Steve is getting closer to Sony, but the iMac needs...

2»

Comments

  • Reply 22 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tak1108

    Here you go:



    http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetv500




    Yah, the El Gato thing is cool. But it is a peripheral rather than an example of convergence. Jobs has stated that he feels that people don't (in the main) want to watch TV on their computer.



    Of course, just because he says it doesn't mean it's true.
  • Reply 23 of 29
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Frankly, I don't want to watch TV on my computer.



    But I want my computer to archive/record/stream video. If that video came from NetFlix, or broadcast, or the net, I don't care. I just want it to hold it, organize it, and send it off to a display device of my choice. Might be my laptop, might be the theoretical projector I have in my living room.



    So no, I don't want a TV input in my computer, and frankly I think that with the current mishmash of input options, formats, and transfer systems, it would be silly to add one in that will only work with some subset. OTOH, the only valid solution at this point that meets those problems head on is, as applenut pointed out, composite. Which is analog. Which would be silly with the advent of digital distribution over cable, satellite, and such.



    Bottom line: there's nothing at this point that's suitable for long-term strategy... other than FireWire. Already being pushed by the FCC, already being adopted by video equipment manufacturers, and already on every Mac. The market is just being poky.
  • Reply 24 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Frankly, I don't want to watch TV on my computer.



    But I want my computer to archive/record/stream video.




    Ok...but if that were to happen, the computer would be capable of displaying these archive/record/stream on the computer screen also...and Steve thinks that's a no-no...so archiving/recording/streaming to another device cannot happen while Steve says it can't.
  • Reply 25 of 29
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Well that was a biazrre comment.



    Care to translate?
  • Reply 26 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Well that was a biazrre comment.



    Care to translate?




    I took it to mean that while your ideas make a lot of sense, they have to get past Jobs's dislike of convergence.



    Of course, there are some ways that this could happen - if the functionality took off in the Windows world, for example. Apple certainly isn't immune to copying from Windows.
  • Reply 27 of 29
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    I don't think it's that far off... we currently don't have an iTunes-esque approach for organizing video *period*... which is weird, considering the importance of QuickTime. So that's certainly coming down the pipe, guaranteed.



    THEN the only missing piece is getting your home TV video into the computer, and as we've been discussing, the options right now are simply too numerous for a one-size-fits-all that Apple would have to do. The only viable option at all is analog, which is just a silly thing to do when everything is going digital.



    In the meantime, there are peripherals for getting the video in from the format that *you* have... while the Mac sits there, FireWire port at the ready, waiting for the final digital HDTV push, IEEE1394 included.
  • Reply 28 of 29
    jrgjrg Posts: 58member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    THEN the only missing piece is getting your home TV video into the computer, and as we've been discussing, the options right now are simply too numerous for a one-size-fits-all that Apple would have to do. The only viable option at all is analog, which is just a silly thing to do when everything is going digital.





    How about a kind of reverse Airport Express?



    Have 2-3 different video in ports and broadcast to another wireless equipped Mac to some has-yet-to-be-created iApp. The tuner is then the hardware you already have: Set-top box, video, dvd, TiVO etc. Less flexible than the iMac having everything, but, generally most houses don't have more than a couple of TV antenna connections anyway. In my house you need a large external aerial to get any TV at all, and I only have 1 jack into the place, so that is the only room any system that does not broadcast over Airport would work for me.
  • Reply 29 of 29
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JRG

    How about a kind of reverse Airport Express?



    Have 2-3 different video in ports and broadcast to another wireless equipped Mac to some has-yet-to-be-created iApp. The tuner is then the hardware you already have: Set-top box, video, dvd, TiVO etc. Less flexible than the iMac having everything, but, generally most houses don't have more than a couple of TV antenna connections anyway. In my house you need a large external aerial to get any TV at all, and I only have 1 jack into the place, so that is the only room any system that does not broadcast over Airport would work for me.




    The problem with this approach is that you have to be there to turn on the TV, choose the channel, and start your computer recording. What is desirable is the ability to have the computer do this with an easy programing selection via iCal.
Sign In or Register to comment.