In H264, it might be 15 GB (rough guess), which w/ a 10 mbps connection would take about 3 - 4 hours off the top of my head. If you can also watch it as it dl's, then it would be only a 2 hour wait. Sound like something that can requested and then be done overnight.
The problem is that the prices would likely be quite high. I wonder why someone wouldn't just get the HD-DVD or B-R and save the hassle. This is assuming that both technologies come down in price by the time Apple supports 1080p.
Also, my cable company limits our downstream bandwidth per month at 40Gb, but I believe that restriction has been raised significantly.
This could be a hint of things to come for the Mini...
Apple TV - Mac Mini stack, anyone?
YES! I've been suggesting this for a while. Now, if they would only make everything with the same front and side dimensions, Then make a tuner unit for the top, and a five channel amp for the bottom. Or possibly put the amp on top for heat dispersion.
I'm sure a swap would be no trouble, the problem would be getting the OS off the stock drive and onto your new one.
DVR's often allow re-formatting the HD when things go wrong. Possibly this will also. The question is whether Apple did something with the HD's ROM as they used to do in the old days.
Why are you demanding that a device that is primarily designed to receive media files streamed from your computer have massive local storage?
Some people want Apple TV to be more like a media server that it's not intended to be?
Quote:
It makes much more sense to me to keep my media files on an external drive on my main computer, where I have access to all the nice organization and transcoding and ripping software and I can stick cheap drives in firewire enclosures to my heart's content. Big drives on desktop: media server. Atv: media client.
This could be a hint of things to come for the Mini...
Apple TV - Mac Mini stack, anyone?
Yeah I thought about stacking when I saw the AppleTV and the new AirPort Extreme ? but whilst the current Mac mini and the new AirPort Extreme share the same footprint (6.5"), the AppleTV is slightly larger (7.7").
Some people want Apple TV to be more like a media server that it's not intended to be?
I prefer that media server/client model, too.
I'm using the new AirPort Extreme as a media server. All you have to do is connect a USB drive and every machine on the network can access the contents...
I'm quite impressed with the stuff on the innards, except the 33GB hard drive. Call it 40GB all you wall but if you've more than 33GB in the right format on iTunes it wont all fit on the your Apple TV. Apple should do a microsoft on this thing and bring out an add-on hard drive for $100 or $150 that rests on top of the Apple TV with the same footprint and hooks into that USB port.
On a side note; Blu-Ray movies are about 20GB each, so if you imagine that Apple TV 2.0 could handle 1080p and had a 500GB hard drive, that's not even enough storage for 20 movies, not to mention that you need to fit all your music, photos and podcasts on this thing. This whole Apple TV thing has a long way to go. iTunes res is not good enough, and iTunes TV shows and movies didn't hit outside the US yet, wowzer.
I'm kinda thinking and kinda hoping that apple will come out with a cheap home server kinda like the HP one that was recently released. But extremely simple, like an appletv but much bigger and built only to hold all the media a house hold may have, and has maybe like 3 hard drive drawers so you could swap them easily when need be.
That'd currently allow for 2.2 tb of storage. And it'd ship with just one 320gb drive in it, that's still a lot of space to joe average.
I'd see it for like $249 to really catch on.
It'd be different from network storage because it'd be extremely simple to use and come with great software for mac and for pc. Then appletv can also grab media straight from that and a computer wouldn't always need to be involved.
That's what I want. To have no music or movies or pictures on my computer or external hds at all and have everyone in my house share everything. That'd be awesome.
In H264, it might be 15 GB (rough guess), which w/ a 10 mbps connection would take about 3 - 4 hours off the top of my head. If you can also watch it as it dl's, then it would be only a 2 hour wait. Sound like something that can requested and then be done overnight.
Actually, judging from the 1080p movie trailers, an average movie would be about 8GB
Um yeah, an integrated chip. NVIDIA can make those too.
It is integrated onto the main board, but it is a discrete chip rather than built into some other chip, and apparently that chip is the core of the 7300 boards, the same core video chip is used in the stock Mac Pro.
I'm kinda thinking and kinda hoping that apple will come out with a cheap home server kinda like the HP one that was recently released. But extremely simple, like an appletv but much bigger and built only to hold all the media a house hold may have, and has maybe like 3 hard drive drawers so you could swap them easily when need be.
That'd currently allow for 2.2 tb of storage. And it'd ship with just one 320gb drive in it, that's still a lot of space to joe average.
I'd see it for like $249 to really catch on.
It'd be different from network storage because it'd be extremely simple to use and come with great software for mac and for pc. Then appletv can also grab media straight from that and a computer would always need to be involved.
That's what I want. To have no music or movies or pictures on my computer or external hds at all and have everyone in my house share everything. That'd be awesome.
I'm curious, are you talking about the Windows Home Server trash that Microsoft recently released?
It is integrated onto the main board, but it is a discrete chip rather than built into some other chip, and apparently that chip is the core of the 7300 boards, the same core video chip is used in the stock Mac Pro.
The chip is based on the G72 obviously and that isn't suitable for the Mac Pro at all. Either way it doesn't matter though, the chip isn't really any better then the GMA 950. Unfortunately I can't find anything specific on the G72M in which I'm guessing the M means it's designed specifically for embedding into integrated systems as a Mobile unit or something similiar to that.
The chip is based on the G72 obviously and that isn't suitable for the Mac Pro at all. Either way it doesn't matter though, the chip isn't really any better then the GMA 950. Unfortunately I can't find anything specific on the G72M in which I'm guessing the M means it's designed specifically for embedding into integrated systems as a Mobile unit or something similiar to that.
It looks to me like it's a Geforce 7xxx series chip though, I can't imagine that a GMA is comparable to that. If it was, then I'd think they would just use the GMA.
It looks to me like it's a Geforce 7xxx series chip though, I can't imagine that a GMA is comparable to that. If it was, then I'd think they would just use the GMA.
Scroll down a bit until you come to the table comparing the different G7x chips. The G72 from what I can tell isn't that much different from the GMA 950.
Yeah I thought about stacking when I saw the AppleTV and the new AirPort Extreme – but whilst the current Mac mini and the new AirPort Extreme share the same footprint (6.5"), the AppleTV is slightly larger (7.7").
I don't believe that it is recommended that you put anything on top of these devices because it could interfere with the wireless transmission.
Scroll down a bit until you come to the table comparing the different G7x chips. The G72 from what I can tell isn't that much different from the GMA 950.
Sebastian
The chip is close to a Radeon X1300, which is still 3 times faster than the GMA. Nowhere near the X1600, which is more than 10 times faster than the GMA but it's still better. Since we know they can put them in their TV products, it's just annoying they didn't do the same with their Mac Minis. Of course, the Mini is over half a year old now wherease the Apple TV is just out so let's hope they rectify the issue with a Mini update.
Comments
In H264, it might be 15 GB (rough guess), which w/ a 10 mbps connection would take about 3 - 4 hours off the top of my head. If you can also watch it as it dl's, then it would be only a 2 hour wait. Sound like something that can requested and then be done overnight.
The problem is that the prices would likely be quite high. I wonder why someone wouldn't just get the HD-DVD or B-R and save the hassle. This is assuming that both technologies come down in price by the time Apple supports 1080p.
Also, my cable company limits our downstream bandwidth per month at 40Gb, but I believe that restriction has been raised significantly.
This could be a hint of things to come for the Mini...
Apple TV - Mac Mini stack, anyone?
YES! I've been suggesting this for a while. Now, if they would only make everything with the same front and side dimensions, Then make a tuner unit for the top, and a five channel amp for the bottom. Or possibly put the amp on top for heat dispersion.
I'm sure a swap would be no trouble, the problem would be getting the OS off the stock drive and onto your new one.
DVR's often allow re-formatting the HD when things go wrong. Possibly this will also. The question is whether Apple did something with the HD's ROM as they used to do in the old days.
Why are you demanding that a device that is primarily designed to receive media files streamed from your computer have massive local storage?
Some people want Apple TV to be more like a media server that it's not intended to be?
It makes much more sense to me to keep my media files on an external drive on my main computer, where I have access to all the nice organization and transcoding and ripping software and I can stick cheap drives in firewire enclosures to my heart's content. Big drives on desktop: media server. Atv: media client.
I prefer that media server/client model, too.
This could be a hint of things to come for the Mini...
Apple TV - Mac Mini stack, anyone?
Yeah I thought about stacking when I saw the AppleTV and the new AirPort Extreme ? but whilst the current Mac mini and the new AirPort Extreme share the same footprint (6.5"), the AppleTV is slightly larger (7.7").
Some people want Apple TV to be more like a media server that it's not intended to be?
I prefer that media server/client model, too.
I'm using the new AirPort Extreme as a media server. All you have to do is connect a USB drive and every machine on the network can access the contents...
I'm quite impressed with the stuff on the innards, except the 33GB hard drive. Call it 40GB all you wall but if you've more than 33GB in the right format on iTunes it wont all fit on the your Apple TV. Apple should do a microsoft on this thing and bring out an add-on hard drive for $100 or $150 that rests on top of the Apple TV with the same footprint and hooks into that USB port.
On a side note; Blu-Ray movies are about 20GB each, so if you imagine that Apple TV 2.0 could handle 1080p and had a 500GB hard drive, that's not even enough storage for 20 movies, not to mention that you need to fit all your music, photos and podcasts on this thing. This whole Apple TV thing has a long way to go. iTunes res is not good enough, and iTunes TV shows and movies didn't hit outside the US yet, wowzer.
I'm kinda thinking and kinda hoping that apple will come out with a cheap home server kinda like the HP one that was recently released. But extremely simple, like an appletv but much bigger and built only to hold all the media a house hold may have, and has maybe like 3 hard drive drawers so you could swap them easily when need be.
That'd currently allow for 2.2 tb of storage. And it'd ship with just one 320gb drive in it, that's still a lot of space to joe average.
I'd see it for like $249 to really catch on.
It'd be different from network storage because it'd be extremely simple to use and come with great software for mac and for pc. Then appletv can also grab media straight from that and a computer wouldn't always need to be involved.
That's what I want. To have no music or movies or pictures on my computer or external hds at all and have everyone in my house share everything. That'd be awesome.
They put a NVIDIA chip in this but they put the pos GMA 950 in the mini , macbook, and macbook black.
Um yeah, an integrated chip. NVIDIA can make those too.
Sebastian
In H264, it might be 15 GB (rough guess), which w/ a 10 mbps connection would take about 3 - 4 hours off the top of my head. If you can also watch it as it dl's, then it would be only a 2 hour wait. Sound like something that can requested and then be done overnight.
Actually, judging from the 1080p movie trailers, an average movie would be about 8GB
Um yeah, an integrated chip. NVIDIA can make those too.
It is integrated onto the main board, but it is a discrete chip rather than built into some other chip, and apparently that chip is the core of the 7300 boards, the same core video chip is used in the stock Mac Pro.
Is that a 1.8 inch drive? Looks like it. Do they make SATA 1.8 inch drives?
It's 2.5 Inch.
I'm kinda thinking and kinda hoping that apple will come out with a cheap home server kinda like the HP one that was recently released. But extremely simple, like an appletv but much bigger and built only to hold all the media a house hold may have, and has maybe like 3 hard drive drawers so you could swap them easily when need be.
That'd currently allow for 2.2 tb of storage. And it'd ship with just one 320gb drive in it, that's still a lot of space to joe average.
I'd see it for like $249 to really catch on.
It'd be different from network storage because it'd be extremely simple to use and come with great software for mac and for pc. Then appletv can also grab media straight from that and a computer would always need to be involved.
That's what I want. To have no music or movies or pictures on my computer or external hds at all and have everyone in my house share everything. That'd be awesome.
I'm curious, are you talking about the Windows Home Server trash that Microsoft recently released?
Then you may be interested in this.
Sebastian
It is integrated onto the main board, but it is a discrete chip rather than built into some other chip, and apparently that chip is the core of the 7300 boards, the same core video chip is used in the stock Mac Pro.
The chip is based on the G72 obviously and that isn't suitable for the Mac Pro at all. Either way it doesn't matter though, the chip isn't really any better then the GMA 950. Unfortunately I can't find anything specific on the G72M in which I'm guessing the M means it's designed specifically for embedding into integrated systems as a Mobile unit or something similiar to that.
Sebastian
The chip is based on the G72 obviously and that isn't suitable for the Mac Pro at all. Either way it doesn't matter though, the chip isn't really any better then the GMA 950. Unfortunately I can't find anything specific on the G72M in which I'm guessing the M means it's designed specifically for embedding into integrated systems as a Mobile unit or something similiar to that.
It looks to me like it's a Geforce 7xxx series chip though, I can't imagine that a GMA is comparable to that. If it was, then I'd think they would just use the GMA.
It looks to me like it's a Geforce 7xxx series chip though, I can't imagine that a GMA is comparable to that. If it was, then I'd think they would just use the GMA.
Click
and
Scroll down a bit until you come to the table comparing the different G7x chips. The G72 from what I can tell isn't that much different from the GMA 950.
Sebastian
Yeah I thought about stacking when I saw the AppleTV and the new AirPort Extreme – but whilst the current Mac mini and the new AirPort Extreme share the same footprint (6.5"), the AppleTV is slightly larger (7.7").
I don't believe that it is recommended that you put anything on top of these devices because it could interfere with the wireless transmission.
Well that didn't take long!
I don't believe that it is recommended that you put anything on top of these devices because it could interfere with the wireless transmission.
Not to mention the fact that the top of the TV acts as the unit's heatsink.
Click
and
Scroll down a bit until you come to the table comparing the different G7x chips. The G72 from what I can tell isn't that much different from the GMA 950.
Sebastian
The chip is close to a Radeon X1300, which is still 3 times faster than the GMA. Nowhere near the X1600, which is more than 10 times faster than the GMA but it's still better. Since we know they can put them in their TV products, it's just annoying they didn't do the same with their Mac Minis. Of course, the Mini is over half a year old now wherease the Apple TV is just out so let's hope they rectify the issue with a Mini update.