The fact that you use iTV to choose which computer you want it to use, means that you can choose which computer you want it to use. So while you might be stuck streaming from one computer at any given time, you can always select another computer to stream from.
I guess the only other option is that iTV looks at ALL the computers and compiles it's music list, movie list, photo list to include the contents of all the computers at the same time. While this would be neat in a lot of respects, it is asking a lot.
But thats my point is that its weird to have to choose which computer you want to stream from. I would rather just have all the shared content shown at once so that I don't have to remember which computer something is on.
This can't record because it's a hub to your audio/video system.
Your computer records. What is the problem here?
You can set your Mini up in your living room if you want to record there. then use this to get that signal to your system.
This just makes it easier for those of us who do not have our computer systems set up in the same rooms as our A/V ststems.
This ISN'T a computer. If Apple came out with the whole thing in one, then people would complain that the Mini costs too much. This gives people a choice.
Buy your computer, and use this, if you need it. If not, you don't have to pay for the functionality.
As things get cheaper, then Apple might build it into their machines.
But, and I don't remember for certain, I seem to remember Jobs, or someone, saying that this is compatible with PC's as well. If that's true, then a much bigger market is in mind.
ecking - what do you mean, I thought it was clear from the beginning that it did video?
Sorry I should have been clearer, it was listed as in it could play any video, not just itunes purchased videos. Which would be the selling point for me, I have all kinds of videos I'd love to play on my tv but none of them were purchased through itunes.
To play the content that's on your computer on your TV. I'm not sure why people wouldn't want to do that. I know people who have DVRs love them to death, but the fact is that they've been a flop. People don't buy them. They've been out for how many years, but have less than 1% of households. People just aren't interested in them, apparently. Compare that to DVD players, for example, or, more relevant, to computers.
You're wrong. DVR market penetration is more like 9 percent.
If you have an opinion, fine. But don't come in here spouting off BS.
From what I've read, albeit a limited amount of material is publically available, this device assumes you own an Apple desktop or laptop. What has made the iPod so successful is that the software runs outside of OS X. If the iTV can be managed by iTunes for Windows then I can see the market share growing.
If it is an OS X only solution then the product will definitely be marginal, no matter how good its capabilities.
From what I've read, albeit a limited amount of material is publically available, this device assumes you own an Apple desktop or laptop. What has made the iPod so successful is that the software runs outside of OS X. If the iTV can be managed by iTunes for Windows then I can see the market share growing.
If it is an OS X only solution then the product will definitely be marginal, no matter how good its capabilities.
I've not seen anywhere where it was stated that you need a Mac to use the iTV. Rather, I believe Jobs said the iTV works with any computer that has iTunes, which includes both PCs and Macs.
I think the hard drive stores the first several minutes (or even the first GB) of each movie found on the network. This would allow for instantaneous playback even with a not-so-great wifi connection. I don't think it will be possible to browse this hard drive from a Finder. I also think the iTV could have flash memory so that it powers up instantaneously (or at least as fast as your TV).
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
I've not seen anywhere where it was stated that you need a Mac to use the iTV. Rather, I believe Jobs said the iTV works with any computer that has iTunes, which includes both PCs and Macs.
I think the hard drive stores the first several minutes (or even the first GB) of each movie found on the network. This would allow for instantaneous playback even with a not-so-great wifi connection. I don't think it will be possible to browse this hard drive from a Finder. I also think the iTV could have flash memory so that it powers up instantaneously (or at least as fast as your TV).
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
If there is a hd built-in, then it would be again, a 2.5, or possibly even a 1.8.
Either way, it would account for a good chunk of the cost.
But thats my point is that its weird to have to choose which computer you want to stream from. I would rather just have all the shared content shown at once so that I don't have to remember which computer something is on.
What if I like Jazz and Classical but my teenage daughter like Deathmetal and Ska?
Do you really think everyone wants it all jumbled together?
The small HDD opens up a whole lot more than just having a buffer. And if Apple is every watching any of these sort of postings here is a free idea. Give us a scroll wheal remote control and then let people download the iPod Video Games to their iTV to play on it. Now that is an idea. Games don't have to be 'all that' for them to be fun. The iPod games are cool because they are simple. They would be cooler if you could play them on the TV
You're wrong. DVR market penetration is more like 9 percent.
If you have an opinion, fine. But don't come in here spouting off BS.
Yeah, you're right. I had underestimated it. I did a little searching and also see about 10 millions household with DVRs in the US, for about 100 million households, making about 10%.
I think the hard drive stores the first several minutes (or even the first GB) of each movie found on the network. This would allow for instantaneous playback even with a not-so-great wifi connection. I don't think it will be possible to browse this hard drive from a Finder. I also think the iTV could have flash memory so that it powers up instantaneously (or at least as fast as your TV).
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If there is a hd built-in, then it would be again, a 2.5, or possibly even a 1.8.
Either way, it would account for a good chunk of the cost.
I don't think the iTV needs a hard drive to do caching.
Here are my calaculations:
Assuming the typical movie on the iTunes store is encoded at 1500 kbits/sec
IF the iTV was designed to buffer 10 minutes of video for skip protection,
Yeah, you're right. I had underestimated it. I did a little searching and also see about 10 millions household with DVRs in the US, for about 100 million households, making about 10%.
The problem with the "10% of households with DVRs", and that it's doubling in the next year, is that any computer with Windows Media Center edition counts as a DVR, at least in the forbes report. Presumably, that doubling could occur once Vista comes out, as it will also have full Digital Video Recording capabilities, and lots of people will be upgrading from pre-media centre edition XP. The thought that 10% of Americans have Tivo or the other set-top boxes is totally ridiculous. That would put it up to about half the market penetration of mobile phones...
On the other hand, I don't think everyone with XP media centre edition or Vista will use it to record TV, so it's hard to get real numbers as to how many people are regularly recording TV shows and using their DVRs, although I wouldn't doubt that Microsoft is collecting the information somehow right now.
I think what iTV will do is be a cost effective, and hopefully user friendly (not to mention well-branded) way to connect the computer to the home theater, something Microsoft still hasn't really accomplished. There's still not many people watching TV and movies on their computers except on flights,etc. (computer in the living room will just never be cozy) If Apple can make "iTV" a part of the vernacular like they have with "iPod", "podcasting", etc., they'll automatically be at the forefront of the public's consciousness in the area. Unlike TiVO...
I am glad that it will include a hard drive. I have a macbook pro and I was thinking it would kind of suck to always have my computer on next to the tv or in the other room if I want to stream something. For example if I am using a bittorrent I want to be able to use the itv at the same time without any bandwith problems.
Comments
The fact that you use iTV to choose which computer you want it to use, means that you can choose which computer you want it to use. So while you might be stuck streaming from one computer at any given time, you can always select another computer to stream from.
I guess the only other option is that iTV looks at ALL the computers and compiles it's music list, movie list, photo list to include the contents of all the computers at the same time. While this would be neat in a lot of respects, it is asking a lot.
But thats my point is that its weird to have to choose which computer you want to stream from. I would rather just have all the shared content shown at once so that I don't have to remember which computer something is on.
Your computer records. What is the problem here?
You can set your Mini up in your living room if you want to record there. then use this to get that signal to your system.
This just makes it easier for those of us who do not have our computer systems set up in the same rooms as our A/V ststems.
This ISN'T a computer. If Apple came out with the whole thing in one, then people would complain that the Mini costs too much. This gives people a choice.
Buy your computer, and use this, if you need it. If not, you don't have to pay for the functionality.
As things get cheaper, then Apple might build it into their machines.
But, and I don't remember for certain, I seem to remember Jobs, or someone, saying that this is compatible with PC's as well. If that's true, then a much bigger market is in mind.
ecking - what do you mean, I thought it was clear from the beginning that it did video?
Sorry I should have been clearer, it was listed as in it could play any video, not just itunes purchased videos. Which would be the selling point for me, I have all kinds of videos I'd love to play on my tv but none of them were purchased through itunes.
it is a little too expensive in my opinion, but then again, this is apple.
To play the content that's on your computer on your TV. I'm not sure why people wouldn't want to do that. I know people who have DVRs love them to death, but the fact is that they've been a flop. People don't buy them. They've been out for how many years, but have less than 1% of households. People just aren't interested in them, apparently. Compare that to DVD players, for example, or, more relevant, to computers.
You're wrong. DVR market penetration is more like 9 percent.
If you have an opinion, fine. But don't come in here spouting off BS.
You're wrong. DVR market penetration is more like 9 percent.
If you have an opinion, fine. But don't come in here spouting off BS.
Good article. The numbers are about to double to 18% as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if they continue to rise at a rapid rate.
If it is an OS X only solution then the product will definitely be marginal, no matter how good its capabilities.
From what I've read, albeit a limited amount of material is publically available, this device assumes you own an Apple desktop or laptop. What has made the iPod so successful is that the software runs outside of OS X. If the iTV can be managed by iTunes for Windows then I can see the market share growing.
If it is an OS X only solution then the product will definitely be marginal, no matter how good its capabilities.
I've not seen anywhere where it was stated that you need a Mac to use the iTV. Rather, I believe Jobs said the iTV works with any computer that has iTunes, which includes both PCs and Macs.
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
I've not seen anywhere where it was stated that you need a Mac to use the iTV. Rather, I believe Jobs said the iTV works with any computer that has iTunes, which includes both PCs and Macs.
Yes, that's what I remember.
I think the hard drive stores the first several minutes (or even the first GB) of each movie found on the network. This would allow for instantaneous playback even with a not-so-great wifi connection. I don't think it will be possible to browse this hard drive from a Finder. I also think the iTV could have flash memory so that it powers up instantaneously (or at least as fast as your TV).
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
If there is a hd built-in, then it would be again, a 2.5, or possibly even a 1.8.
Either way, it would account for a good chunk of the cost.
http://www.moviebeam.com/opencms/ope...atIsMovieBeam/
Disney is an investor. I wonder how that is going?
But thats my point is that its weird to have to choose which computer you want to stream from. I would rather just have all the shared content shown at once so that I don't have to remember which computer something is on.
What if I like Jazz and Classical but my teenage daughter like Deathmetal and Ska?
Do you really think everyone wants it all jumbled together?
What if I like Jazz and Classical but my teenage daughter like Deathmetal and Ska?
Do you really think everyone wants it all jumbled together?
Play Lists
You're wrong. DVR market penetration is more like 9 percent.
If you have an opinion, fine. But don't come in here spouting off BS.
Yeah, you're right. I had underestimated it. I did a little searching and also see about 10 millions household with DVRs in the US, for about 100 million households, making about 10%.
Play Lists
What if I'm lazy and want to just browse by artist or album?
The point is, most consumers only have one computer with THEIR music on it.
Many households will have multiple computers and multiple users who DONT want to see the other users music.
I think the hard drive stores the first several minutes (or even the first GB) of each movie found on the network. This would allow for instantaneous playback even with a not-so-great wifi connection. I don't think it will be possible to browse this hard drive from a Finder. I also think the iTV could have flash memory so that it powers up instantaneously (or at least as fast as your TV).
The only reason I think Apple might use 802.11g is because all its Macs use g. If the iTV uses n, then we need to buy an n adapter for the computer in order to get the full speed of n from that computer. Having not mentioned that, it will seem very misleading later when we have to pony up another $100 or more (since n is brand new, it'll be priced at a premium) just to get the adapter. So then, the iTV must not require n on both ends.
But even though it's not needed, Apple could build n into the iTV now so that it be there when Apple transitions its Macs to n in the future.
If there is a hd built-in, then it would be again, a 2.5, or possibly even a 1.8.
Either way, it would account for a good chunk of the cost.
I don't think the iTV needs a hard drive to do caching.
Here are my calaculations:
Assuming the typical movie on the iTunes store is encoded at 1500 kbits/sec
IF the iTV was designed to buffer 10 minutes of video for skip protection,
1500 kbits/sec * 60 seconds * 10 minutes = 900,000 kilobits = 879 Megabytes
The iTV needs only 1GB of NAND flash memory to achieve this level of skip protection.
Yeah, you're right. I had underestimated it. I did a little searching and also see about 10 millions household with DVRs in the US, for about 100 million households, making about 10%.
The problem with the "10% of households with DVRs", and that it's doubling in the next year, is that any computer with Windows Media Center edition counts as a DVR, at least in the forbes report. Presumably, that doubling could occur once Vista comes out, as it will also have full Digital Video Recording capabilities, and lots of people will be upgrading from pre-media centre edition XP. The thought that 10% of Americans have Tivo or the other set-top boxes is totally ridiculous. That would put it up to about half the market penetration of mobile phones...
On the other hand, I don't think everyone with XP media centre edition or Vista will use it to record TV, so it's hard to get real numbers as to how many people are regularly recording TV shows and using their DVRs, although I wouldn't doubt that Microsoft is collecting the information somehow right now.
I think what iTV will do is be a cost effective, and hopefully user friendly (not to mention well-branded) way to connect the computer to the home theater, something Microsoft still hasn't really accomplished. There's still not many people watching TV and movies on their computers except on flights,etc. (computer in the living room will just never be cozy) If Apple can make "iTV" a part of the vernacular like they have with "iPod", "podcasting", etc., they'll automatically be at the forefront of the public's consciousness in the area. Unlike TiVO...