Hi O4BlackWRX (nice car, BTW ) That is a solution looking for a problem. As I said, this is the thinking of an engineer, not the consumer. As the consumer I want the quickest easiest answer. The "quickest, easiest" in this case is to burn a disk, or take a movie on DVD.
I agree (btw I hvae an '06 STI now but can't change my screenname....) and I can see your point of view and I'm looking at this from a comsumer/programmer point of view where there are practical applications for just about every product. And I agree and hope this is just the "base" model, but Steve never did mention what the USB 2.0 port was for......could you say external HD?
Tivo is such a must for this thing. Also, if its only close to dvd qualty than man what a step back. I mean we're getting HD everything these days, Apple expects us to watch movies in "close to dvd quality" you have to be kidding... maybe i'm missing something.
All of which can be done MUCH easier without involving your computer. The iTV solution is irrational if you compare it to the existing solutions available to consumers, and it is overly complex. I'm certainly not going to have my computer running just to supply my movie (even music and photos, fer gosh sakes) to my TV. Hey, I'm an Apple stockholder (as are many who post here) but iTV is as dumb as a pile of wood, and I'd tell Jobs that to his face.
What existing options are available for accessing your itunes music and videos and iphoto content on your TV?
I (like lots of people) keep my music on one Mac, and access it from others in my home through sharing - you can't seriously tell me it would be easier for me to burn a CD and then put it in my Mac and then play it. It's really the same thing with TV. You could burn DVD of photos and movies and then bring them to your TV, but that doesn't really make sense if you can have full access to everything without burning a disc. Furthermore, you can't burn iTunes DRM-ed videos (a huge flaw, IMO), and to burn photos involves iDVD and/or iMovie.
Perhaps this doesn't make sense for you, but I'd use it a lot. I have a ton of photos and movies of kids and family stuff that we look at all the time. Not everyone will be interested - I know I have little interest in hooking my iPod up to my car, for example. And maybe the types of people who post here - mostly young men - aren't the right market. I don't know. But since Apple is so focused on music and video and photo content, this thing is a perfectly logical device for them to provide.
It does seem overpriced. Airport/Airtunes is $129. This is basically the same thing with some extras, and I'd hope they could sell it for $199.
All of which can be done MUCH easier without involving your computer. The iTV solution is irrational if you compare it to the existing solutions available to consumers, and it is overly complex. I'm certainly not going to have my computer running just to supply my movie (even music and photos, fer gosh sakes) to my TV. Hey, I'm an Apple stockholder (as are many who post here) but iTV is as dumb as a pile of wood, and I'd tell Jobs that to his face.
I totally agree with you. Where I stand is - The things iTV offered in the demo should be a few of the the bonus features that are accessible if you have a Mac or PC running iTunes. It should be a PVR like tivo device, but the things Apple is offering from the demo should be what happens if you own a computer, and if you own a Mac you should be able to access some more of Apples digital hub. Just running video iChats, and Photo-booth alone through a PVR with the bonus features would be a really cool product including all the other features at no extra cost. It would Just be one of the many more reasons to buy a Mac. I think they they came at this from the wrong direction. What they showed was pretty "ho hum" and messed up compared to a TIVO, DreamBox or a ReplayTV. Apple is bringing the computers to the TV, not enhancing TV for the typical TV user, and adding bonus features that you can't get elsewhere which is what they should have done.
I still think they should buy DreamBox, or Elgato, or better yet both, and come up with a more sensible product for the living room, and having limited set of computer accessibility apps from there would be best way to market this. As for right now I would prefer a good PVR/DVR device alone over what Apple just announced. I think Apple should have tried to beat that.
I totally agree with you. Where I stand is - The things iTV offered in the demo should be a few of the the bonus features that are accessible if you have a Mac or PC running iTunes. It should be a PVR like tivo device, but the things Apple is offering from the demo should be what happens if you own a computer, and if you own a Mac you should be able to access some more of Apples digital hub. Just running video iChats, and Photo-booth alone through a PVR with the bonus features would be a really cool product including all the other features at no extra cost. It would Just be one of the many more reasons to buy a Mac. I think they they came at this from the wrong direction. What they showed was pretty "ho hum" and messed up compared to a TIVO, DreamBox or a ReplayTV. Apple is bringing the computers to the TV, not enhancing TV for the typical TV user, and adding bonus features that you can't get elsewhere which is what they should have done.
I still think they should buy DreamBox, or Elgato, or better yet both, and come up with a more sensible product for the living room, and having limited set of computer accessibility apps from there would be best way to market this. As for right now I would prefer a good PVR/DVR device alone over what Apple just announced. I think Apple should have tried to beat that.
Another thought... This was an unusual announcement by Apple (iTV) at this early date because they are trying to get content providers to sign on to the idea... but they can expect a slow ramp up until it proves itself as incremental business... OK, we know Google and Apple are talking. What if Apple + Google = iTV?
Google videos downloaded over broadband to iTV, plus the Disney library, plus the other stuff... PLUS, the price drops about $100. Now, you're talking.
Yet another thought... how does iTV compare to existing solutions for the PC? Since this is a multi-platform product, I'd like to know how it is perceived by PC owners.
But the real audience for iTV, which is such a crippled poorly conceived product, is damn small. I'm personally not interested in a product that requires I have a running computer just to duplicate what I could have with a regular DVD. That's ridiculous engineering-centric thinking. Not the usual Apple-like thinking. Netflix remains my entertainment provider choice for now. Let's rethink this one Apple.
Your personal opinion is not an argument for the potential market for this product.
That's a good idea. It would be cool to have the Front row interface for the free video services like youtube (I say youtube because I believe Google sells videos, so they're a competitor to Apple). It could work on the same principle as the existing movie trailers section of front row/iTV.
Getting on to youtube through your TV and wasting time clicking around for funny 2-minute videos would be quite a different experience than accessing your own stuff, because there's an unlimited and ever-changing selection on youtube.
[edit] But how would youtube make money from this?
I think Apple are getting too bound up with whole "content" thing.
Make it so it just sends data fast. Let the consumer use it or abuse it in whatever way they wish.
God all the big players are sooo concerned with trying to tie up rights and have control over content. If they make it too bloody difficult people will walk away from this thing.
Assuming that I have FTTH and that iTunes starts providing access to the bulk of the shows I watch I wonder how much I need a PVR anymore. OnDemand, when it actually works, seems more useful. iTunes is simply a variation and somewhat more expensive today than cable.
With respect to simplicity for the consumer it doesn't get much easier than flipping to iTunes and getting the content you want. If the cable companies could get OnDemand to work as seamlessly (or at all sometimes) this might be DOA but they don't. i don't see it as an engineering solution at all. Its seems to me to be very consumer oriented as long as you don't care about owning hard media.
I have an extensive DVD collection. It is obsolecent. If I wanted the same capability as what will be in iTunes I need to rip the entire damn collection to a NAS. If I decide to upgrade these titles to HD I need buy new media and again, rip the title to a NAS (if that's even possible). Screw that. Its so much simpler to buy the HD version on iTunes and have access when I want them.
I have a bookshelf full of LDs and a couple of DVDs. I'm done with hard media. Sure I'm tethered to a high speed internet connection but frankly it'll cheaper to pay $30 for a HD movie available on iTunes than it is to take the entire family to the movie theaters.
As far as portability, eh...its as portable as my cable service. Assuming my friends have iTunes I can probably enable them for the evening and have access to all my purchased titles. If they don't they can come to my house. My crappy system is better than 90% of what my friends have anyway.
No, that's just extrapolating your opinion. It's groundless.
Assessing the potential market for a product is a fairly involved process.
I'm familiar with market research, Shawn. The fact is: your opinion counts. I'd suggest that you voice your approval and disapproval on these boards, since it is the closest most of us will come to having an effect on the direction of any product development efforts by Apple (there is the possibility some of the folks here actually work at Apple, of course).
I'm familiar with market research, Shawn. The fact is: your opinion counts. I'd suggest that you voice your approval and disapproval on these boards, since it is the closest most of us will come to having an effect on the direction of any product development efforts by Apple (there is the possibility some of the folks here actually work at Apple, of course).
Sure. I personally think the potential market for this product could add nicely to the company's bottom line, but we'll see what the analysts (people who've actually done the research) think when they publish their research notes. I don't think you're going to see much disapproval of this exciting new product-- at least not to the level of your complaint-- which suggests practically no market at all for it. That one puzzles me.
Sure. I personally think the potential market for this product could add nicely to the company's bottom line, but we'll see what the analysts (people who've actually done the research) think when they publish their research notes. I don't think you're going to see much disapproval of this exciting new product-- at least not to the level of your complaint-- which suggests practically no market at all for it. That one puzzles me.
No, I'm not suggesting there's no market for it. But clearly the market for videos on iPods will be much larger for a some time. Movies on a portable device make sense, because they offer a notable difference/advantage from other ways of consuming this product (filmed entertainment), and correct if I'm wrong, but movies on an iPod can ALSO be hooked up to and viewed over a TV, with acceptable results.
iTV does not address the fundamental question for it's being. What is the consumer advantage that makes it superior to other, simpler solutions, such as today's DVDs.
iTV does not address the fundamental question for it's being. What is the consumer advantage that makes it superior to other, simpler solutions, such as today's DVDs.
Near instant access to your entire library without needing to maintain a NAS or a large collection of hard media. Quick gratification vs. NetFlix or going to Walmart/BestBuy.
For $300, my current PC (mac or windows) and my FiOS connection (15 Mbps for $44.95/mo) I can get the functionality that many on avsforums have spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours to do. At least for the new titles I buy.
Near instant access to your entire library without needing to maintain a NAS or a large collection of hard media. Quick gratification vs. NetFlix or going to Walmart/BestBuy.
How big is the average library of DVDs and VHS tapes in a household? Speaking for myself, I have roughly 150+ DVDs and about 60+ VHS tapes I'd like to update to the latest & greatest format.
For iTV to work for me, I'd have to have (many) terabytes of instantly accessible movies. That just doesn't add up. I'd be a smarter consumer to simply buy DVDs or (if I'm willing to risk it, Blu-Ray discs).
How big is the average library of DVDs and VHS tapes in a household? Speaking for myself, I have roughly 120+ DVDs and about 60+ VHS tapes I'd like to update to the latest & greatest format.
For iTV to work for me, I'd have to have (many) terabytes of instantly accessible movies. That just doesn't add up. I'd be a smarter consumer to simply buy DVDs or (if I'm willing to risk it, Blu-Ray discs).
You don't think Apple has Petabytes worth of storage between .mac, iTunes, etc?
How instant do you want it? I can see iTunes downloading 720p trailers as you are figuring out what to select and after you hit play by the time the trailers have finished playing enough of the movie is buffered for you to start watching the actual movie.
To find out what some analysts think the market looks like requires $1500.
As I mentioned in the other thread it is the idiotic format war between HD-DVD and BR coupled with the bandwidth war between cable and telcos that makes this a viable play for HD. The HDMI and component ports out the back are the key indicator that 640x480 is not the likely resolution that iTV will operate at.
Comments
Hi O4BlackWRX (nice car, BTW
I agree (btw I hvae an '06 STI now but can't change my screenname....) and I can see your point of view and I'm looking at this from a comsumer/programmer point of view where there are practical applications for just about every product. And I agree and hope this is just the "base" model, but Steve never did mention what the USB 2.0 port was for......could you say external HD?
All of which can be done MUCH easier without involving your computer. The iTV solution is irrational if you compare it to the existing solutions available to consumers, and it is overly complex. I'm certainly not going to have my computer running just to supply my movie (even music and photos, fer gosh sakes) to my TV. Hey, I'm an Apple stockholder (as are many who post here) but iTV is as dumb as a pile of wood, and I'd tell Jobs that to his face.
What existing options are available for accessing your itunes music and videos and iphoto content on your TV?
I (like lots of people) keep my music on one Mac, and access it from others in my home through sharing - you can't seriously tell me it would be easier for me to burn a CD and then put it in my Mac and then play it. It's really the same thing with TV. You could burn DVD of photos and movies and then bring them to your TV, but that doesn't really make sense if you can have full access to everything without burning a disc. Furthermore, you can't burn iTunes DRM-ed videos (a huge flaw, IMO), and to burn photos involves iDVD and/or iMovie.
Perhaps this doesn't make sense for you, but I'd use it a lot. I have a ton of photos and movies of kids and family stuff that we look at all the time. Not everyone will be interested - I know I have little interest in hooking my iPod up to my car, for example. And maybe the types of people who post here - mostly young men - aren't the right market. I don't know. But since Apple is so focused on music and video and photo content, this thing is a perfectly logical device for them to provide.
It does seem overpriced. Airport/Airtunes is $129. This is basically the same thing with some extras, and I'd hope they could sell it for $199.
All of which can be done MUCH easier without involving your computer. The iTV solution is irrational if you compare it to the existing solutions available to consumers, and it is overly complex. I'm certainly not going to have my computer running just to supply my movie (even music and photos, fer gosh sakes) to my TV. Hey, I'm an Apple stockholder (as are many who post here) but iTV is as dumb as a pile of wood, and I'd tell Jobs that to his face.
I totally agree with you. Where I stand is - The things iTV offered in the demo should be a few of the the bonus features that are accessible if you have a Mac or PC running iTunes. It should be a PVR like tivo device, but the things Apple is offering from the demo should be what happens if you own a computer, and if you own a Mac you should be able to access some more of Apples digital hub. Just running video iChats, and Photo-booth alone through a PVR with the bonus features would be a really cool product including all the other features at no extra cost. It would Just be one of the many more reasons to buy a Mac. I think they they came at this from the wrong direction. What they showed was pretty "ho hum" and messed up compared to a TIVO, DreamBox or a ReplayTV. Apple is bringing the computers to the TV, not enhancing TV for the typical TV user, and adding bonus features that you can't get elsewhere which is what they should have done.
I still think they should buy DreamBox, or Elgato, or better yet both, and come up with a more sensible product for the living room, and having limited set of computer accessibility apps from there would be best way to market this. As for right now I would prefer a good PVR/DVR device alone over what Apple just announced. I think Apple should have tried to beat that.
I totally agree with you. Where I stand is - The things iTV offered in the demo should be a few of the the bonus features that are accessible if you have a Mac or PC running iTunes. It should be a PVR like tivo device, but the things Apple is offering from the demo should be what happens if you own a computer, and if you own a Mac you should be able to access some more of Apples digital hub. Just running video iChats, and Photo-booth alone through a PVR with the bonus features would be a really cool product including all the other features at no extra cost. It would Just be one of the many more reasons to buy a Mac. I think they they came at this from the wrong direction. What they showed was pretty "ho hum" and messed up compared to a TIVO, DreamBox or a ReplayTV. Apple is bringing the computers to the TV, not enhancing TV for the typical TV user, and adding bonus features that you can't get elsewhere which is what they should have done.
I still think they should buy DreamBox, or Elgato, or better yet both, and come up with a more sensible product for the living room, and having limited set of computer accessibility apps from there would be best way to market this. As for right now I would prefer a good PVR/DVR device alone over what Apple just announced. I think Apple should have tried to beat that.
Another thought... This was an unusual announcement by Apple (iTV) at this early date because they are trying to get content providers to sign on to the idea... but they can expect a slow ramp up until it proves itself as incremental business... OK, we know Google and Apple are talking. What if Apple + Google = iTV?
Google videos downloaded over broadband to iTV, plus the Disney library, plus the other stuff... PLUS, the price drops about $100. Now, you're talking.
But the real audience for iTV, which is such a crippled poorly conceived product, is damn small. I'm personally not interested in a product that requires I have a running computer just to duplicate what I could have with a regular DVD. That's ridiculous engineering-centric thinking. Not the usual Apple-like thinking. Netflix remains my entertainment provider choice for now. Let's rethink this one Apple.
Your personal opinion is not an argument for the potential market for this product.
What if Apple + Google = iTV?
That's a good idea. It would be cool to have the Front row interface for the free video services like youtube (I say youtube because I believe Google sells videos, so they're a competitor to Apple). It could work on the same principle as the existing movie trailers section of front row/iTV.
Getting on to youtube through your TV and wasting time clicking around for funny 2-minute videos would be quite a different experience than accessing your own stuff, because there's an unlimited and ever-changing selection on youtube.
[edit] But how would youtube make money from this?
Make it so it just sends data fast. Let the consumer use it or abuse it in whatever way they wish.
God all the big players are sooo concerned with trying to tie up rights and have control over content. If they make it too bloody difficult people will walk away from this thing.
Your personal opinion is not an argument for the potential market for this product.
Sure it is. Yours is too, if you are a potential customer. I own several iPods, 4 PowerMacs... I have a TV... I am the target consumer.
Sure it is. Yours is too, if you are a potential customer. I own several iPods, 4 PowerMacs... I have a TV... I am the target consumer.
No, that's just extrapolating your opinion. It's groundless.
Assessing the potential market for a product is a fairly involved process.
With respect to simplicity for the consumer it doesn't get much easier than flipping to iTunes and getting the content you want. If the cable companies could get OnDemand to work as seamlessly (or at all sometimes) this might be DOA but they don't. i don't see it as an engineering solution at all. Its seems to me to be very consumer oriented as long as you don't care about owning hard media.
I have an extensive DVD collection. It is obsolecent. If I wanted the same capability as what will be in iTunes I need to rip the entire damn collection to a NAS. If I decide to upgrade these titles to HD I need buy new media and again, rip the title to a NAS (if that's even possible). Screw that. Its so much simpler to buy the HD version on iTunes and have access when I want them.
I have a bookshelf full of LDs and a couple of DVDs. I'm done with hard media. Sure I'm tethered to a high speed internet connection but frankly it'll cheaper to pay $30 for a HD movie available on iTunes than it is to take the entire family to the movie theaters.
As far as portability, eh...its as portable as my cable service. Assuming my friends have iTunes I can probably enable them for the evening and have access to all my purchased titles. If they don't they can come to my house. My crappy system is better than 90% of what my friends have anyway.
Vinea
No, that's just extrapolating your opinion. It's groundless.
Assessing the potential market for a product is a fairly involved process.
I'm familiar with market research, Shawn. The fact is: your opinion counts. I'd suggest that you voice your approval and disapproval on these boards, since it is the closest most of us will come to having an effect on the direction of any product development efforts by Apple (there is the possibility some of the folks here actually work at Apple, of course).
I'm familiar with market research, Shawn. The fact is: your opinion counts. I'd suggest that you voice your approval and disapproval on these boards, since it is the closest most of us will come to having an effect on the direction of any product development efforts by Apple (there is the possibility some of the folks here actually work at Apple, of course).
Sure. I personally think the potential market for this product could add nicely to the company's bottom line, but we'll see what the analysts (people who've actually done the research) think when they publish their research notes. I don't think you're going to see much disapproval of this exciting new product-- at least not to the level of your complaint-- which suggests practically no market at all for it. That one puzzles me.
Sure. I personally think the potential market for this product could add nicely to the company's bottom line, but we'll see what the analysts (people who've actually done the research) think when they publish their research notes. I don't think you're going to see much disapproval of this exciting new product-- at least not to the level of your complaint-- which suggests practically no market at all for it. That one puzzles me.
No, I'm not suggesting there's no market for it. But clearly the market for videos on iPods will be much larger for a some time. Movies on a portable device make sense, because they offer a notable difference/advantage from other ways of consuming this product (filmed entertainment), and correct if I'm wrong, but movies on an iPod can ALSO be hooked up to and viewed over a TV, with acceptable results.
iTV does not address the fundamental question for it's being. What is the consumer advantage that makes it superior to other, simpler solutions, such as today's DVDs.
iTV does not address the fundamental question for it's being. What is the consumer advantage that makes it superior to other, simpler solutions, such as today's DVDs.
Near instant access to your entire library without needing to maintain a NAS or a large collection of hard media. Quick gratification vs. NetFlix or going to Walmart/BestBuy.
For $300, my current PC (mac or windows) and my FiOS connection (15 Mbps for $44.95/mo) I can get the functionality that many on avsforums have spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours to do. At least for the new titles I buy.
Vinea
Near instant access to your entire library without needing to maintain a NAS or a large collection of hard media. Quick gratification vs. NetFlix or going to Walmart/BestBuy.
How big is the average library of DVDs and VHS tapes in a household? Speaking for myself, I have roughly 150+ DVDs and about 60+ VHS tapes I'd like to update to the latest & greatest format.
For iTV to work for me, I'd have to have (many) terabytes of instantly accessible movies. That just doesn't add up. I'd be a smarter consumer to simply buy DVDs or (if I'm willing to risk it, Blu-Ray discs).
How big is the average library of DVDs and VHS tapes in a household? Speaking for myself, I have roughly 120+ DVDs and about 60+ VHS tapes I'd like to update to the latest & greatest format.
For iTV to work for me, I'd have to have (many) terabytes of instantly accessible movies. That just doesn't add up. I'd be a smarter consumer to simply buy DVDs or (if I'm willing to risk it, Blu-Ray discs).
You don't think Apple has Petabytes worth of storage between .mac, iTunes, etc?
How instant do you want it? I can see iTunes downloading 720p trailers as you are figuring out what to select and after you hit play by the time the trailers have finished playing enough of the movie is buffered for you to start watching the actual movie.
To find out what some analysts think the market looks like requires $1500.
http://www.tdgresearch.com/product.a...id=95&catid=32
The average household has (from public, free sources) more than 40 titles and bought 18 DVDs and rented 23 in 2005.
http://www.idealink.org/Resource.phx...uick-facts.htx
As I mentioned in the other thread it is the idiotic format war between HD-DVD and BR coupled with the bandwidth war between cable and telcos that makes this a viable play for HD. The HDMI and component ports out the back are the key indicator that 640x480 is not the likely resolution that iTV will operate at.
Vinea