BTW, when is iOS going to support the royalty free and vastly superior VP9¡
Probably right after they support VP8 (i.e., never.)
"A performance comparison of H.265/MPEG-HEVC, VP9, and H.264/MPEG-AVC encoders was presented. According to the experimental results, the coding efficiency of VP9 was shown to be inferior to both H.264/MPEG-AVC and H.265/MPEG-HEVC with an average bit-rate overhead at the same objective quality of 8.4% and 79.4%, respectively. Also, it was shown that the VP9 encoding times are larger by a factor of more than 100 compared to those of the x264 encoder."
This will lead to a new ATV, shortly, with the chip and h265 ecoding. Netflix already uses h265 for their 4k (for example - house of cards). However, the limitation seems be more HDMI. Would need at least 1 port with HDMI 2.0. I have a new Sony 4K, which will have a firmware update to raise 1 port, maybe its two, to HDMI 2.0 specs. Not sure of other manufacturers of 4K sets if they have that option or not. The only other company that has a 4K movie delivery hardware type product is Sony. They just announced that their movie server device will now be avail for use with other manufacturers sets, was only avail for use with Sony sets before. Not sure what codec they use but I think theirs downloads in full 4K quality and think it does it overnight but not sure. Apple getting their foot in the door with the only non-app with 4K content would be huge.
Does h.254 provide benefits for those without 4K TVs?
I'm not so much enamored on the i-branding as I am disappointed with "Apple-" and "?-" branding. I thought keeping the Apple brand separate from the product names was a pretty big Jobs mandate. This starts to sound like Microsoft.
I'm not so much enamored on the i-branding as I am disappointed with "Apple-" and "?-" branding. I thought keeping the Apple brand separate from the product names was a pretty big Jobs mandate. This starts to sound like Microsoft.
Good question. My best guesses: 1) They were holding back iTV for an actual television set, 2) the iTV trademark is already owned by another company and Apple was unable to negotiate favorable terms for its acquisition at the time.
BTW, am I the only one who dislikes the new i-free branding. "Apple Watch" is a mouthful. To me it sounds kind of generic, while at the same time diluting the Apple brand.
I prefer it. Diluting? How is releasing a product under their name diluting their own brand?!
I also love how the Apple Watch Edition is just that. Not like every single other company would name it. They’d do “[company] [product] [special category name] Edition”. To Apple, the very existence of there being a product warranting an “edition” means that the use of the word “edition” is enough.
I’m not sure I care for the existence of the name (splitting the product into three lines), but the implementation thereof was really enjoyable.
Originally Posted by freediverx
Does h.265 provide benefits for those without 4K TVs?
Well, yeah. Last I read, it was “equal bitrate at 50% file size” or “2x bitrate at the same file size”. That’s huge.
Good question. My best guesses: 1) They were holding back iTV for an actual television set, 2) the iTV trademark is already owned by another company and Apple was unable to negotiate favorable terms for its acquisition at the time.
Swatch opposed Apple's trademark application for iWatch for being too similar to their iSwatch. At least one country (Iceland) has preliminarily rejected Apple's application on this basis.
This will lead to a new ATV, shortly, with the chip and h265 ecoding. Netflix already uses h265 for their 4k (for example - house of cards). However, the limitation seems be more HDMI. Would need at least 1 port with HDMI 2.0. I have a new Sony 4K, which will have a firmware update to raise 1 port, maybe its two, to HDMI 2.0 specs. Not sure of other manufacturers of 4K sets if they have that option or not. The only other company that has a 4K movie delivery hardware type product is Sony. They just announced that their movie server device will now be avail for use with other manufacturers sets, was only avail for use with Sony sets before. Not sure what codec they use but I think theirs downloads in full 4K quality and think it does it overnight but not sure. Apple getting their foot in the door with the only non-app with 4K content would be huge.
It could be a huge market for Apple if they would make a combo ATV/cable box. Cable companies could stream all the live channels using H265 which would free up a lot of bandwidth for other services. Apple has the h265 chip but I suspect that cable box manufacturers also have chips for h265 decoding so the cable companies likely won't give the keys to their kingdom away.
Swatch opposed Apple's trademark application for iWatch for being too similar to their iSwatch. At least one country (Iceland) has preliminarily rejected Apple's application on this basis.
Good question. My best guesses: 1) They were holding back iTV for an actual television set, 2) the iTV trademark is already owned by another company and Apple was unable to negotiate favorable terms for its acquisition at the time.
ITV (itv.com) is one of the major broadcasters in the UK, and I seem to have some (now distant) memories of them having supposedly lodged objections to the iTV name as far back as the rumour stage of the original silver Apple TV....
I'm not so much enamored on the i-branding as I am disappointed with "Apple-" and "?-" branding. I thought keeping the Apple brand separate from the product names was a pretty big Jobs mandate. This starts to sound like Microsoft.
I love it because it's easily represented by a single character. Even more modern versions of Windows will be able to see that character correctly since it's a part of Unicode (even though it takes them 5 steps to create it, as noted recently by [@]PhilBoogie[/@]). For me, it's that simplicity for Mac users that makes it a perfect choice for Apple.
I'd also like to see an the Apple logo that isn't filled in. Perhaps that can use the L with other key combinations so they are right next to each other. Right now Option-Shift-L is being used for 'Ò'.
• 1280 × 720 = 921,600 pixels × 240fps = 221,184,000 pixels per second
• 3840 × 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels × 30 fps = 248,832,000 pixels per second
Close. Very close.
Although, if doing 24p (UHD)... 199,065,600 pixels per second
Could also capture cinema 4K (4096 x 2160) 24p... 212,336,640 per second
Having said that, I think it would depend upon the sensor size and its aspect ratio. Even at 8 MP, it may not be 3840 wide. May be closer to 3,450 x 2,300 (assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio).
What I'd really love to see though is 30p (or 24p) HD with a higher color sampling and/or higher bit-depth (e.g. 10 bit 4:2:2 instead of I believe its current 8 bit 4:2:0). I'd have to run the numbers though on that to see if doable.
Although, if doing 24p (UHD)... 199,065,600 pixels per second
Could also capture cinema 4K (4096 x 2160) 24p... 212,336,640 per second
Having said that, I think it would depend upon the sensor size and its aspect ratio. Even at 8 MP, it may not be 3840 wide. May be closer to 3,450 x 2,300 (assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio).
What I'd really love to see though is 30p (or 24p) HD with a higher color sampling and/or higher bit-depth (e.g. 10 bit 4:2:2 instead of I believe its current 8 bit 4:2:0). I'd have to run the numbers though on that to see if doable.
Indeed, if the 5s is anything to go by then the 6 will never do 4k as the aspect ratio is all wrong. 3264x2448 just wont work for 4k
I am stunned that Apple has buried this, instead of trumpeting it as a competitive advantage. ITunes movies (lower bandwidth, higher quality for 1080) is a prime use for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
When iTunes Store content is finally updated I am sure they will not keep quiet.
Exactly... ...Apple's seeding all their devices and OS's with new tech, e.g., 64bitness in A-series processors and iOS (tho' they did "trumpet" that for a few minutes), and this new codec... ...so that as user-facing applications using the new technologies come on line, all their current and recent inventory will be poised for uptake across the board. (E.g., 64 bit has barely begun to come to its full potential on the platform, but a critical mass of devices is building up in the market day by day.)
While Android will take much longer to migrate and devs/manufacturers will be supporting obsolete HW and codecs with more hassles...
...similar to the way MS is trapped by the fact that much of the Fortune 500 is still running proprietary code on "legacy" XP machines... ...and even on new consumer machines, OEM's are racing toward the bottom with $200 notebooks and the like.
And this is a key piece of the still not fully appreciated "vision" of Cook and his team that will help Apple enormously going forward... ...i.e., strategic thinking and execution.
Exactly... ...Apple's seeding all their devices and OS's with new tech, e.g., 64bitness in A-series processors and iOS (tho' they did "trumpet" that for a few minutes), and this new codec... ...so that as user-facing applications using the new technologies come on line, all their current and recent inventory will be poised for uptake across the board.
While Android will take much longer to migrate and devs/manufacturers will be supporting obsolete HW and codecs with more hassles...
...similar to the way MS is trapped by the fact that much of the Fortune 500 is still running proprietary code on "legacy" XP machines... ...and even on new consumer machines, OEM's are racing toward the bottom with $200 notebooks and the like.
And this is a key piece of the still not fully appreciated "vision" of Cook and his team that will help Apple enormously going forward... ...i.e., strategic thinking and execution.
"The same quality for about the half the file size. This means your movie will start faster and will use less bandwidth to do it.* But today we're also introducing an option for 4K video which is 4x the image quality but less than twice the size of the previous 1080p videos."
* I don't think they'd word that sentence anywhere as poorly as I did.
** I would think the H.265 option would come first to iTS with 4K UHD as an option coming at a later event when there are more TVs that can support and, most importantly, when at least the iPads can still play back these videos adequately.
What I'd really love to see though is 30p (or 24p) HD with a higher color sampling and/or higher bit-depth (e.g. 10 bit 4:2:2 instead of I believe its current 8 bit 4:2:0). I'd have to run the numbers though on that to see if doable.
But OSX still doesn't support 10-bit monitors though...(perhaps 10.10.10 does?) Though they do have a Pro Apps codec for it: http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1719
I hoped for it months ago but yeah, I noticed it a few days ago.
Notice also that the phone DOES NOT PLAY BACK H.265. It simply uses it for FaceTime between iPhone 6 models (reverting to H.264 for older ones and Macs).
But since it CAN do H.265, that tells me that playback is simply waiting for
1. an update to iTunes to support it on the phone
2. an update to iTunes to support it on Macs 3. corresponding H.265 files from Apple in the iTunes Store
?So be on the lookout for those in the very near future.
Chicken and Egg problem. There's no h.265 video out there, and encoding high quality video in software is 10x slower than h.264 at the same resolution. h.265 at the 720 facetime resolution is probably exactly what the hardware encoder on the device is set to. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPhone can playback 720/1080 h265 video, but iTunes may not hand out h.265 video to any device unless it supports it. Likewise I don't see Youtube supporting h.265 yet, but they may be forced to if it's the only hardware codec adopted over it's own.
BTW, am I the only one who dislikes the new i-free branding. "Apple Watch" is a mouthful. To me it sounds kind of generic, while at the same time diluting the Apple brand.
The i-branding is almost 20 years old now, and it has been mocked as meaningless old hat for a large proportion of that time.
I remember being disappointed they were keeping the i around for iPhone, so no; this is a welcome move. Can't say I'm a fan of the ALL CAPS though.
Comments
Nice catch.
• 1280 × 720 = 921,600 pixels × 240fps = 221,184,000 pixels per second
• 3840 × 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels × 30 fps = 248,832,000 pixels per second
Close. Very close.
Shooting 120 fps slo-mo on the 5S is a huge battery drain. I'm bracing for the effect of 240.
BTW, when is iOS going to support the royalty free and vastly superior VP9¡
Probably right after they support VP8 (i.e., never.)
"A performance comparison of H.265/MPEG-HEVC, VP9, and H.264/MPEG-AVC encoders was presented. According to the experimental results, the coding efficiency of VP9 was shown to be inferior to both H.264/MPEG-AVC and H.265/MPEG-HEVC with an average bit-rate overhead at the same objective quality of 8.4% and 79.4%, respectively. Also, it was shown that the VP9 encoding times are larger by a factor of more than 100 compared to those of the x264 encoder."
http://iphome.hhi.de/marpe/download/Performance_HEVC_VP9_X264_PCS_2013_preprint.pdf
This will lead to a new ATV, shortly, with the chip and h265 ecoding. Netflix already uses h265 for their 4k (for example - house of cards). However, the limitation seems be more HDMI. Would need at least 1 port with HDMI 2.0. I have a new Sony 4K, which will have a firmware update to raise 1 port, maybe its two, to HDMI 2.0 specs. Not sure of other manufacturers of 4K sets if they have that option or not. The only other company that has a 4K movie delivery hardware type product is Sony. They just announced that their movie server device will now be avail for use with other manufacturers sets, was only avail for use with Sony sets before. Not sure what codec they use but I think theirs downloads in full 4K quality and think it does it overnight but not sure. Apple getting their foot in the door with the only non-app with 4K content would be huge.
Does h.254 provide benefits for those without 4K TVs?
I love it. I want the official i-branding to end.
I'm not so much enamored on the i-branding as I am disappointed with "Apple-" and "?-" branding. I thought keeping the Apple brand separate from the product names was a pretty big Jobs mandate. This starts to sound like Microsoft.
I'm not so much enamored on the i-branding as I am disappointed with "Apple-" and "?-" branding. I thought keeping the Apple brand separate from the product names was a pretty big Jobs mandate. This starts to sound like Microsoft.
IF it were a Jobs-mandate, then why "Apple TV"?!
IF it were a Jobs-mandate, then why "Apple TV"?!
Good question. My best guesses: 1) They were holding back iTV for an actual television set, 2) the iTV trademark is already owned by another company and Apple was unable to negotiate favorable terms for its acquisition at the time.
BTW, am I the only one who dislikes the new i-free branding. "Apple Watch" is a mouthful. To me it sounds kind of generic, while at the same time diluting the Apple brand.
I prefer it. Diluting? How is releasing a product under their name diluting their own brand?!
I also love how the Apple Watch Edition is just that. Not like every single other company would name it. They’d do “[company] [product] [special category name] Edition”. To Apple, the very existence of there being a product warranting an “edition” means that the use of the word “edition” is enough.
I’m not sure I care for the existence of the name (splitting the product into three lines), but the implementation thereof was really enjoyable.
Well, yeah. Last I read, it was “equal bitrate at 50% file size” or “2x bitrate at the same file size”. That’s huge.
Good question. My best guesses: 1) They were holding back iTV for an actual television set, 2) the iTV trademark is already owned by another company and Apple was unable to negotiate favorable terms for its acquisition at the time.
Swatch opposed Apple's trademark application for iWatch for being too similar to their iSwatch. At least one country (Iceland) has preliminarily rejected Apple's application on this basis.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-04/swatch-objects-to-authorities-over-apple-s-use-of-iwatch-label.html
It could be a huge market for Apple if they would make a combo ATV/cable box. Cable companies could stream all the live channels using H265 which would free up a lot of bandwidth for other services. Apple has the h265 chip but I suspect that cable box manufacturers also have chips for h265 decoding so the cable companies likely won't give the keys to their kingdom away.
Swatch opposed Apple's trademark application for iWatch for being too similar to their iSwatch. At least one country (Iceland) has preliminarily rejected Apple's application on this basis.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-04/swatch-objects-to-authorities-over-apple-s-use-of-iwatch-label.html
There's a big difference between similar and same:
http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/06/itv-entertainment-trademark-holder-seeking-to-rouse-apples-attention-with-warnings-over-unreleased-tv-set/
ITV (itv.com) is one of the major broadcasters in the UK, and I seem to have some (now distant) memories of them having supposedly lodged objections to the iTV name as far back as the rumour stage of the original silver Apple TV....
I love it because it's easily represented by a single character. Even more modern versions of Windows will be able to see that character correctly since it's a part of Unicode (even though it takes them 5 steps to create it, as noted recently by [@]PhilBoogie[/@]). For me, it's that simplicity for Mac users that makes it a perfect choice for Apple.
I'd also like to see an the Apple logo that isn't filled in. Perhaps that can use the L with other key combinations so they are right next to each other. Right now Option-Shift-L is being used for 'Ò'.
Nice catch.
• 1280 × 720 = 921,600 pixels × 240fps = 221,184,000 pixels per second
• 3840 × 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels × 30 fps = 248,832,000 pixels per second
Close. Very close.
Although, if doing 24p (UHD)... 199,065,600 pixels per second
Could also capture cinema 4K (4096 x 2160) 24p... 212,336,640 per second
Having said that, I think it would depend upon the sensor size and its aspect ratio. Even at 8 MP, it may not be 3840 wide. May be closer to 3,450 x 2,300 (assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio).
What I'd really love to see though is 30p (or 24p) HD with a higher color sampling and/or higher bit-depth (e.g. 10 bit 4:2:2 instead of I believe its current 8 bit 4:2:0). I'd have to run the numbers though on that to see if doable.
Although, if doing 24p (UHD)... 199,065,600 pixels per second
Could also capture cinema 4K (4096 x 2160) 24p... 212,336,640 per second
Having said that, I think it would depend upon the sensor size and its aspect ratio. Even at 8 MP, it may not be 3840 wide. May be closer to 3,450 x 2,300 (assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio).
What I'd really love to see though is 30p (or 24p) HD with a higher color sampling and/or higher bit-depth (e.g. 10 bit 4:2:2 instead of I believe its current 8 bit 4:2:0). I'd have to run the numbers though on that to see if doable.
Indeed, if the 5s is anything to go by then the 6 will never do 4k as the aspect ratio is all wrong. 3264x2448 just wont work for 4k
Is that really a ?...? The comment speaks for itself! Big difference between decoding and encoding...
I am stunned that Apple has buried this, instead of trumpeting it as a competitive advantage. ITunes movies (lower bandwidth, higher quality for 1080) is a prime use for it.
Quote:
When iTunes Store content is finally updated I am sure they will not keep quiet.
Exactly... ...Apple's seeding all their devices and OS's with new tech, e.g., 64bitness in A-series processors and iOS (tho' they did "trumpet" that for a few minutes), and this new codec... ...so that as user-facing applications using the new technologies come on line, all their current and recent inventory will be poised for uptake across the board. (E.g., 64 bit has barely begun to come to its full potential on the platform, but a critical mass of devices is building up in the market day by day.)
While Android will take much longer to migrate and devs/manufacturers will be supporting obsolete HW and codecs with more hassles...
...similar to the way MS is trapped by the fact that much of the Fortune 500 is still running proprietary code on "legacy" XP machines... ...and even on new consumer machines, OEM's are racing toward the bottom with $200 notebooks and the like.
And this is a key piece of the still not fully appreciated "vision" of Cook and his team that will help Apple enormously going forward... ...i.e., strategic thinking and execution.
"The same quality for about the half the file size. This means your movie will start faster and will use less bandwidth to do it.* But today we're also introducing an option for 4K video which is 4x the image quality but less than twice the size of the previous 1080p videos."
* I don't think they'd word that sentence anywhere as poorly as I did.
** I would think the H.265 option would come first to iTS with 4K UHD as an option coming at a later event when there are more TVs that can support and, most importantly, when at least the iPads can still play back these videos adequately.
I'm still looking for that one...
But OSX still doesn't support 10-bit monitors though...(perhaps 10.10.10 does?) Though they do have a Pro Apps codec for it:
http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1719
It's not an i (eye), it's an inverted exclamation mark (¡¿):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_question_and_exclamation_marks
Chicken and Egg problem. There's no h.265 video out there, and encoding high quality video in software is 10x slower than h.264 at the same resolution. h.265 at the 720 facetime resolution is probably exactly what the hardware encoder on the device is set to. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPhone can playback 720/1080 h265 video, but iTunes may not hand out h.265 video to any device unless it supports it. Likewise I don't see Youtube supporting h.265 yet, but they may be forced to if it's the only hardware codec adopted over it's own.
BTW, am I the only one who dislikes the new i-free branding. "Apple Watch" is a mouthful. To me it sounds kind of generic, while at the same time diluting the Apple brand.
The i-branding is almost 20 years old now, and it has been mocked as meaningless old hat for a large proportion of that time.
I remember being disappointed they were keeping the i around for iPhone, so no; this is a welcome move. Can't say I'm a fan of the ALL CAPS though.