales in that AR. Don't think that ratio is good for regular TV as one would have a worse experience than sitting front row at Wimbledon (repeating myself here). Besides, the content needs to be shot at that ratio if I understand it correctly.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I would bet that the number of people willing to forgo all their other video devices is so small that it's delusional to expect there be no HDMI inputs. Especially with how clumsy the current AppleTV is currently.
You might be right. We'll see. If I know Apple, this thing will be locked down like Fort Knox. But yeah, it will need to be truly compelling to get people to put it in their living room, if it does indeed ship totally locked down, like I believe it will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
If there's a down side to having an HDMI input, you haven't convinced anyone.
That's not my job.
But, if I had to bring up a download on the consumer end, I would say adding 1, 2 or any HDMI ports adds complexity.
People round here will argue that it wouldn't add complexity, but I believe it does.
It's not "your job", but your input to these conversations is pointless if you're doing a bad or nonexistent job of persuading. As it is, you're basically just screaming into a corner.
It does, but sometimes it's unavoidable, and frankly, it's not a big deal. The iOS platform is a lot more complex than the current AppleTV and it hasn't held Apple back. Inputs are certainly simpler than iTune's media management system. If Apple is going to have non-linear or linear "channels", inputs can simply be an additional channel.
A significant number of Apple fans happen to have console systems and I don't see them appreciating such a move or going along with it. If Apple actually does have chops to convince even their current user base to forgo inputs, then they've totally failed to demonstrate any such chops with the current AppleTV lineage so far.
Don't get all worked up on someone speculating what the TV if they make one, might be like! It was just a comment someone made! My Mac does not have a ticker running along the bottom, why would a TV?
Actually Steve Jobs said it to his biographer, so it wasn't said in secret.
Originally Posted by dasanman69
But no specific rules the screen needed to follow. They have to follow the aspect ratio and resolution of the competition.
Nope.
Originally Posted by justmeblue
Don't get all worked up on someone speculating what the TV if they make one, might be like! It was just a comment someone made! My Mac does not have a ticker running along the bottom, why would a TV?
Probably because your Mac isn't a TV. Your Mac doesn't have wheels on the bottom, why would a car? See how it doesn't work?
So if Apple made a TV it wouldn't be 16:9 and 1920x1080?
Originally Posted by dasanman69
So if Apple made a TV it wouldn't be 16:9 and 1920x1080?
Might not! It'd be just like Apple to do something like that. There's always 2.39:1, like I said.
Though I'm being sort of facetious about that.
So, AR, yes, they could create something different than what is already out there. But there are so many ratios that I don't think they will be able to set a standard. Black bars, horizontal or vertical are here to stay.
(Random pic)
[IMG]http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/images/Philips-Cinema-21-9_big.jpg[/IMG]
i can see Apple remaining the TV display. They could make it new aspect ratio and/or higher resolution, both of which could possibly allow for pixel-perfect 1080p content whilst still allowing for s row/column for icons, data. etc. I'm not saying they will do that but I do think it's likely Apple has explored many options with the TV to see if they can come with a concept that is markedly better.
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
But there are so many ratios that I don't think they will be able to set a standard. Black bars, horizontal or vertical are here to stay.
Well, there are basically three for video content, 4:3, 16:9, and 21:9.
You hear about 2.39:1 as 2.35:1 and 2.40:1, and then there was that one old movie (forget the name) that was partially shot in 4:1 (yep!), but really it's almost down to those three.
Philips! That's it. Thanks.
Still not radically different from what's already out.
WOW, a new portmanteau! Sorry, couldn't resist¡
Wow, 4:1. That would probably be a worse experience than sitting front row at Wimbeldon.
Have you seen that Philips 21:9 Carousel vid on YouTube? I'd paste a link if I were able to copy it from the new YouTube app, but alas. Pretty cool though.
Philips was the first to consumer with HDTVs, nice seeing them pushing the bar again.
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Still not radically different from what's already out.
It is since there aren't any on the market presently.
Fine: New, from Apple! The 9:16 television set! Replace all your doors!
Originally Posted by charlituna
His comments aren't panning TV sets…
… I'm probably grasping, but isn't there a "pan & scan" pun in here somewhere?
"Grasping in the sense that there's not much to make a pun, or grasping in the sense that it's difficult to make the concept of 'pan & scan' funny?"
Er, yes.
Now that's funny.
Has anyone else noticed the new iTunes "marquees" in iTunes 11?
[INDENT][IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/17496/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/17497/width/500/height/1000[/IMG][/INDENT]
That are pretty much exactly a 21:9 aspect ratio, if not exactly 21:9. That's Philip's Cinema AR right there. Now combine that with 2560x1080 resolution and imagine that Apple has inked deals with studios for the CinemaScope (2560x1080) content for iTunes Store. Apple is starting to look like it may have found a way to get around the quality of Blu-ray by doing something Blu-ray can't yet compete with.
Would Blu-ray qualiy still be better? Well that depends. Blu-ray discs can hold 50GB of content on a single DL-disc so can get more data per frame but if you have 1920x1080 (or less than 1080) content being upscaled to fit on a 21:9 TV so it's not letterboxed Apple might be able to get away with smaller files — using the same codec, mind you, as H.265 isn't ready — that look equivalent if they are getting CinemaScope resolution data so there is no upscaling being done.
This could allow a column of icons or widgets showing other data (as an option) without affecting the pixel-to-pixel content when watching TV.
I have. But also back in 1998. Yes, 14 years ago. Saw it in QuickTime v3. Nice tiddybit on why Apple started posting trailers over here:
http://www.quora.com/Movie-Trailers/How-did-Apple-com-become-the-de-facto-spot-for-movie-trailers
I captured a screenshot and it looks like it is 20:9, off by 50:0 pixels in order to come at 21:9 - so I think you're right. 2560*1080 = 19:8. For an AR of 21:9 it should be 2520*1080 but now I'm fucking ants (Dutch equivalent to splitting hairs).
Blu-ray, I can't find any documentation on a mandatory AR; is there one? Apple trailer you're showing is ? 20:9 and it is stated as "widescreen, 720p"
I don't think the quality doesn't depend on the storage capacity, as they could always put the movie on 2 or more disc. Just like in the old days where you had to flip the vinyl to hear the rest of the song. lol I believe the frame rate limit for Blu-ray is 59.94p. Theoretically iTunes is not limited; a file size increase will only take longer to download.
Would be great if Apple made a 21:9 (or whatever widescreen) TV and create iTunes movie rentals/sales in that AR. Don't think that ratio is good for regular TV as one would have a worse experience than sitting front row at Wimbledon (repeating myself here). Besides, the content needs to be shot at that ratio if I understand it correctly.