Where you err is in making an assumption that the appropriate power needed for the ATV cannot be done with a Soc. The current Apple TV gets too hot IMO and heat always breaks down components faster. The next Apple TV should IMO support 1080p playback even if iTunes doesn't offer that resolution and it should use a SoC based system with OpenGL ES 2.0 graphics and a processor for decoding video. ARM/PowerVR/VXD accomplishes this and will do so far less the heat signature of the current Apple TV components. It's literally a no brainer.
For starters, I never suggested something like 1080p playback couldn't be done with an SoC solution. Overall, I would suggest that the Atom/nVidia solution would offer better performance. Also, why would you push for an OpenGL ES solution as opposed to a full OpenGL capable solution? Finally, a minor modification to the AppleTV design (possibly with vents) would easily take care of any heat situation. Again, for a portable device, I'd agree with your suggestion. For a set top box, I don't agree. Maybe you could explain what I'm missing a bit further.
For starters, I never suggested something like 1080p playback couldn't be done with an SoC solution. Overall, I would suggest that the Atom/nVidia solution would offer better performance. Also, why would you push for an OpenGL ES solution as opposed to a full OpenGL capable solution? Finally, a minor modification to the AppleTV design (possibly with vents) would easily take care of any heat situation. Again, for a portable device, I'd agree with your suggestion. For a set top box, I don't agree. Maybe you could explain what I'm missing a bit further.
Oh I fully realize that Steve. I'm just wondering from from a design perspective if an ARM/PVR/VXD solution would come in at a lower cost than an Atom/ION solution in both financial and heat dissipation requirements. Considering the limited scope of the Apple TV OpenGL ES 2.0 is easily going to handle %90 of the needs of the UI and even would allow gaming (perhaps some sort of iPhone/iPod Touch compability environment).
You're not missing anything. It basically comes down to BoM costs. Will an ARM/PVR/VXD setup cost less than an Atom/ION based system? I cannot provide that answer. I believe Apple has plans to keep the Apple TV simple (read I don't expect a lot of apps being created for it) but I could be wrong.
You really have no idea what you're talking about do you?
I guess I should have stated my position better. Things don't look good for Apple in the 'Home Media' department.
What Apple did with music entertainment was revolutionary, iTunes/iPod.
What they are trying to do with Apple TV is not revolutionary, and they have major competition.
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
Video distribution is a far tricker task than audio distribution. Certain elements are analogous to the audio side but we tend to consume the media differently. I agree that Apple will never be able to dominate video like they do audio.
DRM for video is not going away. Audio going DRM free has absolutely no bearing on what video does. When you look at the production costs of even a decently distributed Indie film it dwarfs the costs of an Indie music album. Looking at my latest Disc Makers catalog I see you can get 10 thousand CD in jewel cases and 2 color panels for $6500 bucks. The actual content could be created in a home studio (which is how many are created now) and then mixed down and mastered in a commercial studio and distributed. A film on the other hand requires so much personnel and equipment the cost of making a film quickly jumps into the stratosphere.
The movie studios pumping in millions into films aren't going to let those float around without DRM. It would be financial suicide.
I guess I should have stated my position better. Things don't look good for Apple in the 'Home Media' department.
What Apple did with music entertainment was revolutionary, iTunes/iPod.
What they are trying to do with Apple TV is not revolutionary, and they have major competition.
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
How much of a success story was Airport Express?
Nuf said.
Excuse me... i have to research this XBMC file...
Yes, Apple has major competition in video; but can you tell us which of those major competitors doesn't use DRM? You very strongly imply that Apple will suffer because of the DRM, but everyone has the same constraint.
The suggestion that Apple create an open AppleTV and "wait for the content creators to come to them" would be the surest way to kill AppleTV. The music industry's Achilles heel is all those non-DRM CDs. They lost control with the first MP3 players, before the iTunes Music Store even existed. Video, on the other hand, has had DRM/copy-protection since the first VHS tape with Macrovision was released in the late 80's.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. FrontRow will play pretty much any content on my hard drive. It doesn't have to be in iTunes and it isn't limited to a very restricted list of supported formats. AppleTV can do a few things not easily done with a mini, the biggest of these is HD movie rentals. But I'm hoping that will change once DisplayPort is available on the mini.
And now we are full circle...the ONLY way Apple will get HD movies on computers is if those computers support DRM. There is no other way you'll get HD movies (from iTunes) onto your computer. Apple actually needs to move faster to deploy DRM because the longer they delay the farther ahead their competition will get (because they all already have fully implemented DRM).
Yes, Apple has major competition in video; but can you tell us which of those major competitors doesn't use DRM? You very strongly imply that Apple will suffer because of the DRM, but everyone has the same constraint.
The suggestion that Apple create an open AppleTV and "wait for the content creators to come to them" would be the surest way to kill AppleTV. The music industry's Achilles heel is all those non-DRM CDs. They lost control with the first MP3 players, before the iTunes Music Store even existed. Video, on the other hand, has had DRM/copy-protection since the first VHS tape with Macrovision was released in the late 80's.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. FrontRow will play pretty much any content on my hard drive. It doesn't have to be in iTunes and it isn't limited to a very restricted list of supported formats. AppleTV can do a few things not easily done with a mini, the biggest of these is HD movie rentals. But I'm hoping that will change once DisplayPort is available on the mini.
And now we are full circle...the ONLY way Apple will get HD movies on computers is if those computers support DRM. There is no other way you'll get HD movies (from iTunes) onto your computer. Apple actually needs to move faster to deploy DRM because the longer they delay the farther ahead their competition will get (because they all already have fully implemented DRM).
Amen! They all use DRM. Video is different WAY different. At least 50% of the time, if not more, you will rent not buy, unlike music where you will buy 95% of the time. The winner of online video will be a monthly fee subscription service that offers the latest content. Basically a Block Buster online.
Today you have Netflix, Amazon and Blockbuster (just starting) online. Netflix and BlockBuster offer a monthly fee that is really tied to their physical distribution but give you a selection of crap online.
I want the full catalog of BlockBuster/Netflix movies online for a monthly fee. Keep the 24 hour watch it deal before I can rent another movie so people dont abuse it, or at least not anymore than they can abuse Netflix in the mail today.
Whom ever comes out with that kind of deal is going to win. Apple/iTunes could be it.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. .
Yes, you are correct there.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
Actually the Airport Express popular. Amazon lists it at the 126th best selling device in electronics and the Mac mini is also a good seller despite the 2006 specs it offers. I realize your passion about the subject but lets infuse a little more of the truth into your arguments.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
Actually, the really sad thing is that AppleTV can't even play all QuickTime formats! There is simply no excuse for Apple TV to not be able to play, at an absolute minimum, any content that you can play natively in iTunes. Sure, you could use iTunes' "Convert for AppleTV" command, but you shouldn't have to. Not supporting non-QuickTime formats is one thing, but not even supporting their own set of QuickTime codecs is stupid! It made sense for the iPod given it's hardware constraints, but not for AppleTV.
The other significant problem preventing mainstream acceptance is it's inability to play our existing movies which for the majority of users is DVDs. Image how spectacularly unsuccessful the iPod would have been if there were no way to listen to all the music you already had on CDs. Obviously, Apple can't sanction DVD ripping programs without pissing off the studios (but note that FrontRow will play video_ts files just fine), but how about including a $10 DVD drive in the AppleTV or enabling DVD sharing like the MB Air has (which I realize doesn't currently support video DVD sharing). If Apple really wanted to help kill off blu-ray in favor of downloads, they'd put a DVD drive in the AppleTV. That way it's a viable option for people looking to upgrade from their DVD player. If I want to replace my DVD player, currently the only option is to get another DVD player or get a blu-ray player. The average Joe would never consider an AppleTV because it can't play the movies they already own. But put in a DVD player and it's the perfect living room trojan horse to introduce people to online movies as an option to blu-ray. And, oh by the way, it locks them into the iTunes video ecosystem which is a plus for Apple.
The final, less annoying, issue with AppleTV is that all the video content has to be in iTunes. AppleTV can display my photos that aren't in iTunes by simply telling iTunes where they are. Why can't I do the same for the video in my Movies folder or elsewhere on my hard drive?
I think the media hub audience is a minor, but important, segment of the Mac mini market. I don't think it would be dead without that segment. While I use a mini as a media hub for my TV, it does far more duty than just that. It's also my file server, broadcasts iTunes streaming to several Airport Expresses throughout the house, and hosts all my Time Machine backup disks for the rest of the computers. And it's got unlimited storage via it's Firewire connection and is administered remotely via Leopard's screen sharing. Not bad for a $600 computer.
i have two of them...and i adore them...they do exactly what they were meant to do...
THEY PLAY ITUNES CONTENT and do it very well
now...very little of my itunes content is from the itunes store...but it doesnt take that much effort to convert things for the tv...
hello...HANDBRAKE ANYONE?
very simple...i can even take my TIVO content...use iTivo and download the shows and it converts them as per my requested for TV and then i if i want to...i can use Toast to edit out the commercials...so i can keep the content forever...
and PATCHSTICK for TV...is a great thing...not clear on all it does as i dont really need to use those things...but i have it...and i plan to put boxee on it too...
the fact is i am so sick and tired of hearing all the garbage about the TV...dont want it dont buy it...but i love them...do i use them every day...no...but if i wanted to i could...they are there for me when i need them...and
not to mention...even my mother can now work one...the interface is easy...and that is what she needs...
people please stop trashing the TV...what did it do to you???
granted i would love it could be integrated with one of my EyeTV's and could be used as a DVR as well...but im sure someone will come up with that hack soon enough...maybe i will ask for it somewhere...
just had to get that off my chest...fact is...i will not be buying another TV so i dont really care if they change its insides...because my 2 serve me just fine...
... If Apple really wanted to help kill off blu-ray in favor of downloads, they'd put a DVD drive in the AppleTV. That way it's a viable option for people looking to upgrade from their DVD player. If I want to replace my DVD player, currently the only option is to get another DVD player or get a blu-ray player. The average Joe would never consider an AppleTV because it can't play the movies they already own. But put in a DVD player and it's the perfect living room trojan horse to introduce people to online movies as an option to blu-ray. And, oh by the way, it locks them into the iTunes video ecosystem which is a plus for Apple.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I didn't think of it that way before.
If Apple releases an updated Mac Mini that runs on the Ion platform, I will be so thoroughly disappointed that I may not purchase any Apple hardware products again.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config.
Currently my new hardware needs are somewhere between the MacBook and the 15" MacBook Pro's innards, without the display (my 23" Cinema Display still works fine, thank you) and with the parts being desktop parts instead of laptop parts.
I refuse to buy a 15" MacBook Pro and pay all that extra money for an LCD I don't need, laptop architecture I don't need, and the expense of a MDP-to-DVI connector.
They can so easily make a Mac Mini with the MacBook or 15" MacBook Pro hardware inside, set it at $1299 and I would buy one in an instant. The money is literally right in my checking account earmarked for an Apple Special event to announce the damn thing.
If they slap me in the face with an Ion bullcrap Mac Mini, then that was Apple's last chance to appeal to my hardware needs. They'll force me to go down the dark Hackintosh road.
If Apple releases an updated Mac Mini that runs on the Ion platform, I will be so thoroughly disappointed that I may not purchase any Apple hardware products again.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config.
Currently my new hardware needs are somewhere between the MacBook and the 15" MacBook Pro's innards, without the display (my 23" Cinema Display still works fine, thank you) and with the parts being desktop parts instead of laptop parts.
I refuse to buy a 15" MacBook Pro and pay all that extra money for an LCD I don't need, laptop architecture I don't need, and the expense of a MDP-to-DVI connector.
They can so easily make a Mac Mini with the MacBook or 15" MacBook Pro hardware inside, set it at $1299 and I would buy one in an instant. The money is literally right in my checking account earmarked for an Apple Special event to announce the damn thing.
If they slap me in the face with an Ion bullcrap Mac Mini, then that was Apple's last chance to appeal to my hardware needs. They'll force me to go down the dark Hackintosh road.
Agreed on nearly everything (I don't own a cinema display).
Last night I was looking around hackintosh sites with the intent of making a purchase somewhere, but I'm disappointed at some things. All this time I've been used to PC users rubbing it in my face, "here's your precious Mac OS running on my PC!" but they haven't gotten the sound to work? Oh, okay, they got some mono channel sound to work. Could be choppy.
It's worth noting, however, that when I searched eBay for "hackintosh" half the results were for Atom-based desktops. That's right. Atom-based desktops.
If Apple releases an updated Mac Mini that runs on the Ion platform, I will be so thoroughly disappointed that I may not purchase any Apple hardware products again.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config...
Have you considered the possibility that moving the Mini further downmarket with the Atom/Ion just might allow Apple to bring back the $1299. price point on the Pro line?
They clearly thought it made sense to use an Atom to compete with the Mini.
Looking at their marketing style, which takes a lot of influence from Apple, it's easy for me to feel convinced that this is what Apple's doing. Who can't imagine an Apple page advertising an Atom Mini after looking at that?
See Everex MiniPC. Core2Duo, SMALLER than Mac Mini and cost less than $500.
Did a little bit of digging around on this... It's really peaked my curiosity.
Intel will be releasing a 3rd gen dual core Atom with better performance, 2.0ghz speed and a 800mhz FSB with 1mb cache (dual core) 64bit with an est TDP of 3-4watts in spring of 2009. Just the right timeframe for Paul and Tim to go on stage and announce this together.
Also 3rd gen iPhone looks like it's going to get the new nVidia ARM CPU - SOC. Less power, less space, room for extra Flash Ram. It combines 3 of the chips into one. Promissing... Could also make a ARM based MacBook Mini this way with say a NetRemix style OS X interface. OK I KNOW That sounds stupid, but your not gonna run any ilife app aside from iPhoto on this or want to. Your not gonna finish editing the next blockbuster on a 10" screen. This is a small, light, portable to take with you. Would be SERIOUSLY cool if they let it tether to the iPhone over BT for both syncing and shared internet. Even if they only give you 30hrs a month that's still awsome. If it goes arm, think iPhone OS X and App Store explosion!
For arguments sake I tether my Asus 4g (MODIFIED) over BT to a Moto phone for EDGE (yea baby watch it fly) internet speeds when I'm out. It sucks but its also a lifesaver sometimes. With a 10400mah battery I can go almost 12hrs without charging... BUT charging takes 6.5hrs.
Asus 1002AH is probably the next step towards a MacBook Mini. Has nVidia chipset 9300m with 256mb graphics, sells for $799 at NE. Might have to pick one of those up next week and check it out. It's also aluminum and kinda looks like a PB 12".
Comments
We should bombard Apple with emails just in case this is true. There is still time to change their minds.
Apple has been known to dissapoint us many times before so who knows, it could be true.
Sure why not, please make a Mini with a dual core Atom and the 9400 GPU!!!!!!
Sure why not, please make a Mini with a dual core Atom and the 9400 GPU!!!!!!
For $399. I wouldn't pay anymore.
Where you err is in making an assumption that the appropriate power needed for the ATV cannot be done with a Soc. The current Apple TV gets too hot IMO and heat always breaks down components faster. The next Apple TV should IMO support 1080p playback even if iTunes doesn't offer that resolution and it should use a SoC based system with OpenGL ES 2.0 graphics and a processor for decoding video. ARM/PowerVR/VXD accomplishes this and will do so far less the heat signature of the current Apple TV components. It's literally a no brainer.
For starters, I never suggested something like 1080p playback couldn't be done with an SoC solution. Overall, I would suggest that the Atom/nVidia solution would offer better performance. Also, why would you push for an OpenGL ES solution as opposed to a full OpenGL capable solution? Finally, a minor modification to the AppleTV design (possibly with vents) would easily take care of any heat situation. Again, for a portable device, I'd agree with your suggestion. For a set top box, I don't agree. Maybe you could explain what I'm missing a bit further.
For starters, I never suggested something like 1080p playback couldn't be done with an SoC solution. Overall, I would suggest that the Atom/nVidia solution would offer better performance. Also, why would you push for an OpenGL ES solution as opposed to a full OpenGL capable solution? Finally, a minor modification to the AppleTV design (possibly with vents) would easily take care of any heat situation. Again, for a portable device, I'd agree with your suggestion. For a set top box, I don't agree. Maybe you could explain what I'm missing a bit further.
Oh I fully realize that Steve. I'm just wondering from from a design perspective if an ARM/PVR/VXD solution would come in at a lower cost than an Atom/ION solution in both financial and heat dissipation requirements. Considering the limited scope of the Apple TV OpenGL ES 2.0 is easily going to handle %90 of the needs of the UI and even would allow gaming (perhaps some sort of iPhone/iPod Touch compability environment).
You're not missing anything. It basically comes down to BoM costs. Will an ARM/PVR/VXD setup cost less than an Atom/ION based system? I cannot provide that answer. I believe Apple has plans to keep the Apple TV simple (read I don't expect a lot of apps being created for it) but I could be wrong.
I believe Apple has plans to keep the Apple TV simple (read I don't expect a lot of apps being created for it) but I could be wrong.
Isn't it almost guaranteed that the next AppleTV will tie into the App store and run iPod games?
I mean, it's the same operating system...
Crazy idea?
What if Apple uses two (2) dual core Atom CPUs??!?
Flame retardant underwear? Check?
;^p
You really have no idea what you're talking about do you?
I guess I should have stated my position better. Things don't look good for Apple in the 'Home Media' department.
What Apple did with music entertainment was revolutionary, iTunes/iPod.
What they are trying to do with Apple TV is not revolutionary, and they have major competition.
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
How much of a success story was Airport Express?
Nuf said.
Excuse me... i have to research this XBMC file...
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
Video distribution is a far tricker task than audio distribution. Certain elements are analogous to the audio side but we tend to consume the media differently. I agree that Apple will never be able to dominate video like they do audio.
DRM for video is not going away. Audio going DRM free has absolutely no bearing on what video does. When you look at the production costs of even a decently distributed Indie film it dwarfs the costs of an Indie music album. Looking at my latest Disc Makers catalog I see you can get 10 thousand CD in jewel cases and 2 color panels for $6500 bucks. The actual content could be created in a home studio (which is how many are created now) and then mixed down and mastered in a commercial studio and distributed. A film on the other hand requires so much personnel and equipment the cost of making a film quickly jumps into the stratosphere.
The movie studios pumping in millions into films aren't going to let those float around without DRM. It would be financial suicide.
I guess I should have stated my position better. Things don't look good for Apple in the 'Home Media' department.
What Apple did with music entertainment was revolutionary, iTunes/iPod.
What they are trying to do with Apple TV is not revolutionary, and they have major competition.
If you believe that Apple is going to be in the top 3 video distributers in 2 years time... man, give your head a shake. Won't happen. Not unless Apple drops their DRM tomorrow and gets their shit together.
The bureaucracy with DRM is killing Apple's efforts with Apple TV. They should sell an open Apple TV, and wait for the content creators to come to them.
Apple is using the same model for video as it did with music. I'm not positive that is the best direction.
How much of a success story was Airport Express?
Nuf said.
Excuse me... i have to research this XBMC file...
Yes, Apple has major competition in video; but can you tell us which of those major competitors doesn't use DRM? You very strongly imply that Apple will suffer because of the DRM, but everyone has the same constraint.
The suggestion that Apple create an open AppleTV and "wait for the content creators to come to them" would be the surest way to kill AppleTV. The music industry's Achilles heel is all those non-DRM CDs. They lost control with the first MP3 players, before the iTunes Music Store even existed. Video, on the other hand, has had DRM/copy-protection since the first VHS tape with Macrovision was released in the late 80's.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. FrontRow will play pretty much any content on my hard drive. It doesn't have to be in iTunes and it isn't limited to a very restricted list of supported formats. AppleTV can do a few things not easily done with a mini, the biggest of these is HD movie rentals. But I'm hoping that will change once DisplayPort is available on the mini.
And now we are full circle...the ONLY way Apple will get HD movies on computers is if those computers support DRM. There is no other way you'll get HD movies (from iTunes) onto your computer. Apple actually needs to move faster to deploy DRM because the longer they delay the farther ahead their competition will get (because they all already have fully implemented DRM).
Yes, Apple has major competition in video; but can you tell us which of those major competitors doesn't use DRM? You very strongly imply that Apple will suffer because of the DRM, but everyone has the same constraint.
The suggestion that Apple create an open AppleTV and "wait for the content creators to come to them" would be the surest way to kill AppleTV. The music industry's Achilles heel is all those non-DRM CDs. They lost control with the first MP3 players, before the iTunes Music Store even existed. Video, on the other hand, has had DRM/copy-protection since the first VHS tape with Macrovision was released in the late 80's.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. FrontRow will play pretty much any content on my hard drive. It doesn't have to be in iTunes and it isn't limited to a very restricted list of supported formats. AppleTV can do a few things not easily done with a mini, the biggest of these is HD movie rentals. But I'm hoping that will change once DisplayPort is available on the mini.
And now we are full circle...the ONLY way Apple will get HD movies on computers is if those computers support DRM. There is no other way you'll get HD movies (from iTunes) onto your computer. Apple actually needs to move faster to deploy DRM because the longer they delay the farther ahead their competition will get (because they all already have fully implemented DRM).
Amen! They all use DRM. Video is different WAY different. At least 50% of the time, if not more, you will rent not buy, unlike music where you will buy 95% of the time. The winner of online video will be a monthly fee subscription service that offers the latest content. Basically a Block Buster online.
Today you have Netflix, Amazon and Blockbuster (just starting) online. Netflix and BlockBuster offer a monthly fee that is really tied to their physical distribution but give you a selection of crap online.
I want the full catalog of BlockBuster/Netflix movies online for a monthly fee. Keep the 24 hour watch it deal before I can rent another movie so people dont abuse it, or at least not anymore than they can abuse Netflix in the mail today.
Whom ever comes out with that kind of deal is going to win. Apple/iTunes could be it.
That said, I can only assume that when you say DRM, you really mean interoperability?? That would more sense in your argument. And there I would agree with you. In fact, this is why I use a mini instead of AppleTV to drive my HDTV. .
Yes, you are correct there.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
Yes, you are correct there.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
Actually the Airport Express popular. Amazon lists it at the 126th best selling device in electronics and the Mac mini is also a good seller despite the 2006 specs it offers. I realize your passion about the subject but lets infuse a little more of the truth into your arguments.
Yes, you are correct there.
I'm not talking about the studio's digital DRM on media, i'm talking about Apple not letting people steam formats other then quicktime to Apple TV.
This kind of thinking is why the Airport Express was a miserable failure. You could only stream audio from iTunes. I refer to it as Apple's DRM. 'Interoperability' works too I guess, less confusion.
In my original post, I mentioned that people are looking at this very issue and opting out of purchasing an Apple TV. I had 3 friends return them, and a few more bitch about it.
Not everyone wants to fork out $700 for a mini computer just to use as a media hub. Apple TV should be the product that satisfies that need. It's not.
When someone comes out with a quality, low-cost device that does satisfy those needs. The Mac Mini is as good as dead. The only thing keeping it going right now is people using it as a media hub.
Actually, the really sad thing is that AppleTV can't even play all QuickTime formats! There is simply no excuse for Apple TV to not be able to play, at an absolute minimum, any content that you can play natively in iTunes. Sure, you could use iTunes' "Convert for AppleTV" command, but you shouldn't have to. Not supporting non-QuickTime formats is one thing, but not even supporting their own set of QuickTime codecs is stupid! It made sense for the iPod given it's hardware constraints, but not for AppleTV.
The other significant problem preventing mainstream acceptance is it's inability to play our existing movies which for the majority of users is DVDs. Image how spectacularly unsuccessful the iPod would have been if there were no way to listen to all the music you already had on CDs. Obviously, Apple can't sanction DVD ripping programs without pissing off the studios (but note that FrontRow will play video_ts files just fine), but how about including a $10 DVD drive in the AppleTV or enabling DVD sharing like the MB Air has (which I realize doesn't currently support video DVD sharing). If Apple really wanted to help kill off blu-ray in favor of downloads, they'd put a DVD drive in the AppleTV. That way it's a viable option for people looking to upgrade from their DVD player. If I want to replace my DVD player, currently the only option is to get another DVD player or get a blu-ray player. The average Joe would never consider an AppleTV because it can't play the movies they already own. But put in a DVD player and it's the perfect living room trojan horse to introduce people to online movies as an option to blu-ray. And, oh by the way, it locks them into the iTunes video ecosystem which is a plus for Apple.
The final, less annoying, issue with AppleTV is that all the video content has to be in iTunes. AppleTV can display my photos that aren't in iTunes by simply telling iTunes where they are. Why can't I do the same for the video in my Movies folder or elsewhere on my hard drive?
I think the media hub audience is a minor, but important, segment of the Mac mini market. I don't think it would be dead without that segment. While I use a mini as a media hub for my TV, it does far more duty than just that. It's also my file server, broadcasts iTunes streaming to several Airport Expresses throughout the house, and hosts all my Time Machine backup disks for the rest of the computers. And it's got unlimited storage via it's Firewire connection and is administered remotely via Leopard's screen sharing. Not bad for a $600 computer.
THEY PLAY ITUNES CONTENT and do it very well
now...very little of my itunes content is from the itunes store...but it doesnt take that much effort to convert things for the tv...
hello...HANDBRAKE ANYONE?
very simple...i can even take my TIVO content...use iTivo and download the shows and it converts them as per my requested for TV and then i if i want to...i can use Toast to edit out the commercials...so i can keep the content forever...
and PATCHSTICK for TV...is a great thing...not clear on all it does as i dont really need to use those things...but i have it...and i plan to put boxee on it too...
the fact is i am so sick and tired of hearing all the garbage about the TV...dont want it dont buy it...but i love them...do i use them every day...no...but if i wanted to i could...they are there for me when i need them...and
not to mention...even my mother can now work one...the interface is easy...and that is what she needs...
people please stop trashing the TV...what did it do to you???
granted i would love it could be integrated with one of my EyeTV's and could be used as a DVR as well...but im sure someone will come up with that hack soon enough...maybe i will ask for it somewhere...
just had to get that off my chest...fact is...i will not be buying another TV so i dont really care if they change its insides...because my 2 serve me just fine...
... If Apple really wanted to help kill off blu-ray in favor of downloads, they'd put a DVD drive in the AppleTV. That way it's a viable option for people looking to upgrade from their DVD player. If I want to replace my DVD player, currently the only option is to get another DVD player or get a blu-ray player. The average Joe would never consider an AppleTV because it can't play the movies they already own. But put in a DVD player and it's the perfect living room trojan horse to introduce people to online movies as an option to blu-ray. And, oh by the way, it locks them into the iTunes video ecosystem which is a plus for Apple.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I didn't think of it that way before.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config.
Currently my new hardware needs are somewhere between the MacBook and the 15" MacBook Pro's innards, without the display (my 23" Cinema Display still works fine, thank you) and with the parts being desktop parts instead of laptop parts.
I refuse to buy a 15" MacBook Pro and pay all that extra money for an LCD I don't need, laptop architecture I don't need, and the expense of a MDP-to-DVI connector.
They can so easily make a Mac Mini with the MacBook or 15" MacBook Pro hardware inside, set it at $1299 and I would buy one in an instant. The money is literally right in my checking account earmarked for an Apple Special event to announce the damn thing.
If they slap me in the face with an Ion bullcrap Mac Mini, then that was Apple's last chance to appeal to my hardware needs. They'll force me to go down the dark Hackintosh road.
If Apple releases an updated Mac Mini that runs on the Ion platform, I will be so thoroughly disappointed that I may not purchase any Apple hardware products again.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config.
Currently my new hardware needs are somewhere between the MacBook and the 15" MacBook Pro's innards, without the display (my 23" Cinema Display still works fine, thank you) and with the parts being desktop parts instead of laptop parts.
I refuse to buy a 15" MacBook Pro and pay all that extra money for an LCD I don't need, laptop architecture I don't need, and the expense of a MDP-to-DVI connector.
They can so easily make a Mac Mini with the MacBook or 15" MacBook Pro hardware inside, set it at $1299 and I would buy one in an instant. The money is literally right in my checking account earmarked for an Apple Special event to announce the damn thing.
If they slap me in the face with an Ion bullcrap Mac Mini, then that was Apple's last chance to appeal to my hardware needs. They'll force me to go down the dark Hackintosh road.
Agreed on nearly everything (I don't own a cinema display).
Last night I was looking around hackintosh sites with the intent of making a purchase somewhere, but I'm disappointed at some things. All this time I've been used to PC users rubbing it in my face, "here's your precious Mac OS running on my PC!" but they haven't gotten the sound to work? Oh, okay, they got some mono channel sound to work. Could be choppy.
It's worth noting, however, that when I searched eBay for "hackintosh" half the results were for Atom-based desktops. That's right. Atom-based desktops.
If Apple releases an updated Mac Mini that runs on the Ion platform, I will be so thoroughly disappointed that I may not purchase any Apple hardware products again.
I am one of those guys who always got the low-end Power Mac. When people were buying the Quad-core, liquid-cooled $3000 workstation G5s, I was the person who bought the Single 1.8GHz $1299 G5 model.
The Mac Pro, even when done as a BTO through a third party like Zones, is still $2300 for the lowest-end config...
Have you considered the possibility that moving the Mini further downmarket with the Atom/Ion just might allow Apple to bring back the $1299. price point on the Pro line?
Have any of you seen this?
http://us.shuttle.com/X2700.aspx
They clearly thought it made sense to use an Atom to compete with the Mini.
Looking at their marketing style, which takes a lot of influence from Apple, it's easy for me to feel convinced that this is what Apple's doing. Who can't imagine an Apple page advertising an Atom Mini after looking at that?
See Everex MiniPC. Core2Duo, SMALLER than Mac Mini and cost less than $500.
Intel will be releasing a 3rd gen dual core Atom with better performance, 2.0ghz speed and a 800mhz FSB with 1mb cache (dual core) 64bit with an est TDP of 3-4watts in spring of 2009. Just the right timeframe for Paul and Tim to go on stage and announce this together.
Also 3rd gen iPhone looks like it's going to get the new nVidia ARM CPU - SOC. Less power, less space, room for extra Flash Ram. It combines 3 of the chips into one. Promissing... Could also make a ARM based MacBook Mini this way with say a NetRemix style OS X interface. OK I KNOW That sounds stupid, but your not gonna run any ilife app aside from iPhoto on this or want to. Your not gonna finish editing the next blockbuster on a 10" screen. This is a small, light, portable to take with you. Would be SERIOUSLY cool if they let it tether to the iPhone over BT for both syncing and shared internet. Even if they only give you 30hrs a month that's still awsome. If it goes arm, think iPhone OS X and App Store explosion!
For arguments sake I tether my Asus 4g (MODIFIED) over BT to a Moto phone for EDGE (yea baby watch it fly) internet speeds when I'm out. It sucks but its also a lifesaver sometimes. With a 10400mah battery I can go almost 12hrs without charging... BUT charging takes 6.5hrs.
Asus 1002AH is probably the next step towards a MacBook Mini. Has nVidia chipset 9300m with 256mb graphics, sells for $799 at NE. Might have to pick one of those up next week and check it out.