The Apple Media Center isn't all that complicated. Mostly it's software plus a mini with more power. Maybe throw in a remote that you can actually do things with (like switch audio tracks and turn subtitles on and off).
The software that's missing is simply an iTunes for videos. It should be a part of iLife and it should integrate with the other iLife programs seamlessly. Having video playlists is a no-brainer and seamless integration with PVRs like eyeTV should be too. It should have an advanced cataloging system: type (movie, TV show, music video, home video, stupid email videos from uncle Mike, etc.), genre (drama, comedy, sci-fi, news, etc.), director, and starring. Videos should be editable in iMovie. And playlists should be exportable to iDVD (or whatever it will be called after Blu-Ray burners become available). The program would obviously be linked to Apple's rebranded online video store (for some reason I like the sound of Film Vault for the program, so the Film Vault Video Store would be the natural name (even though the name is kind of a tautological pun if you think about it...)), but it would also support ripping at various sizes and resolutions DRMed copies of HD movies from Blu-Ray disks (and HD-DVDs?) legally because of MMC.
(BTW, how does MMC work on the new HD-DVDs? Anyone know? Can you copy a full quality version onto your comp? Or is it a downgraded (say, DVD-quality) version that you get? Or is MMC simply vaporware and a marketing ploy to make us think the movie studios are waking up and moving into the new millenium (or at least the 90s) when they really are the same greedy, hyper-controlling fools they've always been?)
If that's in place, then people can simply DIY a media center with whatever display they have and whatever source they have in whatever country.
Apple might consider buying Elgato, or it might just partner with them and let Elgato take the legal risks.
Giving Front Row 2.0 a plug-in style architecture would help individuals customize a solution to their individual circumstance, and give third party developers yet another reason to support and promote the Mac platform.
Most houses have a TV, stereo, DVD player, computer, and a game console. Why are five appliances necessary to interact with what is essentially digital information? I realize that TV and cable are still analog, but HDTV is the future and soon all entertainment will be digital.
And dont forget Games. The market for videogames is huge and growing. I still cannot understand why the new Mac Mini was not re-invented as a game console, in addition to its computer functionality.
Microsh*t's Xbox 360 is foundering, it is expensive, it overheats, and there are still not many good titles for it. The new Mac Mini could have trumped the Xbox 360 and pre-empted the PS 3. Compare the size and capability of the Xbox 360 to the Mac Mini: The Mini is about the same size, and costs about the same, (of course Microsh*t sells the 360 at a loss).
I think most people will agree that any media center must include TV, stereo, support for HDTV, a DVD player, and WiFi, in addition to being a computer. Any computer with the processing power to deal with all this will have the power to run graphics. So please dont forget to make the media center a game console.
I think most people will agree that any media center must include TV, stereo, support for HDTV, a DVD player, and WiFi, in addition to being a computer. Any computer with the processing power to deal with all this will have the power to run graphics. So please dont forget to make the media center a game console.
...
I don't know that it has to be apparent that it is a computer in the same way that my PVR and set-top box don't appear to be computers.
You guy's got it all wrong... It should not be a computer in the least way. It should be a stand alone consumer product all in itself. It should be Mac compatible with some of these features you mention via a networked Mac, but it should not be a Mac. It needs to be an Apple like the iPod is. It needs to start as a living room product like a DVR with maybe a DVD player, or burner, but most of the online, and iLife features should come via a networked computer.
How does Apple beat tivo at their own game? Probably not that tuff with the Apple name. But offering things that a Tivo can not is a place to start. Straight off the bat you could to integrate the few things that are already Windows compatible so they don't feel left out. An iPod dock, airTunes, and iTMS (with a cable modem, or DSL connection only), any other iLife features need to come via a better, more interesting, yet simple, front row application interface where the apps only pop in when your networked with a Mac that has these apps installed.
Then it's all a matter of deciding on what this thing can actually do for the living room. (family room) What does the average consumer like about Apple's products, and those pretty commercials? Once they get a taste, or see one at a friends house they may be compelled to get a Mac mini just for the extra features that are offered via a network. But they still have to offer a few things right out of the box. That is why I suggested the iPod dock, iTMS, and airTunes.
You guy's got it all wrong... It should not be a computer in the least way. It should be a stand alone consumer product all in itself. It should be Mac compatible with some of these features you mention via a networked Mac, but it should not be a Mac. It needs to be an Apple like the iPod is. It needs to start as a living room product like a DVR with maybe a DVD player, or burner, but most of the online, and iLife features should come via a networked computer.
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
That isn't what I said, or meant. I meant the iPod is an Apple - Not a Mac. It's in it's own iconic category. It does not fall into the Mac category which can be both a blessing and a curse.
Quote:
Another shareholder requested that the company make ?the ultimate media center,? a personal video recorder that could record television programs and share media on his computer.
I agree with onlooker and programmer. I dont' think people want to have a computer in their living room. I think they want a box that allows them to record and playback their video content. They want a device that allows them to view their photographs and play their favorite music.
The devil really is in the details. A nice UI is required with lots of flexibility and easy networking. Apple has all the tools to make something very nice.
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
Why would that be too expensive? My Sky+ box is a linux box disguised as an appliance. I believe that the Tivo is similar. Even my iPod is a computer. It just doesn't look like one.
Usually I would agree, and I probably still do, but if the a major new aspect of Leopard is to manipualte media, not through programs on the face of it, but as media (sort of an OpenDoc for media assets), and this is one of the aspects of Leopard that Apple wants to prepare developers for, who knows?
Of course, you are probably right, but I can dream.
More importantly, why not allow the Media Center Device to be a new platform FOR developers? Let them write widget-style plug-ins to enhance fuctions etc.
* Apple will not connect to cable. It wants to replace cable.
Apple should cater to what customers want...
Quote:
* Oh, and iPod hifi surround. hifi-quality wireless speakerset.
No such, will never be such a thing unless battery energy storage density will rise by a factor of 10X and you can somehow have a stable ground from a battery pack. Won't happen in the next 5-10 years.
I agree with onlooker and programmer. I dont' think people want to have a computer in their living room. I think they want a box that allows them to record and playback their video content. They want a device that allows them to view their photographs and play their favorite music.
The devil really is in the details. A nice UI is required with lots of flexibility and easy networking. Apple has all the tools to make something very nice.
Ditto!
I don't want a Mac on my living room. For what? check email, surf the net, word processing. No way. I do those things on my computer in the office or my laptop anywhere.
I want a box that I can record and view my videos, TV shows, see my photos, listen my music, etc.
and connect and integrate all my entertainment devices, like my DVD, my tv, my laserdisc, etc.
These proprietary set top boxes are owned by the companies that provide the networks. Cable companies run wires to peoples houses, satellite TV companies put satellites into orbit to beam down programming. As long as they are building infrastructure, they will have proprietary set-top boxes.
I'm a Comcast subscriber, and the new cable boxes have DVR built into them. There is no way these companies are going to allow another set-top box to provide services that they can install themselves. They have built their networks after all, and they expect to squeeze their customers as much as they can.
Since that is not going to change, Apple must find another way into the living room. Even though an HDTV is really just a computer monitor, there are few people who want HDTV without cable or satellite, (like maybe ten or twenty). But there is another route into the living room.
Make a more powerful version of the Mini, and make it rock at games, goddammit!
Microsh*t had the gall to introduce the Xbox after Sony's PS2. Now they have abandoned their original console and have introduced the Xbox 360, and this new console is tanking. Many have overheated, faulty drives have scratched discs, and there are other technical issues. In addition, there are few titles available. Lack of demand for Xbox 360 titles has already forced publishers to lower prices from $60 to $40 on most games.
There are less than 5 million Xbox 360s out right now. Apple may not have much market share, but a new Mac could be competitive as a game console. However, this opportunity will not last. Sony is introducing their new Playstation 3 this November.
I just cant understand why people cant see it. Think people. This is a "window" of opportunity for Apple.
I don't see it because 90% of games are not particularly compatible with Macs, and Apple has not written a single game. You would have to have to announced this thing when the other three were handing out development packages for their new systems to developers two years in advance so they would have titles to play on them two years later.
So what's Apple going to do? Announce one now? That would be possible, but you still wouldn''t see it for a few years. It could catch the other two off guard because it would have two years jump in technology, but for it to succeed Apple would have to partner with at least 10 current console game developers that have big titles. Give them kick backs, and buy the two mac game conversion teams and unite them under the Apple roof, and hire a big group of new (just out of school) game developers. Then branch that into two categories. One for original titles, and another just for porting games. And that's just a start. This would be a huge endeavor. Apple could go with a 50/50 partnership with intel, and they may have a better looking portfolio on this endeavor at an investors point of view, but I just can't imagine it. Even though I just did.
Onlooker, if this was just another day for the industry I would agree with you. But this is not just another day for the computer/console game industry. Microsh*t, Sony, and Nintendo are all introducing new consoles, with new chipsets.
Every studio making console games already has at least two (Xbox 360 and PS3) platforms they have to code to. Nintendo is introducing a console with a radically different controller, and it is not clear how many studios will develop games for it. And of course there is also the market for PC games.
Your post makes it sound like game studios are exited to deal with Sony and Microsh*t. They are not. The creators HAVE to get permission to develop games for these consoles, they HAVE to sign licencing agreements, and they HAVE to pay a percentage to Microsh*t and Sony for each game sold.
But they do it because these consoles are hooked up to TV's. If Apple made another console that hooked up to a TV or monitor, these studios would make games for it. It's that simple.
PC games are cheaper than console games precisely because the PC is an open system, game studios do not need to get a license and pay Microsoft to develop PC games.
If Apple provided a solid platform that could generate graphics like the Xbox 360, these studios could, and would port games to a Mac. I am not talking about a PC with an expensive graphics card, but a dedicated Mac specifically designed for HDTV and games.
Picture a Mac mini with the ability to create graphics like the Xbox 360, and add a controller. That's it. But this new computer wouldnt just be a game console, it would also be a Mac.
Comments
Originally posted by TenoBell
Nope MS did not invent this. Media PC's have been around for a long time.
Apple had the Macintosh TV back in 1993.
Is that the old Apple STB your referring to? Years before Webtv.
Originally posted by onlooker
Is that the old Apple STB your referring to? Years before Webtv.
No, he means the Mac TV. Kind of a Performa in black on steroids.
The software that's missing is simply an iTunes for videos. It should be a part of iLife and it should integrate with the other iLife programs seamlessly. Having video playlists is a no-brainer and seamless integration with PVRs like eyeTV should be too. It should have an advanced cataloging system: type (movie, TV show, music video, home video, stupid email videos from uncle Mike, etc.), genre (drama, comedy, sci-fi, news, etc.), director, and starring. Videos should be editable in iMovie. And playlists should be exportable to iDVD (or whatever it will be called after Blu-Ray burners become available). The program would obviously be linked to Apple's rebranded online video store (for some reason I like the sound of Film Vault for the program, so the Film Vault Video Store would be the natural name (even though the name is kind of a tautological pun if you think about it...)), but it would also support ripping at various sizes and resolutions DRMed copies of HD movies from Blu-Ray disks (and HD-DVDs?) legally because of MMC.
(BTW, how does MMC work on the new HD-DVDs? Anyone know? Can you copy a full quality version onto your comp? Or is it a downgraded (say, DVD-quality) version that you get? Or is MMC simply vaporware and a marketing ploy to make us think the movie studios are waking up and moving into the new millenium (or at least the 90s) when they really are the same greedy, hyper-controlling fools they've always been?)
If that's in place, then people can simply DIY a media center with whatever display they have and whatever source they have in whatever country.
Apple might consider buying Elgato, or it might just partner with them and let Elgato take the legal risks.
Giving Front Row 2.0 a plug-in style architecture would help individuals customize a solution to their individual circumstance, and give third party developers yet another reason to support and promote the Mac platform.
Originally posted by netdog
Any ideas as to what Media Center rethinks Apple might come up with?
actually, it reminds me of the "HiFi towers" (amp, pre-amp, cassette player, tuner...) from the 70ies...
//pic from Miglia //
And dont forget Games. The market for videogames is huge and growing. I still cannot understand why the new Mac Mini was not re-invented as a game console, in addition to its computer functionality.
Microsh*t's Xbox 360 is foundering, it is expensive, it overheats, and there are still not many good titles for it. The new Mac Mini could have trumped the Xbox 360 and pre-empted the PS 3. Compare the size and capability of the Xbox 360 to the Mac Mini: The Mini is about the same size, and costs about the same, (of course Microsh*t sells the 360 at a loss).
I think most people will agree that any media center must include TV, stereo, support for HDTV, a DVD player, and WiFi, in addition to being a computer. Any computer with the processing power to deal with all this will have the power to run graphics. So please dont forget to make the media center a game console.
...
Originally posted by The Populist
I think most people will agree that any media center must include TV, stereo, support for HDTV, a DVD player, and WiFi, in addition to being a computer. Any computer with the processing power to deal with all this will have the power to run graphics. So please dont forget to make the media center a game console.
...
I don't know that it has to be apparent that it is a computer in the same way that my PVR and set-top box don't appear to be computers.
Originally posted by onlooker
You guy's got it all wrong... It should not be a computer in the least way. It should be a stand alone consumer product all in itself.
Um, I think that is what I just said.
How does Apple beat tivo at their own game? Probably not that tuff with the Apple name. But offering things that a Tivo can not is a place to start. Straight off the bat you could to integrate the few things that are already Windows compatible so they don't feel left out. An iPod dock, airTunes, and iTMS (with a cable modem, or DSL connection only), any other iLife features need to come via a better, more interesting, yet simple, front row application interface where the apps only pop in when your networked with a Mac that has these apps installed.
Then it's all a matter of deciding on what this thing can actually do for the living room. (family room) What does the average consumer like about Apple's products, and those pretty commercials? Once they get a taste, or see one at a friends house they may be compelled to get a Mac mini just for the extra features that are offered via a network. But they still have to offer a few things right out of the box. That is why I suggested the iPod dock, iTMS, and airTunes.
BTW, the Mac TV redo is a Bad idea.
Originally posted by onlooker
You guy's got it all wrong... It should not be a computer in the least way. It should be a stand alone consumer product all in itself. It should be Mac compatible with some of these features you mention via a networked Mac, but it should not be a Mac. It needs to be an Apple like the iPod is. It needs to start as a living room product like a DVR with maybe a DVD player, or burner, but most of the online, and iLife features should come via a networked computer.
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
Originally posted by Programmer
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
That isn't what I said, or meant. I meant the iPod is an Apple - Not a Mac. It's in it's own iconic category. It does not fall into the Mac category which can be both a blessing and a curse.
Another shareholder requested that the company make ?the ultimate media center,? a personal video recorder that could record television programs and share media on his computer.
?We hear you loud and clear,? Jobs responded.
The devil really is in the details. A nice UI is required with lots of flexibility and easy networking. Apple has all the tools to make something very nice.
Originally posted by Programmer
The iPod doesn't stand alone from the computer, however. It is dependent upon it for managing your media and making it available to the iPod. And this media center should not be its own computer because that would make it too expensive, too big, and too noisy -- which the iPod is none of. And it shouldn't have to be concerned about the complex and ever changing world of broadcast TV sources... Apple simply cannot replace cableboxes or other set top units, and with DVRs built into many of those it doesn't make sense to replicate that functionality.
Why would that be too expensive? My Sky+ box is a linux box disguised as an appliance. I believe that the Tivo is similar. Even my iPod is a computer. It just doesn't look like one.
Originally posted by netdog
Usually I would agree, and I probably still do, but if the a major new aspect of Leopard is to manipualte media, not through programs on the face of it, but as media (sort of an OpenDoc for media assets), and this is one of the aspects of Leopard that Apple wants to prepare developers for, who knows?
Of course, you are probably right, but I can dream.
More importantly, why not allow the Media Center Device to be a new platform FOR developers? Let them write widget-style plug-ins to enhance fuctions etc.
That would be an 'excuse' to launch it at WWDC.
* Apple will not connect to cable. It wants to replace cable.
Apple should cater to what customers want...
* Oh, and iPod hifi surround. hifi-quality wireless speakerset.
No such, will never be such a thing unless battery energy storage density will rise by a factor of 10X and you can somehow have a stable ground from a battery pack. Won't happen in the next 5-10 years.
* airport connecting VOIP iPhone
That would be really cool and practical. :-)
Originally posted by hmurchison
I agree with onlooker and programmer. I dont' think people want to have a computer in their living room. I think they want a box that allows them to record and playback their video content. They want a device that allows them to view their photographs and play their favorite music.
The devil really is in the details. A nice UI is required with lots of flexibility and easy networking. Apple has all the tools to make something very nice.
Ditto!
I don't want a Mac on my living room. For what? check email, surf the net, word processing. No way. I do those things on my computer in the office or my laptop anywhere.
I want a box that I can record and view my videos, TV shows, see my photos, listen my music, etc.
and connect and integrate all my entertainment devices, like my DVD, my tv, my laserdisc, etc.
This is what the media hub should be all about.
I'm a Comcast subscriber, and the new cable boxes have DVR built into them. There is no way these companies are going to allow another set-top box to provide services that they can install themselves. They have built their networks after all, and they expect to squeeze their customers as much as they can.
Since that is not going to change, Apple must find another way into the living room. Even though an HDTV is really just a computer monitor, there are few people who want HDTV without cable or satellite, (like maybe ten or twenty). But there is another route into the living room.
Make a more powerful version of the Mini, and make it rock at games, goddammit!
Microsh*t had the gall to introduce the Xbox after Sony's PS2. Now they have abandoned their original console and have introduced the Xbox 360, and this new console is tanking. Many have overheated, faulty drives have scratched discs, and there are other technical issues. In addition, there are few titles available. Lack of demand for Xbox 360 titles has already forced publishers to lower prices from $60 to $40 on most games.
There are less than 5 million Xbox 360s out right now. Apple may not have much market share, but a new Mac could be competitive as a game console. However, this opportunity will not last. Sony is introducing their new Playstation 3 this November.
I just cant understand why people cant see it. Think people. This is a "window" of opportunity for Apple.
...
So what's Apple going to do? Announce one now? That would be possible, but you still wouldn''t see it for a few years. It could catch the other two off guard because it would have two years jump in technology, but for it to succeed Apple would have to partner with at least 10 current console game developers that have big titles. Give them kick backs, and buy the two mac game conversion teams and unite them under the Apple roof, and hire a big group of new (just out of school) game developers. Then branch that into two categories. One for original titles, and another just for porting games. And that's just a start. This would be a huge endeavor. Apple could go with a 50/50 partnership with intel, and they may have a better looking portfolio on this endeavor at an investors point of view, but I just can't imagine it. Even though I just did.
Every studio making console games already has at least two (Xbox 360 and PS3) platforms they have to code to. Nintendo is introducing a console with a radically different controller, and it is not clear how many studios will develop games for it. And of course there is also the market for PC games.
Your post makes it sound like game studios are exited to deal with Sony and Microsh*t. They are not. The creators HAVE to get permission to develop games for these consoles, they HAVE to sign licencing agreements, and they HAVE to pay a percentage to Microsh*t and Sony for each game sold.
But they do it because these consoles are hooked up to TV's. If Apple made another console that hooked up to a TV or monitor, these studios would make games for it. It's that simple.
PC games are cheaper than console games precisely because the PC is an open system, game studios do not need to get a license and pay Microsoft to develop PC games.
If Apple provided a solid platform that could generate graphics like the Xbox 360, these studios could, and would port games to a Mac. I am not talking about a PC with an expensive graphics card, but a dedicated Mac specifically designed for HDTV and games.
Picture a Mac mini with the ability to create graphics like the Xbox 360, and add a controller. That's it. But this new computer wouldnt just be a game console, it would also be a Mac.
...