I'm not sure I liked the idea of a porn-name-like alias anyway.
Quote:
poor man's apple tv. Limitations aside, i do think there's a market for it. Not everyone loves itunes, but i agree that no HD has the potential to be a headache.
No HD yet. When it started, AppleTV didn't have commercial HD media either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slate1
That being said - this 1,000 vs 10,000 argument is pure hogwash. The 10,000 Netflix claims includes TV shows, Documentaries, Movies, Shorts, etc. - everything in the barn!
If you add up all the movies, TV Shows, Documentaries, Music Videos, etc. in the same manner on the AppleTV (essentially the whole iTunes library...), Apple actually has Netflix hammered in the content arena.
The whole cost thing is irrelevant to me in some regards - when 9,950 of the 10,000 items Netflix offers are not something I'd spend an hour of my life watching.
I understand that, but I really don't think it should be swept out like that because you're not interested in the different types of media. Apple doesn't rent any of that other stuff at all, mostly just movies, everything else is buy-only. I think a larger variety of media without having to pay even more per watch is a compelling consideration for many people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
But the AppleTV almost doesn't match anything else anyway, it's almost designed to stick out like a cock. If you own more than one media device, it's almost certainly not going to match it. Home Theater stacks are mostly an amalgam of devices in black shells, all of different designs unless you bought everything from the same brand within a year or two of each other. A black box is a lot more discrete among other black boxes anyway, stick it in the shadow and maybe no one would notice.
Hopefully Apple will consider lowering the price of AppleTV now that it is a constant stream of income instead a just a hardware.
Apple's media store isn't a huge moneymaker. Apple makes a lot more money from their hardware than with media sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
Never going to survive without a hard drive to cache the content. When the connection craps out and you have to start the movie over again there will be some pissed off people.
Do any of the reviews say for sure that it can't skip ahead or can't remember where it left off?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjoec123
Netflix may have more titles available for the Roku, but not many of them are new releases or popular titles. Only a few of the top 100 movies on its own site are available for streaming with this box. Apple actually has them beat on the new release front.
That's true, but to rent the new titles, you do pay extra for it, $4 SD, $5 for HD rentals.
Quote:
There are also no HD titles available via this box, either. It's all standard def, and the quality decreases even further if your Internet connection can't keep up.
How many HD movies are available for rent on AppleTV?
Quote:
And since when is Netflix free? Pay that monthly fee for a year, and you've paid the difference for an Apple TV.
If you go through Apple, you're probably paying even more for the content, unless all you watch are video podcasts or you just don't watch many movies. Which isn't to say that the AppleTV doesn't have other benefits. I'd get the AppleTV just for being what might be the best way to show my photos. PS3 does have a few nifty slide show modes too, but it doesn't connect well with iPhoto.
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
Placing a heat generating device on an insulator is not the way to dissipate the heat.
Placing it in contact with a conductor with a large heat capacity would do the job.
Apple's media store isn't a huge moneymaker. Apple makes a lot more money from their hardware than with media sales.
Lower price means more sales. More sales means lower overhead and more profit. Why do you think Apple reduced the price back in Jan? I think they need to lower it to $199.
The beauty of Apple TV is that it provide a solutions. Renting movies online is not a solution to any problem. With Apple TV you can rent and buy movies online and use it as your home media center. I have converted all of our family vacations and home videos to digital format and would love to have Apple TV so I can watch them on my HDTV (even though they are not in HD format). Additionally, I have converted all of my son's cartoons and Barney DVD to digital format and once I buy an Apple TV then I can play him the show he wants without going through trying to find the DVD.
Lower price means more sales. More sales means lower overhead and more profit. Why do you think Apple reduced the price back in Jan? I think they need to lower it to $199.
But it's not that simple. In order for that to be true, the profits on the higher volume, lower margin price have to outweigh the profits on a lower volume higher margin. I don't think the higher volume necessarily gets Apple better pricing, AppleTV probably isn't a low volume device such that higher volume would push down the total cost that much.
Quote:
The beauty of Apple TV is that it provide a solutions. Renting movies online is not a solution to any problem. With Apple TV you can rent and buy movies online and use it as your home media center.
You basically said that renting is a useless idea, but then cited it as a feature on AppleTV. That sounds like a two-faced statement to me.
You basically said that renting is a useless idea, but then cited it as a feature on AppleTV. That sounds like a two-faced statement to me.
I did not say it is useless, I clearly said it is not a solution for any problem. A device for renting movies online is not as appealing as a device that rent and do other things. As I said, Apple TV provide a solution to a problem, Netflix box does not. I don't think anyone will disagree about that.
I did not say it is useless, I clearly said it is not a solution for any problem. A device for renting movies online is not as appealing as a device that rent and do other things. As I said, Apple TV provide a solution to a problem, Netflix box does not. I don't think anyone will disagree about that.
I agree that AppleTV does a lot more. However, I see vanishingly little, if any, distinction in the meaning between between "not a solution for any problem" and useless. They're two ways to say the same thing, though maybe with varying degrees of tactfulness and conciseness.
Yes, I'm serious, your accusations of absurdity aside. I didn't say that the AppleTV was a thing of beauty, I said compared to the Roku it wins aesthetics hands down. It is low, sleek and unobtrusive on my TV, it looks modern. The Roku looks like some cheap black box from the 80's. And the remote is even uglier.
The Roku looks like a $10 video switcher from Radio Shack.
I agree that AppleTV does a lot more. However, I see vanishingly little, if any, distinction in the meaning between between "not a solution for any problem" and useless. They're two ways to say the same thing, though maybe with varying degrees of tactfulness and conciseness.
Well look at it this way, it can be useful during a rainy day
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
Just like my new 500GB Time Capsule, which has turned my modem closet into a sauna.
It's not a "white-frickin-box". It's actually a very good minimalist design. Give me Apple minimalism over alienware geekism any day of the week. "Edginess" is the scourge of design, and Apple is the only company that has the good taste to eschew all that tasteless crap.
Well, I'm glad we've got the professor here to tell us what is what. The point is that the Roku unit isn't really any less appealing, visually, than the AppleTV, because both are quite minimalist and both are devices that don't go on pedestals to show.
The original iMac and the machines of that timeframe were great because, when every other computer was a beige box, they were bold and different. It was all part of the "Think Different" marketing campaign. That was a great campaign. The campaign for the AppleTV and iTunes video store might as well be "think less," because in pretty much all respects aside from a layer of polish on the UI (and polycarb enclosure), the Apple solution costs more and is less.
As if ATV is some futuristic design-winning product?
Your taste is apparently up your arse if you think a cheap gray plastic warming plate is any better.
Look bud, you want to go tit for tat back and forth on this for days on end, I'm game. But stop putting words in my mouth if you're going to. I did not say the aTV was either a stunning visual product, or a futuristic design; I said it was more modern looking and more visually appealing than the Roku unit. That does not equate to calling it a design winning product, simply one that looks more modern and fits my home theater system aesthetics better than the Roku looks like it would.
I can't imagine why you think a cheap squarish black plastic box with a purple Roku name tag and vent holes on the top is some kind of better design than the aTV. Maybe you've got an outdated system where all the components are bulkier designs into which it fits? I prefer lower sleeker units for my system.
Your obsession with the heat of the aTV comes across as just looking for something to criticize. Does the thing sit on your lap? Is it melting your shelf? That heat's going to generate and go into the room whether it radiates out of the casing or through a fan in the back or top. The ventless design has come to external hard drives from Seagate now (FreeAgent models) where the case itself is designed to act as a heatsink, and the things are warmer to the touch than aTV. It's the wave of the future I think. QUIET operation over heat dissipation.
The point is that the Roku unit isn't really any less appealing, visually, than the AppleTV, because both are quite minimalist and both are devices that don't go on pedestals to show.
Wow. Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I agree with the comment that the Roku box looks like a $10 switchbox from Radio Shack. I also agree with your comment that the TV looks like a (well-designed) warming plate from Pier 1. But a warming plate from Pier 1 just looks better than a switchbox from Radio Shack. Much better.
Your obsession with the heat of the aTV comes across as just looking for something to criticize. Does the thing sit on your lap? Is it melting your shelf? That heat's going to generate and go into the room whether it radiates out of the casing or through a fan in the back or top. The ventless design has come to external hard drives from Seagate now (FreeAgent models) where the case itself is designed to act as a heatsink, and the things are warmer to the touch than aTV. It's the wave of the future I think. QUIET operation over heat dissipation.
Have you not stopped to think that maybe it's just a total waste of electricity? Why should it be using so much juice that it gets very warm even when doing nothing? The ATV is a very disappointing product from an electronic engineering perspective.
The Roku unit also has no fan. It consumes 5 watts when active, and 4 watts inactive, next to the ATV's 20 watts active and 17 watts inactive.
Yes, the ATV has a hard-drive, but a laptop drive consumes about 2.5 watts max, so the difference between the ATV and the Roku is not justifyable.
The Roku hardware is capable of doing most of what the ATV does, it's just that Roku haven't implemented those things (not sure why - it seems quite likely that the box is subsidised by Netflix and they don't want it to be able to do anything other than stream from Netflix).
Comments
Prince McLean = Danielle Dilger?
I'm not sure I liked the idea of a porn-name-like alias anyway.
poor man's apple tv. Limitations aside, i do think there's a market for it. Not everyone loves itunes, but i agree that no HD has the potential to be a headache.
No HD yet. When it started, AppleTV didn't have commercial HD media either.
That being said - this 1,000 vs 10,000 argument is pure hogwash. The 10,000 Netflix claims includes TV shows, Documentaries, Movies, Shorts, etc. - everything in the barn!
If you add up all the movies, TV Shows, Documentaries, Music Videos, etc. in the same manner on the AppleTV (essentially the whole iTunes library...), Apple actually has Netflix hammered in the content arena.
The whole cost thing is irrelevant to me in some regards - when 9,950 of the 10,000 items Netflix offers are not something I'd spend an hour of my life watching.
I understand that, but I really don't think it should be swept out like that because you're not interested in the different types of media. Apple doesn't rent any of that other stuff at all, mostly just movies, everything else is buy-only. I think a larger variety of media without having to pay even more per watch is a compelling consideration for many people.
It may not be a beauty contest, but c'mon, if it's sitting out in your living room in plain view, some consideration for aesthetics should be given the design. aTV wins hands down there.
But the AppleTV almost doesn't match anything else anyway, it's almost designed to stick out like a cock. If you own more than one media device, it's almost certainly not going to match it. Home Theater stacks are mostly an amalgam of devices in black shells, all of different designs unless you bought everything from the same brand within a year or two of each other. A black box is a lot more discrete among other black boxes anyway, stick it in the shadow and maybe no one would notice.
Hopefully Apple will consider lowering the price of AppleTV now that it is a constant stream of income instead a just a hardware.
Apple's media store isn't a huge moneymaker. Apple makes a lot more money from their hardware than with media sales.
Never going to survive without a hard drive to cache the content. When the connection craps out and you have to start the movie over again there will be some pissed off people.
Do any of the reviews say for sure that it can't skip ahead or can't remember where it left off?
Netflix may have more titles available for the Roku, but not many of them are new releases or popular titles. Only a few of the top 100 movies on its own site are available for streaming with this box. Apple actually has them beat on the new release front.
That's true, but to rent the new titles, you do pay extra for it, $4 SD, $5 for HD rentals.
There are also no HD titles available via this box, either. It's all standard def, and the quality decreases even further if your Internet connection can't keep up.
How many HD movies are available for rent on AppleTV?
And since when is Netflix free? Pay that monthly fee for a year, and you've paid the difference for an Apple TV.
If you go through Apple, you're probably paying even more for the content, unless all you watch are video podcasts or you just don't watch many movies. Which isn't to say that the AppleTV doesn't have other benefits. I'd get the AppleTV just for being what might be the best way to show my photos. PS3 does have a few nifty slide show modes too, but it doesn't connect well with iPhoto.
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
Placing a heat generating device on an insulator is not the way to dissipate the heat.
Placing it in contact with a conductor with a large heat capacity would do the job.
Look up heat sink.
Do any of the reviews say for sure that it can't skip ahead or can't remember where it left off?
I don't know about remembering where it left off, but it does do skip forwards and backwards.
Apple's media store isn't a huge moneymaker. Apple makes a lot more money from their hardware than with media sales.
Lower price means more sales. More sales means lower overhead and more profit. Why do you think Apple reduced the price back in Jan? I think they need to lower it to $199.
The beauty of Apple TV is that it provide a solutions. Renting movies online is not a solution to any problem. With Apple TV you can rent and buy movies online and use it as your home media center. I have converted all of our family vacations and home videos to digital format and would love to have Apple TV so I can watch them on my HDTV (even though they are not in HD format). Additionally, I have converted all of my son's cartoons and Barney DVD to digital format and once I buy an Apple TV then I can play him the show he wants without going through trying to find the DVD.
Lower price means more sales. More sales means lower overhead and more profit. Why do you think Apple reduced the price back in Jan? I think they need to lower it to $199.
But it's not that simple. In order for that to be true, the profits on the higher volume, lower margin price have to outweigh the profits on a lower volume higher margin. I don't think the higher volume necessarily gets Apple better pricing, AppleTV probably isn't a low volume device such that higher volume would push down the total cost that much.
The beauty of Apple TV is that it provide a solutions. Renting movies online is not a solution to any problem. With Apple TV you can rent and buy movies online and use it as your home media center.
You basically said that renting is a useless idea, but then cited it as a feature on AppleTV. That sounds like a two-faced statement to me.
You basically said that renting is a useless idea, but then cited it as a feature on AppleTV. That sounds like a two-faced statement to me.
I did not say it is useless, I clearly said it is not a solution for any problem. A device for renting movies online is not as appealing as a device that rent and do other things. As I said, Apple TV provide a solution to a problem, Netflix box does not. I don't think anyone will disagree about that.
I did not say it is useless, I clearly said it is not a solution for any problem. A device for renting movies online is not as appealing as a device that rent and do other things. As I said, Apple TV provide a solution to a problem, Netflix box does not. I don't think anyone will disagree about that.
I agree that AppleTV does a lot more. However, I see vanishingly little, if any, distinction in the meaning between between "not a solution for any problem" and useless. They're two ways to say the same thing, though maybe with varying degrees of tactfulness and conciseness.
Yes, I'm serious, your accusations of absurdity aside. I didn't say that the AppleTV was a thing of beauty, I said compared to the Roku it wins aesthetics hands down. It is low, sleek and unobtrusive on my TV, it looks modern. The Roku looks like some cheap black box from the 80's. And the remote is even uglier.
The Roku looks like a $10 video switcher from Radio Shack.
I agree that AppleTV does a lot more. However, I see vanishingly little, if any, distinction in the meaning between between "not a solution for any problem" and useless. They're two ways to say the same thing, though maybe with varying degrees of tactfulness and conciseness.
Well look at it this way, it can be useful during a rainy day
Your tastes may vary, but I won't call your posts preposterous just because all your taste is apparently in your mouth. ;-)
As if ATV is some futuristic design-winning product?
Your taste is apparently up your arse if you think a cheap gray plastic warming plate is any better.
The Roku looks like a $10 video switcher from Radio Shack.
As opposed to the $15 Pier 1 Import sushi plate that is Apple TV?
I had to put mine on a non-heat conducive wood block as to not have a thermal meltdown in my NYC apartment. All that energy that is constantly being expended - is this product even Green friendly? I swear I could melt a cheese tuna melt on it.
Just like my new 500GB Time Capsule, which has turned my modem closet into a sauna.
It's not a "white-frickin-box". It's actually a very good minimalist design. Give me Apple minimalism over alienware geekism any day of the week. "Edginess" is the scourge of design, and Apple is the only company that has the good taste to eschew all that tasteless crap.
Well, I'm glad we've got the professor here to tell us what is what. The point is that the Roku unit isn't really any less appealing, visually, than the AppleTV, because both are quite minimalist and both are devices that don't go on pedestals to show.
The original iMac and the machines of that timeframe were great because, when every other computer was a beige box, they were bold and different. It was all part of the "Think Different" marketing campaign. That was a great campaign. The campaign for the AppleTV and iTunes video store might as well be "think less," because in pretty much all respects aside from a layer of polish on the UI (and polycarb enclosure), the Apple solution costs more and is less.
How many HD movies are available for rent on AppleTV?
It changes from day to day, but it is constantly increasing... The below (linked) site keeps a running tally of the HD content..
Currently there are 344 HD Movies to rent and/or purchase from Apple TV.
http://www.appletvjunkie.com/
Perhaps it's not demand that's high, but supply that's just very low?
I think you hit the nail on the head!
As if ATV is some futuristic design-winning product?
Your taste is apparently up your arse if you think a cheap gray plastic warming plate is any better.
Look bud, you want to go tit for tat back and forth on this for days on end, I'm game. But stop putting words in my mouth if you're going to. I did not say the aTV was either a stunning visual product, or a futuristic design; I said it was more modern looking and more visually appealing than the Roku unit. That does not equate to calling it a design winning product, simply one that looks more modern and fits my home theater system aesthetics better than the Roku looks like it would.
I can't imagine why you think a cheap squarish black plastic box with a purple Roku name tag and vent holes on the top is some kind of better design than the aTV. Maybe you've got an outdated system where all the components are bulkier designs into which it fits? I prefer lower sleeker units for my system.
Your obsession with the heat of the aTV comes across as just looking for something to criticize. Does the thing sit on your lap? Is it melting your shelf? That heat's going to generate and go into the room whether it radiates out of the casing or through a fan in the back or top. The ventless design has come to external hard drives from Seagate now (FreeAgent models) where the case itself is designed to act as a heatsink, and the things are warmer to the touch than aTV. It's the wave of the future I think. QUIET operation over heat dissipation.
The point is that the Roku unit isn't really any less appealing, visually, than the AppleTV, because both are quite minimalist and both are devices that don't go on pedestals to show.
Wow. Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I agree with the comment that the Roku box looks like a $10 switchbox from Radio Shack. I also agree with your comment that the TV looks like a (well-designed) warming plate from Pier 1. But a warming plate from Pier 1 just looks better than a switchbox from Radio Shack. Much better.
...and this...
...are both toasters, so they must look the same.
Actually... this one looks pretty cool!
Your obsession with the heat of the aTV comes across as just looking for something to criticize. Does the thing sit on your lap? Is it melting your shelf? That heat's going to generate and go into the room whether it radiates out of the casing or through a fan in the back or top. The ventless design has come to external hard drives from Seagate now (FreeAgent models) where the case itself is designed to act as a heatsink, and the things are warmer to the touch than aTV. It's the wave of the future I think. QUIET operation over heat dissipation.
Have you not stopped to think that maybe it's just a total waste of electricity? Why should it be using so much juice that it gets very warm even when doing nothing? The ATV is a very disappointing product from an electronic engineering perspective.
The Roku unit also has no fan. It consumes 5 watts when active, and 4 watts inactive, next to the ATV's 20 watts active and 17 watts inactive.
Yes, the ATV has a hard-drive, but a laptop drive consumes about 2.5 watts max, so the difference between the ATV and the Roku is not justifyable.
The Roku hardware is capable of doing most of what the ATV does, it's just that Roku haven't implemented those things (not sure why - it seems quite likely that the box is subsidised by Netflix and they don't want it to be able to do anything other than stream from Netflix).