iTV can work from the TV to the computer. Steve Jobs showed us, by checking out movie trailers online by simply clicking a button. This means that iTV sent the request to the compter, which went online and the got the trailer, and then sent it back to iTV.
The real question is whether or not the API will be open. If it is, then it would be simple to go get the latest YouTube hit, etc. The possibilities are endless; but only if the API is open.
How do we know that the iTV itself didn't go online? That seems more likely to me.
Oh man, I wish the API were open... I would definately get one then. But considering that the iPod API is *still* closed, I don't have much hope.
the decision to leave a hard drive OUT of this thing was brilliant. the iPod just became that much more important now. everyone with an iPod has the ability to throw their music, favorite shows and increasingly more and more movies and run to anyone else's with an iTV to watch it all. The iPod is on it's way to becoming more or less or a portable DVR.
Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.
I don't know if Apple is willing to go the DVR route. Note that there are no inputs into the iTV other than USB so the lack of a drive only hampers temporary storage of streamed material. So given the form factor and lack of inputs I would have to assume that if they were to ever offer DVR capability that it would appear on the mini which could stack with the iTV.
The drive given the form factor, even if included, would still make it a poor DVR without a NAS somewhere.
As far as not having HD...well the folks that really think that 640x480 is the end resolution for iTV believe that Steve is a complete idiot. There are already many folks with the bandwidth requirements but SpamSandwich wants to believe its still 1996 and not 2006. The majority of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and cable customers will be able to stream 720p within a few years. The telcos are investing billions into the buildout...$15-$20B by Verizon alone. Many of their customers have the bandwidth to stream 720p movies today.
The majority of internet users aready have broadband and can download 720p movies overnight.
They have a secure video chain that will be acceptable to the studios.
So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.
I don't know if Apple is willing to go the DVR route. Note that there are no inputs into the iTV other than USB so the lack of a drive only hampers temporary storage of streamed material. So given the form factor and lack of inputs I would have to assume that if they were to ever offer DVR capability that it would appear on the mini which could stack with the iTV.
Look, people, read some of the earlier posts. It's been said already.
Apple is NOT going to add an HDD or and optical drive into this puppy anytime soon. Their business model here is - drumroll please - the Mac is the DIGITAL HUB!
That means that if you want to record a movie - do it on your Mac. The Mac Pro can hold four 500 GB drives. That's a lot more than they could ever put into this box. Besides, Apple doesn't want you to record your favorite TV show - they wantcha to buy it from the ITS instead!
This is version 1. It is not intended to be what it will be in just a year or two. It's a new release of a new product, fer cryin out loud. This Sneak Peek was probably allowed for two reasons: to keep consumers away from competing appliances and to show the Hollywood Studios that Apple is serious, (and more so) than Amazon.
Besides, put an HDD into it, and maybe an optical drive and it'll cost $500. And people on this and other forums are already crying over the price. How much do ya want it to cost?
The iPod doc has audio and video out, and the iPod can output 640X480 video. As long as there is a doc where you go or you take yours you should be able to hook it up to a TV and play the new higher resolution video on the road. This does not make it a DVR, but it is a portable solution to take your video's to a friends house to watch.
The lack of HD may or may not be a problem for the iTV, we don't know yet. Will it have a limited flash drive for a cache and it's OS? or will the OS be flashed on ROM? Will it act as a Thin Client of the host computer, using it's HD for holding the information and any extensions that it needs?
If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.
So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.
Vinea
I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.
Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.
So what's the deal? The unit has the advanced output port for current HD resolution. That means that, whatever they are currently holding the resolution down to, the box will undoubtedly handle the larger resolution. All they're waiting for is 802.11n standards to get published so the wireless will work as advertised.
If your ISP won't handle the load, that's not Apple's problem; what it WILL do is put additional pressure, in the form of market demand, on the ISPs to increase the pace of Broadband rollout. Believe me, there are enough of us that do have fast enough connections that we'll gladly shell out the bucks to put this baby into our living rooms.
Give this a few years to shake out, and broadcast Tv is going to be close to folding. This is just the first tentative baby steps towards total on demand entertainment content. Ten years is a good guess at how long it might take to reach a good market penetration, but this is the beginning.
It's certainly plausible that one could plug an iPod into the USB port of the iTV and access the iPod's content through the iTV. Friends and family could come over with their iPods and show you stuff. Could be cool.
If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.
You're correct, but that wasn't my point. My point was that the storage doesn't need to be in the iTV. Apple intends for you to use the MAC as the hub; it will control the content. If you want to add massive amounts of storage, then by all means, put in a large array such as you mention. Apple will be more than happy to sell you content to fill it up with through the ITS!
It's certainly plausible that one could plug an iPod into the USB port of the iTV and access the iPod's content through the iTV. Friends and family could come over with their iPods and show you stuff. Could be cool.
Your sig is wrong, you're not wrong - sharing that way would be really cool - and a LOT more enjoyable than the old slide projectors were!
That's what I like about the Mac community - so many folks have great ways to enjoy the technology - and have a lot of fun sharing how they do it, too.
I'm going to be watching this appliance closely.
By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?
Just speculation, but the 802.11n standard isn't due out until spring 2007. Bummer.
Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.
Do you really think your argument is helped by tired name calling?
I don't want a hard drive in my set top box. I'd much rather buy my own HD space and have it hooked up to my computer. If I want to record my programming, I'll just put a tuner on my mac. And I'll probably not buy much video from the iTunes store, I'm mostly interested in ripping my DVD's to a server.
I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.
Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.
I said it looks like ass in comparison to a HD source. Why don't you try your own suggestion and read the posts?
I have a large screen (100") and I can certainly say that DVD quality is not close to even cable HD. It's hard to tell if the Incredibles is in HD from the live stream but the Engadget folks thought so. Other folks thought not. Animated features are often to worst to try to judge video quality from as they tend to look pretty good anyway.
As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.
If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.
The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.
As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.
If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.
The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.
Vinea
You have no idea what we're showing. We have access to studio quality direct feed as well as cable access. Not just PCs. It is a large conference center, and dvd content is often a subject of events we hold. Each conference room has a large stack of equipment, including DVD players, connected to the projectors, and some of these rooms are quite large, certainly as large as a movie theater.
Obviously, if it has an HDMI connector, then DVD isn't all it will do, now will it? Steve said in the event that they were showing 640x480, I think it was. He said "near-dvd". But as I said, the presence of the HDMI port suggests that the box will do better. Right now, they are limiting the resolution due to download limitations, and as soon as the infrastructure, and the market is right, I am sure that they will upgrade.
Right now, they are proving to the studios that they can deliver the goods. If enough people respond to this, it will result, as the iPod did, in the content providers getting on the bandwagon too. I agree that the timing here is right. All they have to do is convince Hollywood that they can do with this what they did for music.
Why put a DVD player in it? I'd bet that Apple will allow streaming from the mac to the iTV. If they allow that, you've already got a DVD player in your mac - and one that's controllable by the Apple Remote through the iTV! How cool - one less remote to have on my coffee table! (Steve DID note that the iTV is compatible with the Apple Remote, by the way)
Bleh. One more reason to not like where iTV is going. Another remote. Do you realize how many bloody remotes are required to operate component TV+Audio? In this house, there are currently four remotes. Four!
They can't do for this what they did for music. A big part of the appeal of buying music from iTMS and other digital stores is that you can cherrypick the songs you want and skip the rest. Want to hear that one great song? You pay 99¢ instead of $12-$15+
You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.
By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?
He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.
He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.
No, he never said calendar or fiscal. I listened very closely for that, as I had heard that same question before I watched the feed. He said "Q1 2007" exactly like that, at least twice.
How plausible is it that the iTV could upconvert the 640x480 content to 720p on an HD screen? Until 720 or 1080 content is released upconversion could be a good work-around.
They can't do for this what they did for music. A big part of the appeal of buying music from iTMS and other digital stores is that you can cherrypick the songs you want and skip the rest. Want to hear that one great song? You pay 99¢ instead of $12-$15+
You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.
It's a decent start.
Actually, the cherry pick thing is the same. You have the same full control over what content you buy. The kicker here is the price. We all wish it were better. I think it will over time, tho.
Timewise, what's the beef? You can start watching within 1 minute of the download starting, so they're buffering the download, just like watching a trailer. I'd say that's FASTER than going to Blockbuster and standing in line.
Granted, not being able to burn to DVD is a bummer, but that's gotta be a demand on the part of Hollywood. I don't think Steve had quite the handle on negotiations here that he did with the music moguls.
And this won't just change the movie industry. This'll change the way we get ALL video content, eventually. People have been complaining about wanting on demand cable for a while now, and the cable companies have successfully fought that. Not any more!
If this takes off for Apple, they will be in on the ground floor of a movement in this industry that will shake it to the core! It won't be overnight, but it WILL happen. On demand is what the market wants, and with people willing to vote with their wallets, it'll happen. Once the studios see the $$$ begin to roll in, it won't take that long.
Bleh. One more reason to not like where iTV is going. Another remote. Do you realize how many bloody remotes are required to operate component TV+Audio? In this house, there are currently four remotes. Four!
Don't you get the idea? When this box lets you access all your content from iTunes USING THE APPLE REMOTE, then you will be able to eliminate:
1. stereo
2. dvd player
3. vhs player
4. TV remote (cause you'll be watching TV through the iTV)
5. home theater system (cause eventually, the iTV will replace that, too)
There go your four remotes, all rolled into one! (yeah, I know that's 5, but a lotta folks won't have the vhs...)
Comments
iTV can work from the TV to the computer. Steve Jobs showed us, by checking out movie trailers online by simply clicking a button. This means that iTV sent the request to the compter, which went online and the got the trailer, and then sent it back to iTV.
The real question is whether or not the API will be open. If it is, then it would be simple to go get the latest YouTube hit, etc. The possibilities are endless; but only if the API is open.
How do we know that the iTV itself didn't go online? That seems more likely to me.
Oh man, I wish the API were open... I would definately get one then. But considering that the iPod API is *still* closed, I don't have much hope.
the decision to leave a hard drive OUT of this thing was brilliant. the iPod just became that much more important now. everyone with an iPod has the ability to throw their music, favorite shows and increasingly more and more movies and run to anyone else's with an iTV to watch it all. The iPod is on it's way to becoming more or less or a portable DVR.
Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.
The drive given the form factor, even if included, would still make it a poor DVR without a NAS somewhere.
As far as not having HD...well the folks that really think that 640x480 is the end resolution for iTV believe that Steve is a complete idiot. There are already many folks with the bandwidth requirements but SpamSandwich wants to believe its still 1996 and not 2006. The majority of Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and cable customers will be able to stream 720p within a few years. The telcos are investing billions into the buildout...$15-$20B by Verizon alone. Many of their customers have the bandwidth to stream 720p movies today.
The majority of internet users aready have broadband and can download 720p movies overnight.
They have a secure video chain that will be acceptable to the studios.
So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.
Vinea
I don't know if Apple is willing to go the DVR route. Note that there are no inputs into the iTV other than USB so the lack of a drive only hampers temporary storage of streamed material. So given the form factor and lack of inputs I would have to assume that if they were to ever offer DVR capability that it would appear on the mini which could stack with the iTV.
Look, people, read some of the earlier posts. It's been said already.
Apple is NOT going to add an HDD or and optical drive into this puppy anytime soon. Their business model here is - drumroll please - the Mac is the DIGITAL HUB!
That means that if you want to record a movie - do it on your Mac. The Mac Pro can hold four 500 GB drives. That's a lot more than they could ever put into this box. Besides, Apple doesn't want you to record your favorite TV show - they wantcha to buy it from the ITS instead!
This is version 1. It is not intended to be what it will be in just a year or two. It's a new release of a new product, fer cryin out loud. This Sneak Peek was probably allowed for two reasons: to keep consumers away from competing appliances and to show the Hollywood Studios that Apple is serious, (and more so) than Amazon.
Besides, put an HDD into it, and maybe an optical drive and it'll cost $500. And people on this and other forums are already crying over the price. How much do ya want it to cost?
The lack of HD may or may not be a problem for the iTV, we don't know yet. Will it have a limited flash drive for a cache and it's OS? or will the OS be flashed on ROM? Will it act as a Thin Client of the host computer, using it's HD for holding the information and any extensions that it needs?
The Mac Pro can hold four 500 GB drives.
If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.
So the pieces are all there for HD. Without HD the iTV box wouldn't sell. So yes, it doesn't make sense if you insist that all it can play is 640x480. Of course you're being incredibly stupid if you make that assumption because Steve talked about hooking it up to your "big flat panel TV"...and 640x480 will look like ass on the larger displays in comparison to even cable HD feeds much less HD-DVD and BR.
Vinea
I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.
Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.
So what's the deal? The unit has the advanced output port for current HD resolution. That means that, whatever they are currently holding the resolution down to, the box will undoubtedly handle the larger resolution. All they're waiting for is 802.11n standards to get published so the wireless will work as advertised.
If your ISP won't handle the load, that's not Apple's problem; what it WILL do is put additional pressure, in the form of market demand, on the ISPs to increase the pace of Broadband rollout. Believe me, there are enough of us that do have fast enough connections that we'll gladly shell out the bucks to put this baby into our living rooms.
Give this a few years to shake out, and broadcast Tv is going to be close to folding. This is just the first tentative baby steps towards total on demand entertainment content. Ten years is a good guess at how long it might take to reach a good market penetration, but this is the beginning.
If large storage is what you want, a regular NAS device would be better suited for the job and a lot cheaper than a Mac Pro. Several are available for $1000 or less, the price including four 250GB drives, and most even have RAID-5, something the Mac Pro doesn't offer.
You're correct, but that wasn't my point. My point was that the storage doesn't need to be in the iTV. Apple intends for you to use the MAC as the hub; it will control the content. If you want to add massive amounts of storage, then by all means, put in a large array such as you mention. Apple will be more than happy to sell you content to fill it up with through the ITS!
It's certainly plausible that one could plug an iPod into the USB port of the iTV and access the iPod's content through the iTV. Friends and family could come over with their iPods and show you stuff. Could be cool.
Your sig is wrong, you're not wrong - sharing that way would be really cool - and a LOT more enjoyable than the old slide projectors were!
That's what I like about the Mac community - so many folks have great ways to enjoy the technology - and have a lot of fun sharing how they do it, too.
I'm going to be watching this appliance closely.
By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?
Just speculation, but the 802.11n standard isn't due out until spring 2007. Bummer.
Yep. You have definitely lost all sense of reality, and have officially become a Zealot. Everything Apple does is not good, and leaving out the hard-drive is definitely one of them. The iPod was already a portable Digital Viewing device, but your essentially saying it's the DVR of the future, and your out of your mind if you think everyone would rather buy their digital programming when it is legally free, and also watch it on a 2 inch screen when you can watch it in HD - Again for free.
Trust me. People would rather Apple included the hard-drive so they could record their programming, and watch it in full screen sitting on a couch.
Apple has completely sold out the consumer/user, and not only that, they have every intention of sticking it them from behind. The iTV demo is living proof of that.
Do you really think your argument is helped by tired name calling?
I don't want a hard drive in my set top box. I'd much rather buy my own HD space and have it hooked up to my computer. If I want to record my programming, I'll just put a tuner on my mac. And I'll probably not buy much video from the iTunes store, I'm mostly interested in ripping my DVD's to a server.
I've read several posts in other forums from people that have their Macs directly hooked to big screen TVs, and they have noted that this new resolution looks pretty good; better in fact on screen than directly on the Mac itself.
Look, Steve had this PROJECTED onto a VERY large screen at the hall where the event was held. The folks that attended were media professionals. Dontcha think they might have noticed if the resolution sucked? I work in a facility that projects just such feeds from PCs to very large projected screens like that, and I'll tell you that if that resolution really sucked like you claim, everybody in that hall would have seen right away that he was full of crap.
I said it looks like ass in comparison to a HD source. Why don't you try your own suggestion and read the posts?
I have a large screen (100") and I can certainly say that DVD quality is not close to even cable HD. It's hard to tell if the Incredibles is in HD from the live stream but the Engadget folks thought so. Other folks thought not. Animated features are often to worst to try to judge video quality from as they tend to look pretty good anyway.
As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.
If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.
The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.
Vinea
As far as projection of PCs to a large screen, the best resolution is typically whatever is native to the projector. And I doubt you're showing movies on them anyway at the right viewing distance for watching movies.
If all this thing will do is DVD or "DVD like" quality they really screwed up. $14.99-$9.99 is the same pricing as DVD and there are no extras. If that's all it is then its not going to do all that much better than UMD. Its a proprietary format for which it is better to simply buy the DVD, rip it and get it to play on the iPod.
The HDMI and composite ports suggest they are going HD. The timing is right to be first to market for HD over the internet and the competitors in the other markets are hampered either by high price and a format war or are compressing their HD to fit more channels in. The opportunity won't last more than a year or so.
Vinea
You have no idea what we're showing. We have access to studio quality direct feed as well as cable access. Not just PCs. It is a large conference center, and dvd content is often a subject of events we hold. Each conference room has a large stack of equipment, including DVD players, connected to the projectors, and some of these rooms are quite large, certainly as large as a movie theater.
Obviously, if it has an HDMI connector, then DVD isn't all it will do, now will it? Steve said in the event that they were showing 640x480, I think it was. He said "near-dvd". But as I said, the presence of the HDMI port suggests that the box will do better. Right now, they are limiting the resolution due to download limitations, and as soon as the infrastructure, and the market is right, I am sure that they will upgrade.
Right now, they are proving to the studios that they can deliver the goods. If enough people respond to this, it will result, as the iPod did, in the content providers getting on the bandwagon too. I agree that the timing here is right. All they have to do is convince Hollywood that they can do with this what they did for music.
Why put a DVD player in it? I'd bet that Apple will allow streaming from the mac to the iTV. If they allow that, you've already got a DVD player in your mac - and one that's controllable by the Apple Remote through the iTV! How cool - one less remote to have on my coffee table! (Steve DID note that the iTV is compatible with the Apple Remote, by the way)
Bleh. One more reason to not like where iTV is going. Another remote. Do you realize how many bloody remotes are required to operate component TV+Audio? In this house, there are currently four remotes. Four!
You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.
It's a decent start.
By the way - Steve said "Q1 2007" He did NOT mention calendar year or fiscal. So this thing could conceiveably come out before Christmas? Or be announced at MWSF?
He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.
He said this was a sneak peek of a product "that will be announced in the first calendar quarter of 2007." It was right after he said that this was an unusual move for Apple.
No, he never said calendar or fiscal. I listened very closely for that, as I had heard that same question before I watched the feed. He said "Q1 2007" exactly like that, at least twice.
They can't do for this what they did for music. A big part of the appeal of buying music from iTMS and other digital stores is that you can cherrypick the songs you want and skip the rest. Want to hear that one great song? You pay 99¢ instead of $12-$15+
You don't have the great savings here. It's less convenient timewise (than buying songs online and probably over just going to the store to buy the physical DVD). You can't burn your own DVDs (yet, if ever). I'm glad the store launched, and I already bought 2 movies. But I don't think the time is now for this thing to change the movie industry the way the music store changed the music industry.
It's a decent start.
Actually, the cherry pick thing is the same. You have the same full control over what content you buy. The kicker here is the price. We all wish it were better. I think it will over time, tho.
Timewise, what's the beef? You can start watching within 1 minute of the download starting, so they're buffering the download, just like watching a trailer. I'd say that's FASTER than going to Blockbuster and standing in line.
Granted, not being able to burn to DVD is a bummer, but that's gotta be a demand on the part of Hollywood. I don't think Steve had quite the handle on negotiations here that he did with the music moguls.
And this won't just change the movie industry. This'll change the way we get ALL video content, eventually. People have been complaining about wanting on demand cable for a while now, and the cable companies have successfully fought that. Not any more!
If this takes off for Apple, they will be in on the ground floor of a movement in this industry that will shake it to the core! It won't be overnight, but it WILL happen. On demand is what the market wants, and with people willing to vote with their wallets, it'll happen. Once the studios see the $$$ begin to roll in, it won't take that long.
Bleh. One more reason to not like where iTV is going. Another remote. Do you realize how many bloody remotes are required to operate component TV+Audio? In this house, there are currently four remotes. Four!
Don't you get the idea? When this box lets you access all your content from iTunes USING THE APPLE REMOTE, then you will be able to eliminate:
1. stereo
2. dvd player
3. vhs player
4. TV remote (cause you'll be watching TV through the iTV)
5. home theater system (cause eventually, the iTV will replace that, too)
There go your four remotes, all rolled into one! (yeah, I know that's 5, but a lotta folks won't have the vhs...)