You don't build in 802.11 Draft-N and 720p playback and NOT expect to sell 720p content on iTunes. Besides...where are you going to get any 720p content except from iTunes?
They also showed direct streaming of trailers from Apple.com. The piece missing is probably authentication to iTunes directly from the iTV software so little Johnny can't buy $10000 worth of iTunes content when the parents aren't home.
Authenticating with nothing but the apple remote should be amusing unless its just a multi-digit pass code linked to your iTunes account. For a lot of content it should get automagically get streamed from your iTunes computer to iTV anyway assuming the computer gets turned on once in a while (i.e. your TV show Season Passes).
As far DVR folks haven't been paying attention...no inputs and we've known that for a while. DVR will have to live on the Mac Mini and likely from 3rd party integration into your iTunes library. Plus it's a lot of work to compete with a $10/month HD DVR rental from Comcast...note that TiVO, other than from lawsuits and now reselling to cablecos because of their patent isn't making money.
Apple TV will die a slow death. It's underpowered vs. the existing competitive products out there. No go.
Oh you mean the
Slim Devices
Dlink
Netgear
and other streamers out there? How can you state it's underpowered when you don't know the Intel chip that they've included. What other product gives me Component and HDMI out with a 40GB hard drive and 802.11n?
I kind of sounds like you're venting your dissaproval without having much information to back it up.
hmmm, I don't know, maybe because I can rip my own cds to Itunes and import mp3s purchase elsewhere. Those factors don't seem to be hurting ITunes.
The bottom line is no DVR = no go as far as I'm concerned.
I don't see your point... If you import content from your own sources, then good for you, Apple TV will play it.. That still doesn't change the fact that Apple SELLS television content that DVR's can record for free..
Also I'm missing a digital TV-tuner and harddisk recording for this to be the ultimate HTPC system in close collaboration with my Mac mini.
Mmm...noticed that too...I'm hoping that the new Airport Extreme is the standout and the next rev mini will use 3.5" HDs and the 7.7x7.7 footprint along with a 7.7x7.7 NAS box...but probably not.
Last point...its 720p because 1080p isn't going to downloadable in the nearish future except for FiOS users paying for that 30 Mbps pipe at nearly $200 a month.
It is not the definitive home video/audio solution. It does however do one very useful thing: Link your iTunes content to your living room.
Anything you buy on iTunes will now play in your living room. That alone makes it valuable and worth buying to me.
I don't need or want a DVR (I don't have or want cable). I don't need a DVD player (I have one).
I DO need a way to enjoy the TV shows, video podcasts, short films and everything else I currently get from iTunes in my living room.
I also need a way to BROWSE my iTunes mp3's in my living room so I can play them through my stereo. (I don't have or want any full PC's in my living room)
Down the road other capabilities will be added, but as an all in one solution for right now, this will squash most of the competition.
And yes, in answer to others, it will work with any TV with component video in and any stereo or boom box with an input.
I'm just curious as to when someone will grab one of these things and find a way to install Linux or OSX on it. It seems to have all the hardware needed for a functioning computer... I guess the lack of a CD drive is the one major thing that would make it hard though.
I'm curious about what kind of upscaling capabilities this thing has, if any.
Either this will be a decent device for which Apple is providing insufficient content or it can upscale like mad.
Most people do not own a 720p HDTV let alone a 1080i/p one. This is a safe play, but perhaps too safe.
A high percentage of UK homes now have HD ready television sets of one flavour or another. A fair number have a resolution of 1280x720 or similar (capable of displaying 720p and 1080i, but not 1080p). A small minority have a resolution of 1920x1080 (capable of displaying 1080p). More models supporting this higher resolution are promised for release this year.
Be aware that 1080i is interlaced, so although it is a higher resolution, it does not benefit from the progressive scan of 720p. The former has the better resolution, the latter is better at handling movement, albeit at a lower HD resolution. With 1080p, however, one gets the best of both worlds.
Last point...its 720p because 1080p isn't going to downloadable in the nearish future except for FiOS users paying for that 30 Mbps pipe at nearly $200 a month.
Vinea
There are already several reasonably priced 1080i HD camcorders available, and although 1080p HD Camcorders are very expensive at the moment (the Sony HVR-V1E supports 1080p and costs just under £3000 inc VAT), this should change dramatically over the next 12 months if prices drop as fast as they did for the 1080i models. Note that the Sony HDR-HC3 High Definition Camcorder supports 1080i and costs £700 (inc VAT) on amazon.co.uk
Given Steve Job's comment this time last year that 2006 would be the year of HD (when introducing iMovie HD), I am surprised that Apple are not flying the true HD banner as is being done by some of the better known TV manufacturers (at least in the UK market), such as Sony with their KDL-40X2000 40" model which can be bought online for as little as £1445 (inc VAT).
As a source of (non-Apple) HD at 1080i or 720p depending on station, Mac as HD TIVO will cost you $200 to get OTA and clearQAM cable recorded. If this recording can be streamed WIRELESSLY to any location in the house where you might want to have your HDTV, I'd be all over it (no Cat5e cable runs or the like!). However, it's not yet clear what resolution it actually supports - the 720p on the site also says 24fps (and that's not HDTV rate - 60fps at 720p is HD) Once it becomes clear what it can actually wirelessly stream, a lot of this discussion may be moot
There are already several reasonably priced 1080i HD camcorders available, and although 1080p HD Camcorders are very expensive at the moment, this should change dramatically over the next 12 months if prices drop as fast as they did for the 1080i models. Note that the Sony HDR-HC3 High Definition Camcorder supports 1080i and costs £700 (inc VAT) on amazon.co.uk
Given Steve Job's comment this time last year that 2006 would be the year of HD (when introducing iMovie HD), I am surprised that Apple are not flying the true HD banner as is being done by some of the better known TV manufacturers (at least in the UK market), such as Sony with their KDL-40X2000 40" model which can be bought online for as little as £1445 (inc VAT).
The HC3 looks to be a nice HD camera that I would buy but not at $1250. The number of non-prosumers using HD is minimal tho' the HC3 with the "easy mode" option is a great step toward that but in some ways a step back from the HC1. If you're spending over 1K for a camera you kinda want the manual controls no? Maybe not.
Most folks are still better off with a Panasonic PV-GS180 for $400 or a Canon Elura 100 for $350 if they make DVDs.
But yes, 1080p/60 playback on aTV would be better. I can't think of too many reasons that aTV can't do it eventually with a software upgrade. Even the on chip decoders can do that if its using the sigma for the decode lifting...
But yes, 1080p/60 playback on aTV would be better. I can't think of too many reasons that aTV can't do it eventually with a software upgrade. Even the on chip decoders can do that if its using the sigma for the decode lifting...
Vinea
There is a slight problem there though. In the UK, thousands have been persuaded to buy flat screens (LCD or Plasma) on the benefits of how little room they take. It is virtually impossible to buy CRT screens anymore despite LCD being 2 to 3 times more expensive (but that's another issue).
The problem is that these flat screens have been sold as "HD Ready" but most of them have a maximum resolution of 1366x768 which is not high enough to display 1080p pictures. Shops are now starting to sell "True HD" screens with a resolution of 1920x1080. For full HD, people will have to replace their flat panels (I'm glad I waited). Further details of "HD Ready" v. "Full HD" were discussed in April 2006 on HDTV UK at http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2006/04/1080p_hd_questi.html, although technology has since moved on. As an example most of Sony's range of 1366x768 LCDs have now been replaced with 1920x1080 panels, and Blu-Ray players with 1080p playback are starting to filter onto the market.
However, it's not yet clear what resolution it actually supports - the 720p on the site also says 24fps (and that's not HDTV rate - 60fps at 720p is HD)
Ugh, you're right. It does say 24fps. Can they even technically call this 720p?
Quote:
Once it becomes clear what it can actually wirelessly stream, a lot of this discussion may be moot
Well, I was assuming this would do gigabit wired Ethernet (all the rest of Apple's current hardware does), so I didn't really care, but I just realized that the Ethernet port is only 10/100BASE-T.
Looks to me like Apple threw all their money into the iPhone, which few can afford and isn't available yet anyhow. But they really skimped on the Apple TV, which may suffice for people who want something that "just works", but really looks like it is going to offer little for someone who wants even decent HDTV A/V performance. I can't imagine how these issues would be fixable in software.
We know Leopard will bring Front Row 2.0. Steve mentioned that AppleTV uses an intel processor but not specifically what processor or its capability.
I'm of the mind that Apple is keeping the killer features of Apple TV secret to unveil with Leopard.
I'm hoping there's more to this device than what they are showing so far. It's basically an iPod that never moves. If you read the website, it says that it syncs with your iTunes library, meaning it's functioning just like the iPod.
Everything on the website says it REQUIRES a widescreen TV, meaning everyone without a widescreen TV can't use it regardless. Which includes myself.
And couldn't they have updated the remote? It's still the same extremely bare bones thing they've been shipping for over a year. Couldn't we get a mute button at least? Maybe a home function? Or how about a click wheel interface?
It also makes me wonder if I should hold off buying any more TV episodes from iTunes for fear that 720p versions will be released soon and I'll get stuck with an inferior version.
I can do pretty much everything the Apple TV does already with my existing 60GB iPod AND it has a larger capacity. I can't get the iPod menus on the screen but there are 3rd party solutions that can which makes the Apple TV pretty pointless to me.
Hopefull Leopard will bring over the same updates to Front Row demonstrated on the Apple TV like correct alphabetical TV sorting and a smaller font choice (maybe even selectable) so you see more than 4 items at a time. It would be nice to be able to turn on and off menu options.
I noticed AppleInsider's article says this uses a "Mac OS X-based software interface". Do they know more than what's on Apple's website or what was said at the keynote yesterday?
It will play anything the iTunes will play... So yes, if you rip a movie into iTunes, then Apple TV will play it.
That is not true. Read the specs page. It was EXTREMELY limited codec support. It would be more accurate to say that it will play anything an iPod would play, with the addition of one higher resolution format (still has to be H.264.
This is pretty lame. Limiting codec support on an iPod makes sense. Battery and CPU power are limiting factors in an iPod which shouldn't apply to AppleTV. The fact that it doesn't support the full range of QuickTime formats is just plain foolish! I've watched iTunes 640x480 video on my standard definition TV. It's better than VHS, sometimes better than Comcast's channels, but nowhere near DVD quality. If I can't watch my DVDs, with full resolution and audio quality (DD/DTS) either by ripping to my Mac or streaming from the DVD drive it's a non-starter. And what about video clips from my digital camera (Canon uses MJPEG)? That won't play. FrontRow at least looks in my Movies folder for content to play.
A mini with FrontRow is a far, far better solution than Apple TV is, even at the higher price range.
Comments
Connects to TVs that support component video. outputs 1080i 60/50hz, 720p 60/50hz, 576 50hz (PAL), 480p 60 Hz.
Any TV that takes analog component in should work. Except probably mine that chokes on the Dish component out...
http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html
You don't build in 802.11 Draft-N and 720p playback and NOT expect to sell 720p content on iTunes. Besides...where are you going to get any 720p content except from iTunes?
They also showed direct streaming of trailers from Apple.com. The piece missing is probably authentication to iTunes directly from the iTV software so little Johnny can't buy $10000 worth of iTunes content when the parents aren't home.
Authenticating with nothing but the apple remote should be amusing unless its just a multi-digit pass code linked to your iTunes account. For a lot of content it should get automagically get streamed from your iTunes computer to iTV anyway assuming the computer gets turned on once in a while (i.e. your TV show Season Passes).
As far DVR folks haven't been paying attention...no inputs and we've known that for a while. DVR will have to live on the Mac Mini and likely from 3rd party integration into your iTunes library. Plus it's a lot of work to compete with a $10/month HD DVR rental from Comcast...note that TiVO, other than from lawsuits and now reselling to cablecos because of their patent isn't making money.
Vinea
Apple TV will die a slow death. It's underpowered vs. the existing competitive products out there. No go.
Oh you mean the
Slim Devices
Dlink
Netgear
and other streamers out there? How can you state it's underpowered when you don't know the Intel chip that they've included. What other product gives me Component and HDMI out with a 40GB hard drive and 802.11n?
I kind of sounds like you're venting your dissaproval without having much information to back it up.
hmmm, I don't know, maybe because I can rip my own cds to Itunes and import mp3s purchase elsewhere. Those factors don't seem to be hurting ITunes.
The bottom line is no DVR = no go as far as I'm concerned.
I don't see your point... If you import content from your own sources, then good for you, Apple TV will play it.. That still doesn't change the fact that Apple SELLS television content that DVR's can record for free..
Exactly! Really strange in my eyes.
Also I'm missing a digital TV-tuner and harddisk recording for this to be the ultimate HTPC system in close collaboration with my Mac mini.
Mmm...noticed that too...I'm hoping that the new Airport Extreme is the standout and the next rev mini will use 3.5" HDs and the 7.7x7.7 footprint along with a 7.7x7.7 NAS box...but probably not.
Vinea
Vinea
...where are you going to get any 720p content except from iTunes?
Apple's movie trailers site
iMovie HD
Final Cut HD
digital cameras
Anything you buy on iTunes will now play in your living room. That alone makes it valuable and worth buying to me.
I don't need or want a DVR (I don't have or want cable). I don't need a DVD player (I have one).
I DO need a way to enjoy the TV shows, video podcasts, short films and everything else I currently get from iTunes in my living room.
I also need a way to BROWSE my iTunes mp3's in my living room so I can play them through my stereo. (I don't have or want any full PC's in my living room)
Down the road other capabilities will be added, but as an all in one solution for right now, this will squash most of the competition.
And yes, in answer to others, it will work with any TV with component video in and any stereo or boom box with an input.
So when it hits the stores, I'm there. :-)
We know Leopard will bring Front Row 2.0. Steve mentioned that AppleTV uses an intel processor but not specifically what processor or its capability.
I'm of the mind that Apple is keeping the killer features of Apple TV secret to unveil with Leopard.
I'm curious about what kind of upscaling capabilities this thing has, if any.
Either this will be a decent device for which Apple is providing insufficient content or it can upscale like mad.
Most people do not own a 720p HDTV let alone a 1080i/p one. This is a safe play, but perhaps too safe.
A high percentage of UK homes now have HD ready television sets of one flavour or another. A fair number have a resolution of 1280x720 or similar (capable of displaying 720p and 1080i, but not 1080p). A small minority have a resolution of 1920x1080 (capable of displaying 1080p). More models supporting this higher resolution are promised for release this year.
Be aware that 1080i is interlaced, so although it is a higher resolution, it does not benefit from the progressive scan of 720p. The former has the better resolution, the latter is better at handling movement, albeit at a lower HD resolution. With 1080p, however, one gets the best of both worlds.
Apple's movie trailers site
iMovie HD
Final Cut HD
digital cameras
Mkay...and the number of HD vid cams out there right now are "limited" to be generous.
And yah...they're going to do 720p just to show trailers and not sell 720p movies on iTunes.
Vinea
Last point...its 720p because 1080p isn't going to downloadable in the nearish future except for FiOS users paying for that 30 Mbps pipe at nearly $200 a month.
Vinea
There are already several reasonably priced 1080i HD camcorders available, and although 1080p HD Camcorders are very expensive at the moment (the Sony HVR-V1E supports 1080p and costs just under £3000 inc VAT), this should change dramatically over the next 12 months if prices drop as fast as they did for the 1080i models. Note that the Sony HDR-HC3 High Definition Camcorder supports 1080i and costs £700 (inc VAT) on amazon.co.uk
Given Steve Job's comment this time last year that 2006 would be the year of HD (when introducing iMovie HD), I am surprised that Apple are not flying the true HD banner as is being done by some of the better known TV manufacturers (at least in the UK market), such as Sony with their KDL-40X2000 40" model which can be bought online for as little as £1445 (inc VAT).
There are already several reasonably priced 1080i HD camcorders available, and although 1080p HD Camcorders are very expensive at the moment, this should change dramatically over the next 12 months if prices drop as fast as they did for the 1080i models. Note that the Sony HDR-HC3 High Definition Camcorder supports 1080i and costs £700 (inc VAT) on amazon.co.uk
Given Steve Job's comment this time last year that 2006 would be the year of HD (when introducing iMovie HD), I am surprised that Apple are not flying the true HD banner as is being done by some of the better known TV manufacturers (at least in the UK market), such as Sony with their KDL-40X2000 40" model which can be bought online for as little as £1445 (inc VAT).
The HC3 looks to be a nice HD camera that I would buy but not at $1250. The number of non-prosumers using HD is minimal tho' the HC3 with the "easy mode" option is a great step toward that but in some ways a step back from the HC1. If you're spending over 1K for a camera you kinda want the manual controls no? Maybe not.
Most folks are still better off with a Panasonic PV-GS180 for $400 or a Canon Elura 100 for $350 if they make DVDs.
But yes, 1080p/60 playback on aTV would be better. I can't think of too many reasons that aTV can't do it eventually with a software upgrade. Even the on chip decoders can do that if its using the sigma for the decode lifting...
Vinea
But yes, 1080p/60 playback on aTV would be better. I can't think of too many reasons that aTV can't do it eventually with a software upgrade. Even the on chip decoders can do that if its using the sigma for the decode lifting...
Vinea
There is a slight problem there though. In the UK, thousands have been persuaded to buy flat screens (LCD or Plasma) on the benefits of how little room they take. It is virtually impossible to buy CRT screens anymore despite LCD being 2 to 3 times more expensive (but that's another issue).
The problem is that these flat screens have been sold as "HD Ready" but most of them have a maximum resolution of 1366x768 which is not high enough to display 1080p pictures. Shops are now starting to sell "True HD" screens with a resolution of 1920x1080. For full HD, people will have to replace their flat panels (I'm glad I waited). Further details of "HD Ready" v. "Full HD" were discussed in April 2006 on HDTV UK at http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2006/04/1080p_hd_questi.html, although technology has since moved on. As an example most of Sony's range of 1366x768 LCDs have now been replaced with 1920x1080 panels, and Blu-Ray players with 1080p playback are starting to filter onto the market.
However, it's not yet clear what resolution it actually supports - the 720p on the site also says 24fps (and that's not HDTV rate - 60fps at 720p is HD)
Ugh, you're right. It does say 24fps. Can they even technically call this 720p?
Once it becomes clear what it can actually wirelessly stream, a lot of this discussion may be moot
Well, I was assuming this would do gigabit wired Ethernet (all the rest of Apple's current hardware does), so I didn't really care, but I just realized that the Ethernet port is only 10/100BASE-T.
Looks to me like Apple threw all their money into the iPhone, which few can afford and isn't available yet anyhow. But they really skimped on the Apple TV, which may suffice for people who want something that "just works", but really looks like it is going to offer little for someone who wants even decent HDTV A/V performance. I can't imagine how these issues would be fixable in software.
Actually info about Apple TV seems pretty slim.
We know Leopard will bring Front Row 2.0. Steve mentioned that AppleTV uses an intel processor but not specifically what processor or its capability.
I'm of the mind that Apple is keeping the killer features of Apple TV secret to unveil with Leopard.
I'm hoping there's more to this device than what they are showing so far. It's basically an iPod that never moves. If you read the website, it says that it syncs with your iTunes library, meaning it's functioning just like the iPod.
Everything on the website says it REQUIRES a widescreen TV, meaning everyone without a widescreen TV can't use it regardless. Which includes myself.
And couldn't they have updated the remote? It's still the same extremely bare bones thing they've been shipping for over a year. Couldn't we get a mute button at least? Maybe a home function? Or how about a click wheel interface?
It also makes me wonder if I should hold off buying any more TV episodes from iTunes for fear that 720p versions will be released soon and I'll get stuck with an inferior version.
I can do pretty much everything the Apple TV does already with my existing 60GB iPod AND it has a larger capacity. I can't get the iPod menus on the screen but there are 3rd party solutions that can which makes the Apple TV pretty pointless to me.
Hopefull Leopard will bring over the same updates to Front Row demonstrated on the Apple TV like correct alphabetical TV sorting and a smaller font choice (maybe even selectable) so you see more than 4 items at a time. It would be nice to be able to turn on and off menu options.
It will play anything the iTunes will play... So yes, if you rip a movie into iTunes, then Apple TV will play it.
That is not true. Read the specs page. It was EXTREMELY limited codec support. It would be more accurate to say that it will play anything an iPod would play, with the addition of one higher resolution format (still has to be H.264.
This is pretty lame. Limiting codec support on an iPod makes sense. Battery and CPU power are limiting factors in an iPod which shouldn't apply to AppleTV. The fact that it doesn't support the full range of QuickTime formats is just plain foolish! I've watched iTunes 640x480 video on my standard definition TV. It's better than VHS, sometimes better than Comcast's channels, but nowhere near DVD quality. If I can't watch my DVDs, with full resolution and audio quality (DD/DTS) either by ripping to my Mac or streaming from the DVD drive it's a non-starter. And what about video clips from my digital camera (Canon uses MJPEG)? That won't play. FrontRow at least looks in my Movies folder for content to play.
A mini with FrontRow is a far, far better solution than Apple TV is, even at the higher price range.
Everything on the website says it REQUIRES a widescreen TV, meaning everyone without a widescreen TV can't use it regardless. Which includes myself.
It just means that your TV can do letterbox when fed a wide screen signal. It does not mean your TV needs to be a widescreen LCD or tube.
Something like 95% of TV's produced in 10 years can do a native letterbox. Even the cheapest TV's today can do this.