My satellite provider can't even deliver HD that's not so compressed it looks horrible, what makes anyone think that Apple will be able to do so over the internet?
Because apple doesn't have to send the data real time. Speed depends on the user's connection, but I think if people are willing to wait 3+ days for Netflix to arrive in the mail, they'd be willing to start an HD video download early. Particularly if iTunes does a good job of informing what the estimated download time is and makes that obvious to the user before they buy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
The product of the FUTURE is exactly what it is. It is NOT the product of the present, except for a small group of people.
But oddly enough, without 5.1 surround sound (which has been around for what, 10 years or more) and 1080i or p, it's a product of the PAST. That's part of apple's problem. They could get away with a "product of the future" if it was consistently that. Right now, it's too advanced for some users while not advanced enough for others - instead of making something that would appeal to one segment of the marketplace, they ended up with something that doesn't fully cater to any part of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB
Biiiigg 'if'.
If the NBC offering is any indications, Apple has nothing to worry about in the long run.
un-skippable commercials, content blow-up. Yeah, they get it.
But the real question is are people watching it? For free programs on demand, people may be willing to forgive the commercials and expiring content.
It's illegal to eat chicken with a fork in Gainesville, GA ( Link ), that doesn't mean it can be enforced.
It can't be easily enforced against individuals, but Apple can't promote that as a feature, who could easily be prosecuted for incitement of infringement if they promote it as a use for AppleTV.
Quote:
RIAA is not breaking down doors of people who use handbrake, P2P - now that's a different story
I haven't bought one, but depending on how things shake out over the next 6 months or so (Macworld announcements, etc) its still a might do.
I've owned a Slimserve Squeezebox2 for a couple of years, and have essentially stopped using it. Wireless is 'iffy' and I can't hard-wire. I'm the only one in the household who can (often with 20 minutes of futzing) get it working properly, and at that its still an inferior interface experience on just about every level to the AppleTV.
It does internet radio, which is nice sometimes, but not what I live for.
Apple TV gives me...
- 160 GB local storage
- 802.11n
- seamless integration with an interface that everyone in the family knows well
- Access to video
- plenty of potential, even in its current form.
My only restraint is that at this point in the product cycle, I'm anticipating some sort of move on Apple's part fairly soon. iPhone has sucked up the oxygen in '07. We'll see what '08 brings.
As an aside, I think that DVR may not always bee the panacea everyone seems to think.
I have Comcast DVR and while looking forward to the Tivo software if it ever comes, my whole family is firmly addicted to it.
But looking at the deals Tivo is cutting with the networks (reporting your viewing habits by the second) I think we're going to be seeing some changes.
Primarily, I'm willing to bet that commercial skipping will be a fond memory within a couple of years. Tivo, struggling to stay alive, agrees to honor a no-skip signal embedded in the commercials, and the feature is history.
It can't be easily enforced against individuals, but Apple can't promote that as a feature, who could easily be prosecuted for incitement of infringement if they promote it as a use for AppleTV.
Wrong organization.
Nevermind, I was being a smart-alek. I appologize.
As others have pointed out, Apple TV failed because it did not target home theater enthusiasts. When it comes to home theater, it is these enthusiasts that drive the majority adoption. HD DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war has opened up huge opportunity for Apple. Sadly, Apple ignored home theater enthusiasts by omitting HD contents, 1080p capability, built-in multi-channel audio, subtitles, video rental, and support for additional codecs. While 400,000 Apple fanboys are not insignificant, Apple TV could've been huge.
...But oddly enough, without 5.1 surround sound (which has been around for what, 10 years or more) and 1080i or p, it's a product of the PAST...
The aTV does support 1080i and 720p... but you're right about the 5.1 deal.... when I handbrake'd my DVD's I encoded them as h.264 mv4's with discrete channels from the 5.1 source... even though aTV only supports Dolby II, my hope is that it will eventually support true 5.1 in the future... since their preferred format (mv4) supports discrete audio channels...
These two posts have it right. It's not shocking that the TV hasn't exploded. Apple hasn't done nearly anything to promote it. It sits in the corner of the Apple Store without much fanfare. Advertising has been virtually nothing, and it hasn't been updated in what seems like forever.
Also, it's lacking some major features that really hurt it.
HD Content. Those crummy little 640 videos from iTunes don't look great on a 42" Plasma. You clearly intend for the TV to be used with an HD set, so give me HD content.
Direct iTunes integration without a PC or Mac. Why do I need to keep a computer running when I want to load the TV? If my iPhone can purchase content from the iTunes store directly, the TV should be able to also.
Full Dolby Support. No excuse.
DVD Drive w/ BTO Blu-Ray Option. No one wants to add one more device to their Home Theater setup. It just means more space, more power, more heat, and another damned remote. Make this the one device. If I can get rid of the DVD player and just use the TV, that makes my life easier, and it makes the product more compelling. Hell, a DVD drive must be about $8 in parts. Slap it in there. If you want Blu-Ray, pay $200 more. At least give us options.
More content and Movie Rentals. This is the tough one. The iTunes store is struggling to find enough Movie content. That doesn't help the TV. It would be great if you could just order a movie right through the device, have it download and start playing within 5 minutes, or have it download and sit ready for you when you actually have time to view it.
I think this device has a place, and could be a big seller, it just needs more focus.
An Apple DVD/DVR with iTunes would be a great product. Who here wouldn't mind owning an Apple DVD player? If it had Blue-Ray, I'd be in line for it on release day.
Nobody should buy AppleTV for anything but the content available NOW. Why buy just for future content you hope for? If Apple TV does nothing for you now, why not wait until the content you wish for exists and THEN buy it?
In June, "NOW" had NBC shows- hello??? Apple has less now than it had then!!! Are you clueless??
My satellite provider can't even deliver HD that's not so compressed it looks horrible, what makes anyone think that Apple will be able to do so over the internet?
I know there are a few satellite channels that the provider ups the bandwidth on and lowers the compression (ESPN HD and a few others) but even then it's still compressed HD.
Satellite and cable companies are limited as to bandwidth. Internet providers are not. They can easily get more. It costs $500 million to send up another satellite, similar heavy costs to increase cable bandwidth. Much cheaper for the internet.
It's partly a pox on Apple too. While Apple is required to have some form of DRM, it's also Apple that decided to make their own and to license it.
1) The most flexible DRM I've seen (can you even rip to CD with other DRMs?
2) and they were supposed to do what then? Not get the biggest concessions from the labels ANYONE to that point was able to get? Not provide any content other than your own collection.
If the NBC offering is any indications, Apple has nothing to worry about in the long run.
un-skippable commercials, content blow-up. Yeah, they get it.
And how do you know this? You don't. You hope it's true.
People have been watching Tv with commercials for 50 years without being able to skip except by leaving the room. It's amazing what people will accept if it's free.
Apple needs more content. And, by the way, ripping DVD's isn't legal. If that's why you think it's so great, then you can understand why most people, who, by the way do NOT rip DVD's, don't think so.
And ripping is a pain. It takes so long and so much room on the hard drive. I ripped 2 movies for my kid's iPod nano and I said that's it, no more, watch it on DVD or don't watch it.
... Apple TV failed because it did not target home theater enthusiasts....
That wouldn't have helped. If you want an "adoption" you need to target the masses like the iPod did. Home theater enthusiasts who are willing to plunk down thousands for a couple of B&W speakers are far from the "masses" who buy based on convenience and affordability.
Satellite and cable companies are limited as to bandwidth. Internet providers are not. They can easily get more. It costs $500 million to send up another satellite, similar heavy costs to increase cable bandwidth. Much cheaper for the internet.
I can't see an internet provider streaming 1080P uncompressed to all the households in NYC. I don't think it's technically possible and even if it were it would be financially inviable. Who's going to pay for all this extra bandwidth that the internet can magically make appear?
What 'everyone wants' is for the media monopolies to no longer be able to rip off the consumer. Features come and go on hardware... hard-ass Steve IS the feature everyone needs.
What everyone wants is to view their content in peace.
jobs should let them try it their way. If it then fails, then fine, they tried, and it didn't work.
But, if somehow it did work, then Jobs would be wrong. The consumer will have spoken either way.
In June, "NOW" had NBC shows- hello??? Apple has less now than it had then!!! Are you clueless??
So you would have wished Apple to appease NBC by forcing you to pay double what you were paying before and let NBC force you to buy suckier shows with the shows you were buying before? Somehow I think you'd be bitching about Apple bowing to NBC's stupid wishes if that happened...
Comments
My satellite provider can't even deliver HD that's not so compressed it looks horrible, what makes anyone think that Apple will be able to do so over the internet?
Because apple doesn't have to send the data real time. Speed depends on the user's connection, but I think if people are willing to wait 3+ days for Netflix to arrive in the mail, they'd be willing to start an HD video download early. Particularly if iTunes does a good job of informing what the estimated download time is and makes that obvious to the user before they buy.
The product of the FUTURE is exactly what it is. It is NOT the product of the present, except for a small group of people.
But oddly enough, without 5.1 surround sound (which has been around for what, 10 years or more) and 1080i or p, it's a product of the PAST. That's part of apple's problem. They could get away with a "product of the future" if it was consistently that. Right now, it's too advanced for some users while not advanced enough for others - instead of making something that would appeal to one segment of the marketplace, they ended up with something that doesn't fully cater to any part of it.
Biiiigg 'if'.
If the NBC offering is any indications, Apple has nothing to worry about in the long run.
un-skippable commercials, content blow-up. Yeah, they get it.
But the real question is are people watching it? For free programs on demand, people may be willing to forgive the commercials and expiring content.
It's illegal to eat chicken with a fork in Gainesville, GA ( Link ), that doesn't mean it can be enforced.
It can't be easily enforced against individuals, but Apple can't promote that as a feature, who could easily be prosecuted for incitement of infringement if they promote it as a use for AppleTV.
RIAA is not breaking down doors of people who use handbrake, P2P - now that's a different story
Wrong organization.
To the vast majority of viewers, the diff between 1080i and 1080p is virtually indistinguishable, and there's no 1080p content.
But there is 1080p content available. Why would you say otherwise?
I've owned a Slimserve Squeezebox2 for a couple of years, and have essentially stopped using it. Wireless is 'iffy' and I can't hard-wire. I'm the only one in the household who can (often with 20 minutes of futzing) get it working properly, and at that its still an inferior interface experience on just about every level to the AppleTV.
It does internet radio, which is nice sometimes, but not what I live for.
Apple TV gives me...
- 160 GB local storage
- 802.11n
- seamless integration with an interface that everyone in the family knows well
- Access to video
- plenty of potential, even in its current form.
My only restraint is that at this point in the product cycle, I'm anticipating some sort of move on Apple's part fairly soon. iPhone has sucked up the oxygen in '07. We'll see what '08 brings.
As an aside, I think that DVR may not always bee the panacea everyone seems to think.
I have Comcast DVR and while looking forward to the Tivo software if it ever comes, my whole family is firmly addicted to it.
But looking at the deals Tivo is cutting with the networks (reporting your viewing habits by the second) I think we're going to be seeing some changes.
Primarily, I'm willing to bet that commercial skipping will be a fond memory within a couple of years. Tivo, struggling to stay alive, agrees to honor a no-skip signal embedded in the commercials, and the feature is history.
Tried skipping through trailers on a CD recently?
It can't be easily enforced against individuals, but Apple can't promote that as a feature, who could easily be prosecuted for incitement of infringement if they promote it as a use for AppleTV.
Wrong organization.
Nevermind, I was being a smart-alek. I appologize.
...But oddly enough, without 5.1 surround sound (which has been around for what, 10 years or more) and 1080i or p, it's a product of the PAST...
The aTV does support 1080i and 720p... but you're right about the 5.1 deal.... when I handbrake'd my DVD's I encoded them as h.264 mv4's with discrete channels from the 5.1 source... even though aTV only supports Dolby II, my hope is that it will eventually support true 5.1 in the future... since their preferred format (mv4) supports discrete audio channels...
==fingers crossed==
These two posts have it right. It's not shocking that the
Also, it's lacking some major features that really hurt it.
- HD Content. Those crummy little 640 videos from iTunes don't look great on a 42" Plasma. You clearly intend for the
TV to be used with an HD set, so give me HD content.
- Direct iTunes integration without a PC or Mac. Why do I need to keep a computer running when I want to load the
TV? If my iPhone can purchase content from the iTunes store directly, the 
TV should be able to also.
- Full Dolby Support. No excuse.
- DVD Drive w/ BTO Blu-Ray Option. No one wants to add one more device to their Home Theater setup. It just means more space, more power, more heat, and another damned remote. Make this the one device. If I can get rid of the DVD player and just use the
TV, that makes my life easier, and it makes the product more compelling. Hell, a DVD drive must be about $8 in parts. Slap it in there. If you want Blu-Ray, pay $200 more. At least give us options.
- More content and Movie Rentals. This is the tough one. The iTunes store is struggling to find enough Movie content. That doesn't help the
TV. It would be great if you could just order a movie right through the device, have it download and start playing within 5 minutes, or have it download and sit ready for you when you actually have time to view it.
I think this device has a place, and could be a big seller, it just needs more focus.An Apple DVD/DVR with iTunes would be a great product. Who here wouldn't mind owning an Apple DVD player? If it had Blue-Ray, I'd be in line for it on release day.
.
Nobody should buy AppleTV for anything but the content available NOW. Why buy just for future content you hope for? If Apple TV does nothing for you now, why not wait until the content you wish for exists and THEN buy it?
In June, "NOW" had NBC shows- hello??? Apple has less now than it had then!!! Are you clueless??
But there is 1080p content available. Why would you say otherwise?
What has been released in 1080p? Doing a quick search in google, I'm not even sure where I'd find any.
My satellite provider can't even deliver HD that's not so compressed it looks horrible, what makes anyone think that Apple will be able to do so over the internet?
I know there are a few satellite channels that the provider ups the bandwidth on and lowers the compression (ESPN HD and a few others) but even then it's still compressed HD.
Satellite and cable companies are limited as to bandwidth. Internet providers are not. They can easily get more. It costs $500 million to send up another satellite, similar heavy costs to increase cable bandwidth. Much cheaper for the internet.
It's partly a pox on Apple too. While Apple is required to have some form of DRM, it's also Apple that decided to make their own and to license it.
1) The most flexible DRM I've seen (can you even rip to CD with other DRMs?
2) and they were supposed to do what then? Not get the biggest concessions from the labels ANYONE to that point was able to get? Not provide any content other than your own collection.
But the real question is are people watching it? For free programs on demand, people may be willing to forgive the commercials and expiring content.
People will eat Soylent Green if that's all that's offered.
Biiiigg 'if'.
If the NBC offering is any indications, Apple has nothing to worry about in the long run.
un-skippable commercials, content blow-up. Yeah, they get it.
And how do you know this? You don't. You hope it's true.
People have been watching Tv with commercials for 50 years without being able to skip except by leaving the room. It's amazing what people will accept if it's free.
Apple needs more content. And, by the way, ripping DVD's isn't legal. If that's why you think it's so great, then you can understand why most people, who, by the way do NOT rip DVD's, don't think so.
And ripping is a pain. It takes so long and so much room on the hard drive. I ripped 2 movies for my kid's iPod nano and I said that's it, no more, watch it on DVD or don't watch it.
... Apple TV failed because it did not target home theater enthusiasts....
That wouldn't have helped. If you want an "adoption" you need to target the masses like the iPod did. Home theater enthusiasts who are willing to plunk down thousands for a couple of B&W speakers are far from the "masses" who buy based on convenience and affordability.
Satellite and cable companies are limited as to bandwidth. Internet providers are not. They can easily get more. It costs $500 million to send up another satellite, similar heavy costs to increase cable bandwidth. Much cheaper for the internet.
I can't see an internet provider streaming 1080P uncompressed to all the households in NYC. I don't think it's technically possible and even if it were it would be financially inviable. Who's going to pay for all this extra bandwidth that the internet can magically make appear?
What 'everyone wants' is for the media monopolies to no longer be able to rip off the consumer. Features come and go on hardware... hard-ass Steve IS the feature everyone needs.
What everyone wants is to view their content in peace.
jobs should let them try it their way. If it then fails, then fine, they tried, and it didn't work.
But, if somehow it did work, then Jobs would be wrong. The consumer will have spoken either way.
Either way, Apple wins.
What has been released in 1080p? Doing a quick search in google, I'm not even sure where I'd find any.
Apple and Microsoft provides 1080p trailers and teasers. Most Blu-Ray and HD DVD movies are 1080p.
In June, "NOW" had NBC shows- hello??? Apple has less now than it had then!!! Are you clueless??
So you would have wished Apple to appease NBC by forcing you to pay double what you were paying before and let NBC force you to buy suckier shows with the shows you were buying before? Somehow I think you'd be bitching about Apple bowing to NBC's stupid wishes if that happened...