Well, I'm certainly not a vocal detractor of Atv. I want it be to good. I suspect that in many ways it is.
But what is not good is the combination of the iTMS movie download res, whatever scaling is going on, and the Bravia LCDs in the Apple store. I haven't seen any other set-up, so that's all I can speak to.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but honestly, I don't see how you can declare what's going on with the Apple Store set-up as being good enough. Yeah, it's not HD, it's also sub-SD and to my eyes somewhat more objectionable than VHS, since VHS has the advantage of analogue vagueness that sort of blends together.
I think this is going to be a problem. I think a lot of people (like me) who might have come into the store thinking "cool, I'll check this out" are going to say "wow, that's really not good enough". Like I've been saying, it's actually kind of startling. This is Apple, after all, kings of sweating the details.
I mean, think about the whole widget: Apple wants us to download movies as an alternative to renting or buying a DVD. That was already a tough proposition given the relative cost, lack of special features and "near DVD" resolution, but who on earth is going to spend $300 for the privilege of watching downloads that cost more than a DVD rental (yes, you sort of own them, but the DRM makes even that less compelling) and, more importantly, look much, much worse? Especially people who have nice big component input flat-screens and who are used to looking at upscaled progressive scan DVDs and digital cable, at the very least? I shudder to think of what this looks like on a bigger display.
Yes, I know: I can rip DVDs or find other means of getting higher res sources into iTunes/Atv friendly format. It also does music. Apple will probably eventually offer higher res downloads. And some people will certainly buy it.
But for right now, for the average, "lets watch a movie on the couch" DVD renting consumer, which Atv is presumably aimed at, I think Apple has made a huge mistake rolling this out before they could get the movie res into some kind of acceptable shape. Better scaling, more pixels, different LCD in the stores, something.
I'm kind of going on about this because it seems so utterly un-Apple like, it's actually bewildering to me. Like I said in my first post, I'm trying to imagine Steve looking at what I saw and saying "yes, let's do that". I would have thought he would have said "that looks like fucking shit, fix it before we go to market".
Exactly...I agree with everything here. This product just isn't good enough right now. Especially not for $300. "Bewildered" is a good word, given Apple's history of not releasing products until they are "ready." This seems like the kind of product Jobs and Co. have mocked other companies for releasing too soon. I've seen the AppleTV output both in the Apple Store and in a home setup and both are unacceptable to me.
There's definitely a compelling product here somewhere down the line but as of right now this isn't it. I was really excited about the Tivo/Unbox combo until I tried it out and, unfortunately, the image quality there is poor as well (and of course it doesn't play my iTunes purchased music, which is HUGE to me). I've found the XBox 360's offering surprisingly good actually: purchases direct from the living room and good image quality with 5.1 sound, but the selection is lacking and the current interface simply won't scale if/when selection increases. Prices seem high to me too. It looks like Apple is the frontrunner in this space as long as they get more content at higher resolutions with 5.1 sound, but none of these products is really there yet.
P.S. It's hilarious how "I'm not a videophile" is the new catchphrase for AppleTV owners. I've been seeing that everywhere lately.
Oh...and I AM a vocal detractor of the AppleTV. After trying the major products in this space I'm a vocal detractor of them all. None of them are good enough yet.
Strange. I would accept nothing less than stellar quality from Steve and the acolytes, but I'll stand by my comment that AppleTV is stillborn.
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
As much hacking activity as I've seen on the AppleTV, I have no doubt the users will be the ones to make it useful. Not holding my breath for Apple to do so.
Congrats on your exposure to high quality material, but that makes no sense whatsoever. It's like saying that if you've been in a recording studio and heard the masters through state of the art equipment, you no longer find any meaningful difference between 16 bit CDs and AM radio.
I wasn't saying that to show off, I was giving context to my opinion. Watching YouTube movies on your television would be the equivalent of AM radio.
Quote:
Reproduction quality, in any medium, generally falls across a continuum from best to worst. Having very good reproductions at the top doesn't make the distinctions amongst everything else just go away, or not matter, especially when you're talking about appealing to people who probably haven't been exposed to the best of the best.
I'm saying there is an obvious difference between the far better and far worse. But once you are closer between the differences the distinctions are a lot less obvious. For example looking at a 2K image and uncompressed 1080 image any of us would be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference.
I agree the iTunes movies aren't as sharp and clear as DVD from 12 inches away, but its not that bad from 10 to 15 feet away where most everyone is realistically viewing. Once again when Joe and Jane Consumer sits in front of the television and are engrossed in their favorite program will any of this matter. Nope.
But the point of this thread is to bitch and complain. So continue.......
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
Apple clearly intends an iPod/ iTMS music type synergy for the Atv and iTMS movies.
If the songs on the iTMS had been 32 bit MPEGs, the whole idea of the iPod would have been tarnished. Even though you can rip your own CDs.
From other people's experiences, here and elsewhere, it seems like a big part of the problem is the Sony LCDs that are being used in the Apple store. That would certainly be consistent with my experience of the broad range of image quality amongst fixed pixel, HD displays dealing with a SD signal.
I hope Apple is getting something major out of using Sony equipment as the face of Atv, like maybe Sony releasing their film catalogue on the iTMS, because it sure isn't showing off their baby in the best light.
addabox, you didn't, by any chance, happen to notice the output setting, did you?
I'm curious if someone was playing around and mixed it up or that was the right 720p output.
I wasn't saying that to show off, I was giving context to my opinion. Watching YouTube movies on your television would be the equivalent of AM radio.
I'm saying there is an obvious difference between the far better and far worse. But once you are closer between the differences the distinctions are a lot less obvious. For example looking at a 2K image and uncompressed 1080 image any of us would be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference.
I agree the iTunes movies aren't as sharp and clear as DVD from 12 inches away, but its not that bad from 10 to 15 feet away where most everyone is realistically viewing. Once again when Joe and Jane Consumer sits in front of the television and are engrossed in their favorite program will any of this matter. Nope.
But the point of this thread is to bitch and complain. So continue.......
Well I just flatly disagree with that. People aren't blind. And they've been exposed to enough source material of reasonable quality to be able to notice the difference, "engrossed" or no.
Remember, the stuff I saw was on a 32" LCD-- a lot of people have far bigger screens, which will magnify the shortcomings, no matter how far away they sit.
Have you not noticed all the people buying big-ass plasmas and progressive scan DVDs? Think they do that because they could care less how stuff looks?
The idea that I started this thread "to bitch and complain" makes me want to slap the stupid off you. I'm pretty much awash in the Koolaid, and willing to defend a lot of Apple's choices against all comers.
I went down to the Apple store expecting to be impressed and instead was shocked, which has literally never happened to me before, when it comes to Apples stuff.
Many people saying that Mac Mini would be better. Not quite. My TV have weird matrix with 1366x768 resolution and it seems like impossible to set Mini to that size. I played with different utilities that allow to set custom video modes, nothing worked. And any other resolution looks like crap. Distorted, streched, squeezed and so on. Plus this freakin' overscan thing.
With Apple TV I have no problem with that, everything looks smooth and clear. Even small text (movies info and annotations) is clear and sharp.
Both of my Samsung HDTVs have VGA inputs. Each of them is detected at their native resolution by my MacBook. One is 1366 x 768 and the other is 1440 x 900. YMMV
Well I just flatly disagree with that. People aren't blind. And they've been exposed to enough source material of reasonable quality to be able to notice the difference, "engrossed" or no.
You are speaking of the same people who are willing to watch poor quality pirated DVD's. People who download BitTorrent movies with 4Mbps data rate and call that superior HDTV. Give me a break.
Quote:
Remember, the stuff I saw was on a 32" LCD-- a lot of people have far bigger screens, which will magnify the shortcomings, no matter how far away they sit.
There have been studies on this that prove that at a given distance versus screen size most people cannot tell the difference between HD and SD.
Quote:
The idea that I started this thread "to bitch and complain" makes me want to slap the stupid off you. I'm pretty much awash in the Koolaid, and willing to defend a lot of Apple's choices against all comers.
Hhmm I thought I was in a constructive conversation. But it goes to illustrate my point that this thread was created to only complain with little tolerance for a different point of view.
You seem to want to officially declare that iTS movies looked like crap and that would be the prevailing attitude. Its fine if that is your opinion you are free to have it. The quality is not good enough for your delicate visual palette but your assessment is not the ruling opinion for the entire consumer market.
I carefully looked through various movies, TV shows, and music videos on the ATV. Looked for known compression problems. Looked at them from different distances. I asked the store associate about the television settings, he told me it was set at 1080. It wasn't great but I thought it looked fine for what it was. I don't have the final word on the consumer market either. But its been proven people value convenience and usability over supreme quality.
You are speaking of the same people who are willing to watch poor quality pirated DVD's. People who download BitTorrent movies with 4Mbps data rate and call that superior HDTV. Give me a break.
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
Quote:
There have been studies on this that prove that at a given distance versus screen size most people cannot tell the difference between HD and SD.
I think you're thinking of the fact that below a certain size, or past a certain distance, HD brings no apparent improvements to the image. Which says nothing about making the image a lot worse than DVD, at a given size or distance.
Quote:
Hhmm I thought I was in a constructive conversation. But it goes to illustrate my point that this thread was created to only complain with little tolerance for a different point of view.
Really? The constructive conversation that you dismissed as being entirely about an opportunity to bitch and moan? Huh.
Quote:
You seem to want to officially declare that iTS movies looked like crap and that would be the prevailing attitude. Its fine if that is your opinion you are free to have it. The quality is not good enough for your delicate visual palette but your assessment is not the ruling opinion for the entire consumer market.
I reported what I saw. In my judgement, the relatively low quality of iTMS movies, as displayed in Apple Store, is undeniable. Really, when you resort to phrases like "your delicate visual palette" to defend that quality, suggesting that my standards must be too high rather than the image not being good enough, you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Which kind of pisses me off, since I really like Apple's stuff, for the most part, and can't see where the company that I like so much is being done any favors by that kind of silly defensiveness.
Quote:
I carefully looked through various movies, TV shows, and music videos on the ATV. Looked for known compression problems. Looked at them from different distances. I asked the store associate about the television settings, he told me it was set at 1080. It wasn't great but I thought it looked fine for what it was. I don't have the final word on the consumer market either. But its been proven people value convenience and usability over supreme quality.
Well, if it's about convenience and usability, people are probably going to stick with Netflix and DVDs. Plus, I'm not sure what "fine for what it was" means in this context. What is it? And how is that a sales point? "We know it doesn't look nearly as good as the DVD player you already have, but you have to consider what it is! And considering that, it's actually pretty good!"
And I'm sorry, but there's something sort of comical about the idea of you examining the image for "known compressions problems" when the image you are looking at is insanely blocky and badly scaled. Like examining a car wreck for "known suspension problems".
Whatever. Good enough for you, that's great. Buy one and enjoy. Personally, I hope Apple figures out a way to make a better first impression, so that Atv does really well in the market and improves the general Apple ecology. But that's just me.
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
Say what? Even many of my "geek" friends wouldn't know line doubled if it walked up and bit them. There's folks sending composite video from their DVD player to thier large RPTVs...
At least HDTV folks got component cables sold them by the helpful Best Buy folks and hopefully getting progressive anamorphic video out of their DVD players.
Quote:
I reported what I saw. In my judgement, the relatively low quality of iTMS movies, as displayed in Apple Store, is undeniable. Really, when you resort to phrases like "your delicate visual palette" to defend that quality, suggesting that my standards must be too high rather than the image not being good enough, you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Yes, SD on iTunes sucks. 720p/24 movies would have made aTV a really hot product IMHO. As is, it seems very niche.
But the product is young and 720p is still possible in the near future. Just far less likely than it was pre-launch for an appearance near term.
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
I guess I'll have to go down to the guy on the corner who sells pirate DVD's and tell him that I made his customer base up in my imagination.
Quote:
Really? The constructive conversation that you dismissed as being entirely about an opportunity to bitch and moan? Huh.
That's exactly what I'm saying.
Quote:
Which says nothing about making the image a lot worse than DVD, at a given size or distance.
Perhaps the TV you saw was really screwed up, I'm not denying you your experience, I'm saying the one I saw wasn't that bad.
Quote:
you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Unless I agree with the chorus who criticize an Apple product by default I become an Apple apologist? It has nothing to do with Apple, that is what I observed as my honest opinion.
Quote:
Well, if it's about convenience and usability, people are probably going to stick with Netflix and DVDs.
The same way CD's are more convenient than an iPod.
Quote:
And I'm sorry, but there's something sort of comical about the idea of you examining the image for "known compressions problems" when the image you are looking at is insanely blocky and badly scaled. Like examining a car wreck for "known suspension problems".
If you sit inches away from your television you can see compression artifacts and blocky shadows while watching DVD's. You normally would not see them because you are sitting several feet away but they are there.
I agree that iTS movies are far more compressed and display more compression artifacts when viewed from up close. But what I saw at a distance became obscured.
Quote:
Buy one and enjoy.
I'm in no rush. I may get one - I may not.
Quote:
Personally, I hope Apple figures out a way to make a better first impression, so that Atv does really well in the market and improves the general Apple ecology. But that's just me.
I'm in Los Angeles doing some work. I went to the Apple store at The Grove. There was a huge crowd around the ATV display. I had to wait to even get to use one.
Yes, SD on iTunes sucks. 720p/24 movies would have made aTV a really hot product IMHO. As is, it seems very niche.
I wouldn't count ATV as a niche product because of iTS download resolution. I agree its a niche product because most people don't perceive that they have the problem that ATV ultimately solves.
It will take some time for the electronics industry to convince the general market that not being able to stream content from your computer to your television is something you really want to do.
I'm in Los Angeles doing some work. I went to the Apple store at The Grove. There was a huge crowd around the ATV display. I had to wait to even get to use one.
Yes, but did the video look like Lego building blocks?
Hmm, I've watched quite a few 640x480 TV shows purchased from iTunes on my iMac display, and I've always felt it looks fine. It's clearly not HD, and I can't say I've gotten up close to look at it, but I've never had a "yech" response like you describe addabox. And I believe the iMac display is higher resolution than that Sony 32".
I've watched my own RIP'd DVD's as well as purchases from iTunes on both my 24" iMac and my 50" Hitachi RPLCD TV via Apple TV. While not HD, I've never had a problem with the quality; it's vastly superior to the artifacted, stretched and washed-out appearance of SD movies on DirecTV. I bought and watched The Rookie on Sunday, and within 5 minutes I was focused on the story not the quality.
I think a lot depends upon your expectations and the upscaling of the TV. I can live with this for now, but I too am hoping for 720p downloads.
...and ONLY 720p downloads. People complaining that they need 1080p are smoking crack. The majority of people don't even have HD sets yet, while the majority of HD owners have either 720p/1080i sets or 1080p sets that DON'T ACCEPT 1080P input!!! Anyone complaining that a good ESPN HD broadcast (720p) is not good enough quality for them is anal to the point of choking on their on colon. The fact is that unless your sitting really close to a really big screen, you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p anyway.
Between the size of the downloads and the facts on the TV's, I think a move to 720p would be a complete coup by Apple. It could literally destroy the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD debate. Are those formats 1080p? Sure, just like a CD is better than mp3 quality; but people will choose convience, simplicity, and instant gratification as long as the quality is not noticeably (to average ears/eyes) worse than another alternative.
Comments
Well, I'm certainly not a vocal detractor of Atv. I want it be to good. I suspect that in many ways it is.
But what is not good is the combination of the iTMS movie download res, whatever scaling is going on, and the Bravia LCDs in the Apple store. I haven't seen any other set-up, so that's all I can speak to.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but honestly, I don't see how you can declare what's going on with the Apple Store set-up as being good enough. Yeah, it's not HD, it's also sub-SD and to my eyes somewhat more objectionable than VHS, since VHS has the advantage of analogue vagueness that sort of blends together.
I think this is going to be a problem. I think a lot of people (like me) who might have come into the store thinking "cool, I'll check this out" are going to say "wow, that's really not good enough". Like I've been saying, it's actually kind of startling. This is Apple, after all, kings of sweating the details.
I mean, think about the whole widget: Apple wants us to download movies as an alternative to renting or buying a DVD. That was already a tough proposition given the relative cost, lack of special features and "near DVD" resolution, but who on earth is going to spend $300 for the privilege of watching downloads that cost more than a DVD rental (yes, you sort of own them, but the DRM makes even that less compelling) and, more importantly, look much, much worse? Especially people who have nice big component input flat-screens and who are used to looking at upscaled progressive scan DVDs and digital cable, at the very least? I shudder to think of what this looks like on a bigger display.
Yes, I know: I can rip DVDs or find other means of getting higher res sources into iTunes/Atv friendly format. It also does music. Apple will probably eventually offer higher res downloads. And some people will certainly buy it.
But for right now, for the average, "lets watch a movie on the couch" DVD renting consumer, which Atv is presumably aimed at, I think Apple has made a huge mistake rolling this out before they could get the movie res into some kind of acceptable shape. Better scaling, more pixels, different LCD in the stores, something.
I'm kind of going on about this because it seems so utterly un-Apple like, it's actually bewildering to me. Like I said in my first post, I'm trying to imagine Steve looking at what I saw and saying "yes, let's do that". I would have thought he would have said "that looks like fucking shit, fix it before we go to market".
Exactly...I agree with everything here. This product just isn't good enough right now. Especially not for $300. "Bewildered" is a good word, given Apple's history of not releasing products until they are "ready." This seems like the kind of product Jobs and Co. have mocked other companies for releasing too soon. I've seen the AppleTV output both in the Apple Store and in a home setup and both are unacceptable to me.
There's definitely a compelling product here somewhere down the line but as of right now this isn't it. I was really excited about the Tivo/Unbox combo until I tried it out and, unfortunately, the image quality there is poor as well (and of course it doesn't play my iTunes purchased music, which is HUGE to me). I've found the XBox 360's offering surprisingly good actually: purchases direct from the living room and good image quality with 5.1 sound, but the selection is lacking and the current interface simply won't scale if/when selection increases. Prices seem high to me too. It looks like Apple is the frontrunner in this space as long as they get more content at higher resolutions with 5.1 sound, but none of these products is really there yet.
P.S. It's hilarious how "I'm not a videophile" is the new catchphrase for AppleTV owners. I've been seeing that everywhere lately.
....
Oh...and I AM a vocal detractor of the AppleTV. After trying the major products in this space I'm a vocal detractor of them all. None of them are good enough yet.
P.S. It's hilarious how "I'm not a videophile" is the new catchphrase for AppleTV owners. I've been seeing that everywhere lately.
Strange. I would accept nothing less than stellar quality from Steve and the acolytes, but I'll stand by my comment that AppleTV is stillborn.
Strange. I would accept nothing less than stellar quality from Steve and the acolytes, but I'll stand by my comment that AppleTV is stillborn.
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
As much hacking activity as I've seen on the AppleTV, I have no doubt the users will be the ones to make it useful. Not holding my breath for Apple to do so.
Congrats on your exposure to high quality material, but that makes no sense whatsoever. It's like saying that if you've been in a recording studio and heard the masters through state of the art equipment, you no longer find any meaningful difference between 16 bit CDs and AM radio.
I wasn't saying that to show off, I was giving context to my opinion. Watching YouTube movies on your television would be the equivalent of AM radio.
Reproduction quality, in any medium, generally falls across a continuum from best to worst. Having very good reproductions at the top doesn't make the distinctions amongst everything else just go away, or not matter, especially when you're talking about appealing to people who probably haven't been exposed to the best of the best.
I'm saying there is an obvious difference between the far better and far worse. But once you are closer between the differences the distinctions are a lot less obvious. For example looking at a 2K image and uncompressed 1080 image any of us would be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference.
I agree the iTunes movies aren't as sharp and clear as DVD from 12 inches away, but its not that bad from 10 to 15 feet away where most everyone is realistically viewing. Once again when Joe and Jane Consumer sits in front of the television and are engrossed in their favorite program will any of this matter. Nope.
But the point of this thread is to bitch and complain. So continue.......
But how is this a problem with AppleTV? Is does what Apple wants it to do: provide content in iTunes/on your computer to your TV. The problem, as I see it, is with media purchased through the iTMS. But what about content encoded by the user? I have many H.264 video files encoded in high quality the I have no way of getting to my TV. This is where an AppleTV will/can fit in.
Apple clearly intends an iPod/ iTMS music type synergy for the Atv and iTMS movies.
If the songs on the iTMS had been 32 bit MPEGs, the whole idea of the iPod would have been tarnished. Even though you can rip your own CDs.
From other people's experiences, here and elsewhere, it seems like a big part of the problem is the Sony LCDs that are being used in the Apple store. That would certainly be consistent with my experience of the broad range of image quality amongst fixed pixel, HD displays dealing with a SD signal.
I hope Apple is getting something major out of using Sony equipment as the face of Atv, like maybe Sony releasing their film catalogue on the iTMS, because it sure isn't showing off their baby in the best light.
addabox, you didn't, by any chance, happen to notice the output setting, did you?
I'm curious if someone was playing around and mixed it up or that was the right 720p output.
I wasn't saying that to show off, I was giving context to my opinion. Watching YouTube movies on your television would be the equivalent of AM radio.
I'm saying there is an obvious difference between the far better and far worse. But once you are closer between the differences the distinctions are a lot less obvious. For example looking at a 2K image and uncompressed 1080 image any of us would be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference.
I agree the iTunes movies aren't as sharp and clear as DVD from 12 inches away, but its not that bad from 10 to 15 feet away where most everyone is realistically viewing. Once again when Joe and Jane Consumer sits in front of the television and are engrossed in their favorite program will any of this matter. Nope.
But the point of this thread is to bitch and complain. So continue.......
Well I just flatly disagree with that. People aren't blind. And they've been exposed to enough source material of reasonable quality to be able to notice the difference, "engrossed" or no.
Remember, the stuff I saw was on a 32" LCD-- a lot of people have far bigger screens, which will magnify the shortcomings, no matter how far away they sit.
Have you not noticed all the people buying big-ass plasmas and progressive scan DVDs? Think they do that because they could care less how stuff looks?
The idea that I started this thread "to bitch and complain" makes me want to slap the stupid off you. I'm pretty much awash in the Koolaid, and willing to defend a lot of Apple's choices against all comers.
I went down to the Apple store expecting to be impressed and instead was shocked, which has literally never happened to me before, when it comes to Apples stuff.
addabox, you didn't, by any chance, happen to notice the output setting, did you?
I'm curious if someone was playing around and mixed it up or that was the right 720p output.
That was actually my first thought, but they've got the res setting locked down, so probably not. I'm going back tonight to ask some questions.
Many people saying that Mac Mini would be better. Not quite. My TV have weird matrix with 1366x768 resolution and it seems like impossible to set Mini to that size. I played with different utilities that allow to set custom video modes, nothing worked. And any other resolution looks like crap. Distorted, streched, squeezed and so on. Plus this freakin' overscan thing.
With Apple TV I have no problem with that, everything looks smooth and clear. Even small text (movies info and annotations) is clear and sharp.
Both of my Samsung HDTVs have VGA inputs. Each of them is detected at their native resolution by my MacBook. One is 1366 x 768 and the other is 1440 x 900. YMMV
Well I just flatly disagree with that. People aren't blind. And they've been exposed to enough source material of reasonable quality to be able to notice the difference, "engrossed" or no.
You are speaking of the same people who are willing to watch poor quality pirated DVD's. People who download BitTorrent movies with 4Mbps data rate and call that superior HDTV. Give me a break.
Remember, the stuff I saw was on a 32" LCD-- a lot of people have far bigger screens, which will magnify the shortcomings, no matter how far away they sit.
There have been studies on this that prove that at a given distance versus screen size most people cannot tell the difference between HD and SD.
The idea that I started this thread "to bitch and complain" makes me want to slap the stupid off you. I'm pretty much awash in the Koolaid, and willing to defend a lot of Apple's choices against all comers.
Hhmm I thought I was in a constructive conversation. But it goes to illustrate my point that this thread was created to only complain with little tolerance for a different point of view.
You seem to want to officially declare that iTS movies looked like crap and that would be the prevailing attitude. Its fine if that is your opinion you are free to have it. The quality is not good enough for your delicate visual palette but your assessment is not the ruling opinion for the entire consumer market.
I carefully looked through various movies, TV shows, and music videos on the ATV. Looked for known compression problems. Looked at them from different distances. I asked the store associate about the television settings, he told me it was set at 1080. It wasn't great but I thought it looked fine for what it was. I don't have the final word on the consumer market either. But its been proven people value convenience and usability over supreme quality.
You are speaking of the same people who are willing to watch poor quality pirated DVD's. People who download BitTorrent movies with 4Mbps data rate and call that superior HDTV. Give me a break.
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
There have been studies on this that prove that at a given distance versus screen size most people cannot tell the difference between HD and SD.
I think you're thinking of the fact that below a certain size, or past a certain distance, HD brings no apparent improvements to the image. Which says nothing about making the image a lot worse than DVD, at a given size or distance.
Hhmm I thought I was in a constructive conversation. But it goes to illustrate my point that this thread was created to only complain with little tolerance for a different point of view.
Really? The constructive conversation that you dismissed as being entirely about an opportunity to bitch and moan? Huh.
You seem to want to officially declare that iTS movies looked like crap and that would be the prevailing attitude. Its fine if that is your opinion you are free to have it. The quality is not good enough for your delicate visual palette but your assessment is not the ruling opinion for the entire consumer market.
I reported what I saw. In my judgement, the relatively low quality of iTMS movies, as displayed in Apple Store, is undeniable. Really, when you resort to phrases like "your delicate visual palette" to defend that quality, suggesting that my standards must be too high rather than the image not being good enough, you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Which kind of pisses me off, since I really like Apple's stuff, for the most part, and can't see where the company that I like so much is being done any favors by that kind of silly defensiveness.
I carefully looked through various movies, TV shows, and music videos on the ATV. Looked for known compression problems. Looked at them from different distances. I asked the store associate about the television settings, he told me it was set at 1080. It wasn't great but I thought it looked fine for what it was. I don't have the final word on the consumer market either. But its been proven people value convenience and usability over supreme quality.
Well, if it's about convenience and usability, people are probably going to stick with Netflix and DVDs. Plus, I'm not sure what "fine for what it was" means in this context. What is it? And how is that a sales point? "We know it doesn't look nearly as good as the DVD player you already have, but you have to consider what it is! And considering that, it's actually pretty good!"
And I'm sorry, but there's something sort of comical about the idea of you examining the image for "known compressions problems" when the image you are looking at is insanely blocky and badly scaled. Like examining a car wreck for "known suspension problems".
Whatever. Good enough for you, that's great. Buy one and enjoy. Personally, I hope Apple figures out a way to make a better first impression, so that Atv does really well in the market and improves the general Apple ecology. But that's just me.
There have been studies on this that prove that at a given distance versus screen size most people cannot tell the difference between HD and SD.
Yeah, unfortunately one would have to be 50 feet away to mistake what was showing at the Apple store to mistake that for HD or DVD quality.
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
Say what? Even many of my "geek" friends wouldn't know line doubled if it walked up and bit them. There's folks sending composite video from their DVD player to thier large RPTVs...
At least HDTV folks got component cables sold them by the helpful Best Buy folks and hopefully getting progressive anamorphic video out of their DVD players.
I reported what I saw. In my judgement, the relatively low quality of iTMS movies, as displayed in Apple Store, is undeniable. Really, when you resort to phrases like "your delicate visual palette" to defend that quality, suggesting that my standards must be too high rather than the image not being good enough, you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Yes, SD on iTunes sucks. 720p/24 movies would have made aTV a really hot product IMHO. As is, it seems very niche.
But the product is young and 720p is still possible in the near future. Just far less likely than it was pre-launch for an appearance near term.
Vinea
Wow, those are some nutty people. That you made up. I'm pretty much thinking about the vast majority of people, who like to watch progressive scan DVDs on line doubling, fair sized monitors.
I guess I'll have to go down to the guy on the corner who sells pirate DVD's and tell him that I made his customer base up in my imagination.
Really? The constructive conversation that you dismissed as being entirely about an opportunity to bitch and moan? Huh.
That's exactly what I'm saying.
Which says nothing about making the image a lot worse than DVD, at a given size or distance.
Perhaps the TV you saw was really screwed up, I'm not denying you your experience, I'm saying the one I saw wasn't that bad.
you sound like a mindless Apple apologist.
Unless I agree with the chorus who criticize an Apple product by default I become an Apple apologist? It has nothing to do with Apple, that is what I observed as my honest opinion.
Well, if it's about convenience and usability, people are probably going to stick with Netflix and DVDs.
The same way CD's are more convenient than an iPod.
And I'm sorry, but there's something sort of comical about the idea of you examining the image for "known compressions problems" when the image you are looking at is insanely blocky and badly scaled. Like examining a car wreck for "known suspension problems".
If you sit inches away from your television you can see compression artifacts and blocky shadows while watching DVD's. You normally would not see them because you are sitting several feet away but they are there.
I agree that iTS movies are far more compressed and display more compression artifacts when viewed from up close. But what I saw at a distance became obscured.
Buy one and enjoy.
I'm in no rush. I may get one - I may not.
Personally, I hope Apple figures out a way to make a better first impression, so that Atv does really well in the market and improves the general Apple ecology. But that's just me.
I'm in Los Angeles doing some work. I went to the Apple store at The Grove. There was a huge crowd around the ATV display. I had to wait to even get to use one.
Yes, SD on iTunes sucks. 720p/24 movies would have made aTV a really hot product IMHO. As is, it seems very niche.
I wouldn't count ATV as a niche product because of iTS download resolution. I agree its a niche product because most people don't perceive that they have the problem that ATV ultimately solves.
It will take some time for the electronics industry to convince the general market that not being able to stream content from your computer to your television is something you really want to do.
I'm in Los Angeles doing some work. I went to the Apple store at The Grove. There was a huge crowd around the ATV display. I had to wait to even get to use one.
Yes, but did the video look like Lego building blocks?
I think a lot depends upon your expectations and the upscaling of the TV. I can live with this for now, but I too am hoping for 720p downloads.
...and ONLY 720p downloads. People complaining that they need 1080p are smoking crack. The majority of people don't even have HD sets yet, while the majority of HD owners have either 720p/1080i sets or 1080p sets that DON'T ACCEPT 1080P input!!! Anyone complaining that a good ESPN HD broadcast (720p) is not good enough quality for them is anal to the point of choking on their on colon. The fact is that unless your sitting really close to a really big screen, you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p anyway.
Between the size of the downloads and the facts on the TV's, I think a move to 720p would be a complete coup by Apple. It could literally destroy the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD debate. Are those formats 1080p? Sure, just like a CD is better than mp3 quality; but people will choose convience, simplicity, and instant gratification as long as the quality is not noticeably (to average ears/eyes) worse than another alternative.