A cube design is not the way to go. I want to be able to stack it with my other equipment. This means, I want it like the size of a DVD player, Audio Receiver, or TiVO. Like Onlooker said, it doesn't need a full OS X setup, nor all the same default applications. It needs Front Row (so iPhoto, iTunes, DVD Player), Safari and Mail (for a WebTV like experience if you have a wireless keyboard), maybe a few others. The hardware needs to have DVI, Ethernet, Airport, Bluetooth, CableCard 2, OTA Antenna connector, and a USB port. It should record to H.264 (or MPEG2 if the channel is an HD MPEG2 stream). It will have a hard drive (for the DVR functionality), but you can also off load songs form your iPod, or photos from your digital camera. Strip out what you don't need (no need for firewire, or for 3 additional USB ports, or for 90% of the applications/printer drivers/etc that OS X installs by default), to lower the price.
This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.
This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.
I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.
I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.
So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.
Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.
cable card comes from your cable provider(you pay them), it's so you don't have to have a box, and operate from your TV BUT many cable don't have it , i've tried, i think it's a bust, why tv's have them and cable (adelphia) doesn't offer it. why then put them in the TV to begin with.... i think it's a bust i can see it saving money since they get the same price for the card as the box, but what about DVR. for 10$ i get both a dvr and features, sure it's another box but hey. now if i had a plasma on my wall i wouldn't want another box hanging around.
So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.
The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.
Quote:
Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.
Um, yes I did. CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues. CableCARD 2.0 is not delayed. It is, and always has been, scheduled for a 2006 rollout, and thats when it is coming. It is FCC mandated, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. TiVO has already committed to it with their Series 3 boxes, as has Microsoft with Windows Vista.
The National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) has provided a CableCARD status report to the Federal Communications Comission...However, the more interesting news is the status of CableCARD 2.0 on track for 2006 deployment.
See CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification OC-SP-CCIF2.0-I02-050708, http://www.opencable.com/specifications/. Pre-Qualified samples of the multistream CableCARD will be submitted to CableLabs for preliminary testing in the fourth quarter of 2005, with the expectation of full testing and qualification early in 2006. It is expected that multistream CableCARDs will be widely available for use in commercially available commercial devices by mid-2006.
So as you can see, no delays at all!
The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.
I have to disagree with the post that said it needed to have safari, and all that crap for it to be a webtv like experience. I think that is the last thing you would want to do. If you wanted to connect a compatible Mac to an Apple home media unit that is another thing, but putting everything all in one box is what they should try and differentiate from. Don't make a computer experience. You need a new one. Start with some basics. Earlier I said have Mail, and Video iChat included, but I think that may have been too much. Stick with the PVR, and iTunes Music store connectivity, an iPod dock, and playback to your stereo through airtunes. That is not going to seem like a computer. If you want the other features (update, and change front row) use Front row equipped Macs as compatible units. I just don't think selling a computer for the TV has been very successful, and Apple should keep expanding on their other hardware.
I also agree that it doesn't have to look like a cube., or a Mac Mini, but it would be neat to make a new set of them fit together that were stackable. They could look really cool. It doesn't necessarily have to be designed to the same size as your DVD player, and various components either. Unique equipment is all over the place in electronic components right now. Many are like pieces of art.
The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.
CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues.
The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.
Is this $10 the same for a non-DVR box? The reason I ask is that DISH Network does have a "Monthly $5.98 DISH Network DVR Service fee". (from the fine print on http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/p...vr/index.shtml)
We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.
I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.
onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.
And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.
We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.
That is something that is up to the box maker I would imagine. Currently TiVO Series 2 boxes have TiVO2GO, which allows to to transmit your shows from the TiVO to your PC via ethernet or wifi.
Quote:
I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.
Um...the broadcast flag is non-existant right now. The MPAA was trying to get it brought in via the FCC, but it was shot down. They have tried to get it in by piggy backing it on other bills, but so far no good. As it stands there is currently no broadcast flag. See here for some info
Quote:
onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.
Ya, I only listed adding Safari and Mail for the above average user. Believe it or not there are WebTV users out there, and there are people that would like to browse the web on their TV. But I agree, this DVR box shouldn't be a full blown computer. Mail and Safari aren't needed, and maybe could be included in some kind of a value added extra (the $299 DVR doesn't include it, but the $399 with a bluetooth keyboard does).
Quote:
And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.
I think the mini now will be a good media center pc, minus the DVR capabilities. I am very tempted to get one, once they get to the refurbished stages (and come down in price a bit).
It should not be stripped down. This is not about turning a mac into a tivo. Its about bringing the flexibility and potential of the mac platform into the central media focus of the home.
Apple should embrace and champion HAVI, allowing me to access custom interfaces for my Amp, DVHS, TIVO, and all other AV equipment. Sound processing should be handled in software, ending the need to buy a new receiver everytime a new codec is introduced. Apple could sell a whole new line of AV products that provide the flexibility people want - Airport Extreme AV for streaming to multiple tvs, mac mini Amp, etc...
Hobbiests should see enough potential to start writing shareware that will extend the macs capabilities into those areas that lawyers fear to tread- Archiving DVD images onto the mini (or an external hard drive) to have a central home media jukebox. Distributed p2p programs to share recorded shows. Word would spread that the mac mini can get the job done with a few downloads.
Comments
Originally posted by kupan787
A cube design is not the way to go. I want to be able to stack it with my other equipment. This means, I want it like the size of a DVD player, Audio Receiver, or TiVO. Like Onlooker said, it doesn't need a full OS X setup, nor all the same default applications. It needs Front Row (so iPhoto, iTunes, DVD Player), Safari and Mail (for a WebTV like experience if you have a wireless keyboard), maybe a few others. The hardware needs to have DVI, Ethernet, Airport, Bluetooth, CableCard 2, OTA Antenna connector, and a USB port. It should record to H.264 (or MPEG2 if the channel is an HD MPEG2 stream). It will have a hard drive (for the DVR functionality), but you can also off load songs form your iPod, or photos from your digital camera. Strip out what you don't need (no need for firewire, or for 3 additional USB ports, or for 90% of the applications/printer drivers/etc that OS X installs by default), to lower the price.
This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.
Originally posted by aresee
This is getting close to what I am looking for. But I don't know about the DVR. First the "DVR rent". The is a "fee" that the cable and satellite companies are forced to charge us for the privilege of recording copyrighted material. Without this fee Hollywood would not allow their shows to distributed by the cable/satellite services offering DVRs. Second is interconnectivity. One of the satellite companies was forced to disable the computer interfaces on their receivers because Hollywood was afraid that it would be used to pirate their shows. I can't see Apple (or us) putting up with either restriction to an Apple branded media center. Add in iTMS offering TV shows, a DVR is a headache that Apple can avoid.
I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.
Originally posted by kupan787
I don't know about satellite, but fortunately for cable users there is CableCard. This kills both your birds with one stone. For a small monthly fee (about the same as getting a DVR from your cable provider, which is $10/month), you can get a CableCard. This card can record multiple streams, change channels, order PPV, and do anything that a cable STB can do. Granted most of this isn't available until CableCard 2.0, but that is supposed to be here later this year.
So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.
Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.
Originally posted by aresee
So what about this CableCard? Is it something you get from the cable company or from a third party. Who do you pay the $10 to, the cable company, card dealer or someone else? And what services and rights do you get for you $10? This does not kill my first point. It just restates it. There is a DVR fee. I don't think that Apple would want to be the middle man in collecting this fee or would want to open up their boxes to the installation of a third party enabling device.
The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.
Nor does your response address the interconnectivity issue. I suspect that the delay on the CableCard 2.0 is due to the "Broadcast Bit". Whose purpose is to prevent unauthorised transfer of recorded TV shows. Especially accross IP networks. Until the time that the Broadcast Bit is released, Hollywood is controlling possible file transfers by denying the DVR manufactures the ability to connect to IP networks. Particularly DVRs that can receive digital signals.
Um, yes I did. CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues. CableCARD 2.0 is not delayed. It is, and always has been, scheduled for a 2006 rollout, and thats when it is coming. It is FCC mandated, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. TiVO has already committed to it with their Series 3 boxes, as has Microsoft with Windows Vista.
See this :
The National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) has provided a CableCARD status report to the Federal Communications Comission...However, the more interesting news is the status of CableCARD 2.0 on track for 2006 deployment.
See CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification OC-SP-CCIF2.0-I02-050708, http://www.opencable.com/specifications/. Pre-Qualified samples of the multistream CableCARD will be submitted to CableLabs for preliminary testing in the fourth quarter of 2005, with the expectation of full testing and qualification early in 2006. It is expected that multistream CableCARDs will be widely available for use in commercially available commercial devices by mid-2006.
So as you can see, no delays at all!
The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.
I also agree that it doesn't have to look like a cube., or a Mac Mini, but it would be neat to make a new set of them fit together that were stackable. They could look really cool. It doesn't necessarily have to be designed to the same size as your DVD player, and various components either. Unique equipment is all over the place in electronic components right now. Many are like pieces of art.
Originally posted by kupan787
The cable company collects the fee. So no 3rd party, no middle man. There is no additional DVR Fee. The way it works is I can choose to pay $10 a month for my current STB with DVR capabilities, or I can pay $10 a month for a CableCARD, which gives me all the functionality of my STB. So this DVR Fee you keep talking about is a non existent point.
CableCARD 2.0 is a STB in a card. It can do EVERYTHING your current STB can do, so there are NO interconnectivity issues.
The Broadcast flag is something completely different, and has already been struck down. Yes, the MPAA is trying to backdoor it in, but its going nowhere.
Is this $10 the same for a non-DVR box? The reason I ask is that DISH Network does have a "Monthly $5.98 DISH Network DVR Service fee". (from the fine print on http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/p...vr/index.shtml)
We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.
I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.
onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.
And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.
Originally posted by aresee
We may be talking about different interfaces. I'm talking about IP interfaces between DVRs and your LAN. The digital receivers that "I" know about (which admittedly isn't many) have this interface disabled or severely restricted. I don't want this happening with any Apple Media Center. I want the media center to be fully functional with the Mac.
That is something that is up to the box maker I would imagine. Currently TiVO Series 2 boxes have TiVO2GO, which allows to to transmit your shows from the TiVO to your PC via ethernet or wifi.
I missed that about the Broadcast flag being dropped. Or I dismissed it because the MPAA didn't drop it. Their backdoor appears to be working. At least with DISH Network.
Um...the broadcast flag is non-existant right now. The MPAA was trying to get it brought in via the FCC, but it was shot down. They have tried to get it in by piggy backing it on other bills, but so far no good. As it stands there is currently no broadcast flag. See here for some info
onlooker, I agree with you. The Apple Media Center should not be a full blown computer. It should be a limited living room box that can browse and display A/V media that is stored either on it or elsewhere on your network. However Safari might be necessary in order for it to access on-line QuickTime streams.
Ya, I only listed adding Safari and Mail for the above average user. Believe it or not there are WebTV users out there, and there are people that would like to browse the web on their TV. But I agree, this DVR box shouldn't be a full blown computer. Mail and Safari aren't needed, and maybe could be included in some kind of a value added extra (the $299 DVR doesn't include it, but the $399 with a bluetooth keyboard does).
And PVR cababilities. From above you can guess that I don't think that it this will happen. More from outside political angles than anything else. I would rather have the media center now, without a PVR, than wait until Apple kisses the right asses, greases the correct palms and genuflects to the right people.
I think the mini now will be a good media center pc, minus the DVR capabilities. I am very tempted to get one, once they get to the refurbished stages (and come down in price a bit).
Apple should embrace and champion HAVI, allowing me to access custom interfaces for my Amp, DVHS, TIVO, and all other AV equipment. Sound processing should be handled in software, ending the need to buy a new receiver everytime a new codec is introduced. Apple could sell a whole new line of AV products that provide the flexibility people want - Airport Extreme AV for streaming to multiple tvs, mac mini Amp, etc...
Hobbiests should see enough potential to start writing shareware that will extend the macs capabilities into those areas that lawyers fear to tread- Archiving DVD images onto the mini (or an external hard drive) to have a central home media jukebox. Distributed p2p programs to share recorded shows. Word would spread that the mac mini can get the job done with a few downloads.