Microsoft uses what in MCE? Viiv? Viiv didn't even exist when the latest MCE was released.
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 was the first OS to use ViiV (ViiV 1.0). And Media Center Extenders are DLNA Compliant (the transcoding trick). See point #4on this page.
ViiV 1.5 is an update with Intel processors (PentiumD and Core Duo -> Core 2 Duo) and ViiV 2.0 changes some things with the transition to Vista.
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 was the first OS to use ViiV (ViiV 1.0). And Media Center Extenders are DLNA Compliant (the transcoding trick). See point #4on this page.
ViiV 1.5 is an update with Intel processors (PentiumD and Core Duo -> Core 2 Duo) and ViiV 2.0 changes some things with the transition to Vista.
What are you talking about? Viiv 1.0 wasn't even released until January 5, 2006. Media Center Center Edition 2005 was released on October 12, 2004. That's well over a year before that. Viiv 1.5 isn't out yet.
And the page you're linking to was written almost a year after MCE 2005 had been out, and months before Viiv was.
What are you talking about? Viiv 1.0 wasn't even released until January 5, 2006. Media Center Center Edition 2005 was released on October 12, 2004. That's well over a year before that. Viiv 1.5 isn't out yet.
And the page you're linking to was written almost a year after MCE 2005 had been out, and months before Viiv was.
My link is not the latest. But two separate products coming at different dates on the market and from different companies does not prevent these partners from working on an interoperable solution. MS and Intel worked on this thing before ViiV ever came out, not after. And this Integrated Media Server Software does not lie into the OS. What do you do of all these Media Center PCs having the ViiV logo on their case? They don't exist?
In this PDF from Intel (2006) you can see some info about DLNA transcoding in ViiV.
And I've just saw why I could not find any recent document about the "Integrated Media Server". It's because Intel renamed this engine to Smart Streaming Technology.
I'm a bit confused - can someone explain why I would need to sync my iTunes content onto the Apple TV's hard drive, if I can stream all the content I want over the air? For a lot of users, I agree, 40gb is less than their iTunes library and this therefore raises questions about what gets synced and what doesn't, and do we enter manual mode somehow if this happens...but if the wireless network will support streaming video (which would be the hungriest bandwidth-wise), then I don't understand why I'd need to have my data in two places (my mac and my Apple TV)?
I guess it'll come down to speed, i.e. content on the hard drive will be accessed faster. But either I'm misunderstanding something or my requirements are different to most people, because I would assume that if there is ANY slowdown or frame loss for streamed video, then the device becomes pretty pointless (for video anyway). And if there ISN'T any slowdown, then we're back to my original question - what's the point in syncing to the hard drive?
Any ideas?
You can sync content to the Apple TV so that you don't actually need the have the computer on as well to watch content. It gives you the option to stream or to store locally, i.e. more flexibility.
You can select what you want to be synced, e.g. playlists, latest 10 TV programs / movies downloaded, specific photo albums, etc.
I think it is a great idea to have local content that is constantly updated in the background.
My link is not the latest. But two separate products coming at different dates on the market and from different companies does not prevent these partners from working on an interoperable solution. MS and Intel worked on this thing before ViiV ever came out, not after. And this Integrated Media Server Software does not lie into the OS. What do you do of all these Media Center PCs having the ViiV logo on their case? They don't exist?
Yes, Viiv supports MCE. No, MCE is not based on Viiv. It doesn't require Viiv, and it doesn't take advantage of Viiv. Perhaps the next MCE version will, but I don't believe so.
But currently, ?tv is not really an end to end solution for media in the living room if you have to get up and go to your den to purchase a tv show, then go back in the living room to watch it.. ?tv needs to allow direct access to the iTunes store from your living room so you can sit on your couch, purchase a movie or tv show and begin watching immediately.. Until it does this, I think the Mac mini is a much better end to end media device.
I think you are missing the absolutely massive point here. I (and I'm sorry for swearing) don't want to buy another fucking computer only so that I can watch movies on my TV. Sure the Mac Mini would work, but set up with a TV would make it an impractical computer. But more importantly a Mac Mini is twice the price for something that I would use merely an extension. This isn't mentioning that I would have to authorise another computer just for the sake of movies.
The Apple TV is intended to be an enhancement of the services on your computer. It makes no difference about what hardware is in the thing. It has a few very simple tasks to perform and I'm sure as it is a dedicated system is perfectly capable of doing them. I'm sure Jobs would have had his whip out if it wasn't up to his (incredibly high) standards.
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
I think this a great product and I'm a tad pissed off with myself because I had the whole living room wired to get my iTS content on my TV.
Taking any bets how long it takes for some group to get Linux run on it?? At $299 bucks the machine has quite a lot going for it (and I'm just talking about hardware and elegance). I can't imagine it'll be too long before we see MythTV based AppleTVs along with a host of other special purpose linux devices...
Here's some of the things I love to see:
Access to the standard:
iMovies
iTunes
iPhoto
Additional access to:
MAME
Insert any/all other popular emulators
Home Automation (ala web access to Indigo)
TV Guide listings
Weather / News Feeds
Sports and such....
You get the idea
I'm betting for those additional features it wouldn't be too much work to somehow add/hack them in.
Too bad there not passing the savings on to the consumer. This box probably costs them $150 max.
I'm sure it does, and I don't have a problem with that.
The people that have a problem with this just don't understand any of the complexities or costs of bringing a product to market. In other words, the incremental costs of the hardware don't even begin to tell of those expenses. To illustrate this, Apple's average net margin is about 10%, not 50% as you might suggest.
interesting that apple TV has a better graphics processor than the macbook!
With the M there's probably no way to get solid 720p playback without PureVideo.
Kind of a bummer as 1080 is a non-starter if the M is underclocked unless the G72M on aTV performs better than the stock 7400 which tops out at 10-11 mpbs output rate according to nVidia.
Shame...there are several SOC solutions that would have work about as well. Either that or Apple or nVidea really improved H.264 performance for PureVideo.
Taking any bets how long it takes for some group to get Linux run on it?? At $299 bucks the machine has quite a lot going for it (and I'm just talking about hardware and elegance). I can't imagine it'll be too long before we see MythTV based AppleTVs along with a host of other special purpose linux devices...
Here's some of the things I love to see:
Access to the standard:
iMovies
iTunes
iPhoto
Additional access to:
MAME
Insert any/all other popular emulators
Home Automation (ala web access to Indigo)
TV Guide listings
Weather / News Feeds
Sports and such....
You get the idea
I'm betting for those additional features it wouldn't be too much work to somehow add/hack them in.
Dave
ITS NOT A COMPUTER and no doubt will be missing some items from preventing it from ever being one, like IO for Keyboard / Mouse, etc.
Actually the official thech specs list it as "USB 2.0 (for service and diagnostics)"
This is the biggest let down for me.
I would have gotten one if I could of attached an external HD to supplement the 40GB internal drive.
I think Apple has a golden opportunity to create the home server standard.
The AppleTV should be able to back up important files from from up to 5 Macs & PCs.
Backup is the killer app! Something nobody has made drop dead simple.
They should have called it the iVault and designed it to work with Leopard's Time Machine.
Yes, but if I wanted a big stack o noisy HDs next to my TV I'd just use a regular computer configured as a HTPC rather than aTV.
I suspect they are positioning the new Airport for this. Airport next to the cable modem with a HD attached available wirelessle over draft-N allowed disconnected (except for power) Timemachine backups of MacBooks and MBPs. A real Apple NAS at some point would also be welcome.
Taking any bets how long it takes for some group to get Linux run on it?? At $299 bucks the machine has quite a lot going for it (and I'm just talking about hardware and elegance). I can't imagine it'll be too long before we see MythTV based AppleTVs along with a host of other special purpose linux devices...
I'm sure someone will have Linux on it in short time. But, at $299, you won't see too many people doing too much with them. You can get a used Xbox for $100 or less and do most of the same things, or even buy a whole computer with better specs for $300.
These will be nice for Linux when you can pick them up for $150 or less.
Yes, but if I wanted a big stack o noisy HDs next to my TV I'd just use a regular computer configured as a HTPC rather than aTV.
I suspect they are positioning the new Airport for this. Airport next to the cable modem with a HD attached available wirelessle over draft-N allowed disconnected (except for power) Timemachine backups of MacBooks and MBPs. A real Apple NAS at some point would also be welcome.
Hard drives aren't that loud these days. Just don't pick an enclosure with a loud fan and it's fine. Drop in a Samsung drive and you probably will not notice it was there even if a random seek test was done on it.
ITS NOT A COMPUTER and no doubt will be missing some items from preventing it from ever being one, like IO for Keyboard / Mouse, etc.
Linux hackers... Keyboards?!!? We don't neeeeed no stinkin keyboards
I've got a 200MHz (?) NSLU2 (linksys hard drive network sharing device) that I've since rebranded with linux and now it can provide a ton of other functions! For $99 it's pretty cool actually!
I think you are missing the absolutely massive point here. I (and I'm sorry for swearing) don't want to buy another fucking computer only so that I can watch movies on my TV. Sure the Mac Mini would work, but set up with a TV would make it an impractical computer. But more importantly a Mac Mini is twice the price for something that I would use merely an extension. This isn't mentioning that I would have to authorise another computer just for the sake of movies.
The Apple TV is intended to be an enhancement of the services on your computer. It makes no difference about what hardware is in the thing. It has a few very simple tasks to perform and I'm sure as it is a dedicated system is perfectly capable of doing them. I'm sure Jobs would have had his whip out if it wasn't up to his (incredibly high) standards.
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
I think this a great product and I'm a tad pissed off with myself because I had the whole living room wired to get my iTS content on my TV.
I disagree, I don't think I've missed the point massively.. In fact, I think Apple missed the mark as far as what consumers need/want to make this a real killer living room product.
I agree that a Mac mini may be overkill for the living room, but a mini is currently the only way to be able to do what I would want in a living room device.. Apple Tv is already a computer, so all Apple had to do was create a way for it to interface with the iTunes store for Movies and Tv show purchases on demand... They could have done it so it would be all menu driven (without the need for a keyboard,) so that consumers could watch movie previews and be able to immediately purchase and watch all from their couch.
Microsoft managed to make an on demand movie service with the Xbox 360 which offers both purchase and rental options as well as full HD resolution... Apple could have (and should have) done it better.
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
.
To further elaborate on my above post... If Apple did it right, extra peripherals would not be needed... Purchases through Apple tv could be done with the simple Apple remote.. A menu based navigation with categories like "new releases," "dramas," "comedies" etc. etc... move up and down through the categories, press the menu button to watch the trailer, and press menu again to purchase and begin downloading.. The hardware is already capable of this, a software interface to the iTunes store is all that's needed.
Seriously, WHY is there a Hard Drive in this thing? It makes NO SENSE! If it can stream at 300Mb/s, that should be plenty quick for any 802.11n-equipped computer. So assuming that one's AppleTV gets its media from a "host computer" (which is in turn connected to the iTS), everything on the AppleTV would be a duplicate of content on the host computer -- a device which could just as well be streaming the data. Apple could have cut the price by almost $50 by not including the 40GB HD. Very unwise, if you ask me.
Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.
Perhaps this will be a future version of the device, and Apple might just be testing the waters, but if the device fails, primarily because it doesn't include DVR capabilities, the AppleTV will not have a second chance. Apple needs to get the product right the first time, not the second time. Same goes for all their computers/devices, practically... 2nd gen is always better. I know I'll receive some flak for saying this, but that's why I'm waiting for the 2nd gen iPhone... that and I don't have money for it now . A big wedding is coming up!
I think any 4:3 TV will work on the following conditions:
1. (There is a component input OR you have a component-to-composite adapter) AND
2. Your TV is able to "detect" OR you can set your TV to "know" that it is a 16:9 signal,
.....ie. Your TV will letterbox 16:9 signals if it autodetects or you force it to letterbox.
The tech specs on apple.com say otherwise.
Not all sets that have component in from a few years ago support 480p and you cannot convert a 480p signal to composite using just a (physical) cable adapter.
Comments
Microsoft uses what in MCE? Viiv? Viiv didn't even exist when the latest MCE was released.
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 was the first OS to use ViiV (ViiV 1.0). And Media Center Extenders are DLNA Compliant (the transcoding trick). See point #4 on this page.
ViiV 1.5 is an update with Intel processors (PentiumD and Core Duo -> Core 2 Duo) and ViiV 2.0 changes some things with the transition to Vista.
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 was the first OS to use ViiV (ViiV 1.0). And Media Center Extenders are DLNA Compliant (the transcoding trick). See point #4 on this page.
ViiV 1.5 is an update with Intel processors (PentiumD and Core Duo -> Core 2 Duo) and ViiV 2.0 changes some things with the transition to Vista.
What are you talking about? Viiv 1.0 wasn't even released until January 5, 2006. Media Center Center Edition 2005 was released on October 12, 2004. That's well over a year before that. Viiv 1.5 isn't out yet.
And the page you're linking to was written almost a year after MCE 2005 had been out, and months before Viiv was.
What are you talking about? Viiv 1.0 wasn't even released until January 5, 2006. Media Center Center Edition 2005 was released on October 12, 2004. That's well over a year before that. Viiv 1.5 isn't out yet.
And the page you're linking to was written almost a year after MCE 2005 had been out, and months before Viiv was.
My link is not the latest. But two separate products coming at different dates on the market and from different companies does not prevent these partners from working on an interoperable solution. MS and Intel worked on this thing before ViiV ever came out, not after. And this Integrated Media Server Software does not lie into the OS. What do you do of all these Media Center PCs having the ViiV logo on their case? They don't exist?
BTW here is the ViiV Supported Operating System info page on Intel's web site.
In this PDF from Intel (2006) you can see some info about DLNA transcoding in ViiV.
And I've just saw why I could not find any recent document about the "Integrated Media Server". It's because Intel renamed this engine to Smart Streaming Technology.
I'm a bit confused - can someone explain why I would need to sync my iTunes content onto the Apple TV's hard drive, if I can stream all the content I want over the air? For a lot of users, I agree, 40gb is less than their iTunes library and this therefore raises questions about what gets synced and what doesn't, and do we enter manual mode somehow if this happens...but if the wireless network will support streaming video (which would be the hungriest bandwidth-wise), then I don't understand why I'd need to have my data in two places (my mac and my Apple TV)?
I guess it'll come down to speed, i.e. content on the hard drive will be accessed faster. But either I'm misunderstanding something or my requirements are different to most people, because I would assume that if there is ANY slowdown or frame loss for streamed video, then the device becomes pretty pointless (for video anyway). And if there ISN'T any slowdown, then we're back to my original question - what's the point in syncing to the hard drive?
Any ideas?
You can sync content to the Apple TV so that you don't actually need the have the computer on as well to watch content. It gives you the option to stream or to store locally, i.e. more flexibility.
You can select what you want to be synced, e.g. playlists, latest 10 TV programs / movies downloaded, specific photo albums, etc.
I think it is a great idea to have local content that is constantly updated in the background.
Ian
My link is not the latest. But two separate products coming at different dates on the market and from different companies does not prevent these partners from working on an interoperable solution. MS and Intel worked on this thing before ViiV ever came out, not after. And this Integrated Media Server Software does not lie into the OS. What do you do of all these Media Center PCs having the ViiV logo on their case? They don't exist?
BTW here is the ViiV Supported Operating System info page on Intel's web site.
Yes, Viiv supports MCE. No, MCE is not based on Viiv. It doesn't require Viiv, and it doesn't take advantage of Viiv. Perhaps the next MCE version will, but I don't believe so.
interesting that apple TV has a better graphics processor than the macbook!
This really pisses me off. Oh, Apple can't use a good GPU in the Macbooks and Mini because of form factor and price. F*ck you Apple.
This card is better than the GMA for these reasons:
GMA: shader model 2, 3DMark06 = 170, shared DDR2 memory, no Hardware T&L
7400: shader model 3, 3DMark06 = 800, dedicated GDDR3 memory, Hardware T&L
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html
So i suppose itunes will soon sell 720P video then?
I hope that's the plan and that the iTV is capable of it. The cynical part of me is wondering if the 720p is only there for showing iPhoto slideshows.
So now we know the RUMOURED video hardware - anyone know if it's capable of 720p or greater?
But currently, ?tv is not really an end to end solution for media in the living room if you have to get up and go to your den to purchase a tv show, then go back in the living room to watch it.. ?tv needs to allow direct access to the iTunes store from your living room so you can sit on your couch, purchase a movie or tv show and begin watching immediately.. Until it does this, I think the Mac mini is a much better end to end media device.
I think you are missing the absolutely massive point here. I (and I'm sorry for swearing) don't want to buy another fucking computer only so that I can watch movies on my TV. Sure the Mac Mini would work, but set up with a TV would make it an impractical computer. But more importantly a Mac Mini is twice the price for something that I would use merely an extension. This isn't mentioning that I would have to authorise another computer just for the sake of movies.
The Apple TV is intended to be an enhancement of the services on your computer. It makes no difference about what hardware is in the thing. It has a few very simple tasks to perform and I'm sure as it is a dedicated system is perfectly capable of doing them. I'm sure Jobs would have had his whip out if it wasn't up to his (incredibly high) standards.
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
I think this a great product and I'm a tad pissed off with myself because I had the whole living room wired to get my iTS content on my TV.
Here's some of the things I love to see:
Access to the standard:
iMovies
iTunes
iPhoto
Additional access to:
MAME
Insert any/all other popular emulators
Home Automation (ala web access to Indigo)
TV Guide listings
Weather / News Feeds
Sports and such....
You get the idea
I'm betting for those additional features it wouldn't be too much work to somehow add/hack them in.
Dave
Too bad there not passing the savings on to the consumer. This box probably costs them $150 max.
I'm sure it does, and I don't have a problem with that.
The people that have a problem with this just don't understand any of the complexities or costs of bringing a product to market. In other words, the incremental costs of the hardware don't even begin to tell of those expenses. To illustrate this, Apple's average net margin is about 10%, not 50% as you might suggest.
interesting that apple TV has a better graphics processor than the macbook!
With the M there's probably no way to get solid 720p playback without PureVideo.
Kind of a bummer as 1080 is a non-starter if the M is underclocked unless the G72M on aTV performs better than the stock 7400 which tops out at 10-11 mpbs output rate according to nVidia.
Shame...there are several SOC solutions that would have work about as well. Either that or Apple or nVidea really improved H.264 performance for PureVideo.
Vinea
Taking any bets how long it takes for some group to get Linux run on it?? At $299 bucks the machine has quite a lot going for it (and I'm just talking about hardware and elegance). I can't imagine it'll be too long before we see MythTV based AppleTVs along with a host of other special purpose linux devices...
Here's some of the things I love to see:
Access to the standard:
iMovies
iTunes
iPhoto
Additional access to:
MAME
Insert any/all other popular emulators
Home Automation (ala web access to Indigo)
TV Guide listings
Weather / News Feeds
Sports and such....
You get the idea
I'm betting for those additional features it wouldn't be too much work to somehow add/hack them in.
Dave
ITS NOT A COMPUTER and no doubt will be missing some items from preventing it from ever being one, like IO for Keyboard / Mouse, etc.
Actually the official thech specs list it as "USB 2.0 (for service and diagnostics)"
This is the biggest let down for me.
I would have gotten one if I could of attached an external HD to supplement the 40GB internal drive.
I think Apple has a golden opportunity to create the home server standard.
The AppleTV should be able to back up important files from from up to 5 Macs & PCs.
Backup is the killer app! Something nobody has made drop dead simple.
They should have called it the iVault and designed it to work with Leopard's Time Machine.
Yes, but if I wanted a big stack o noisy HDs next to my TV I'd just use a regular computer configured as a HTPC rather than aTV.
I suspect they are positioning the new Airport for this. Airport next to the cable modem with a HD attached available wirelessle over draft-N allowed disconnected (except for power) Timemachine backups of MacBooks and MBPs. A real Apple NAS at some point would also be welcome.
aTV will make someone a nice linux machine.
Vinea
Taking any bets how long it takes for some group to get Linux run on it?? At $299 bucks the machine has quite a lot going for it (and I'm just talking about hardware and elegance). I can't imagine it'll be too long before we see MythTV based AppleTVs along with a host of other special purpose linux devices...
I'm sure someone will have Linux on it in short time. But, at $299, you won't see too many people doing too much with them. You can get a used Xbox for $100 or less and do most of the same things, or even buy a whole computer with better specs for $300.
These will be nice for Linux when you can pick them up for $150 or less.
Yes, but if I wanted a big stack o noisy HDs next to my TV I'd just use a regular computer configured as a HTPC rather than aTV.
I suspect they are positioning the new Airport for this. Airport next to the cable modem with a HD attached available wirelessle over draft-N allowed disconnected (except for power) Timemachine backups of MacBooks and MBPs. A real Apple NAS at some point would also be welcome.
Hard drives aren't that loud these days. Just don't pick an enclosure with a loud fan and it's fine. Drop in a Samsung drive and you probably will not notice it was there even if a random seek test was done on it.
ITS NOT A COMPUTER and no doubt will be missing some items from preventing it from ever being one, like IO for Keyboard / Mouse, etc.
Linux hackers... Keyboards?!!? We don't neeeeed no stinkin keyboards
I've got a 200MHz (?) NSLU2 (linksys hard drive network sharing device) that I've since rebranded with linux and now it can provide a ton of other functions! For $99 it's pretty cool actually!
Dave
[/B]
I think you are missing the absolutely massive point here. I (and I'm sorry for swearing) don't want to buy another fucking computer only so that I can watch movies on my TV. Sure the Mac Mini would work, but set up with a TV would make it an impractical computer. But more importantly a Mac Mini is twice the price for something that I would use merely an extension. This isn't mentioning that I would have to authorise another computer just for the sake of movies.
The Apple TV is intended to be an enhancement of the services on your computer. It makes no difference about what hardware is in the thing. It has a few very simple tasks to perform and I'm sure as it is a dedicated system is perfectly capable of doing them. I'm sure Jobs would have had his whip out if it wasn't up to his (incredibly high) standards.
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
I think this a great product and I'm a tad pissed off with myself because I had the whole living room wired to get my iTS content on my TV.
I disagree, I don't think I've missed the point massively.. In fact, I think Apple missed the mark as far as what consumers need/want to make this a real killer living room product.
I agree that a Mac mini may be overkill for the living room, but a mini is currently the only way to be able to do what I would want in a living room device.. Apple Tv is already a computer, so all Apple had to do was create a way for it to interface with the iTunes store for Movies and Tv show purchases on demand... They could have done it so it would be all menu driven (without the need for a keyboard,) so that consumers could watch movie previews and be able to immediately purchase and watch all from their couch.
Microsoft managed to make an on demand movie service with the Xbox 360 which offers both purchase and rental options as well as full HD resolution... Apple could have (and should have) done it better.
[/B]
I surf the internet, download stuff, with the computer because it has a keyboard. Are you intending to disturb the balance of the living room by chucking a whole irritating bunch of additional computer peripherals in just for the convenience of being able to download a movie and then watch it instantly. In fact, why doesn't Apple make a new wireless controller with multi-touch interface costing an extra £200. That's like buying a brand new sports car to get your kids to school quicker. Get real. Buy your movies in advance and press "sync"... it isn't hard.
.
To further elaborate on my above post... If Apple did it right, extra peripherals would not be needed... Purchases through Apple tv could be done with the simple Apple remote.. A menu based navigation with categories like "new releases," "dramas," "comedies" etc. etc... move up and down through the categories, press the menu button to watch the trailer, and press menu again to purchase and begin downloading.. The hardware is already capable of this, a software interface to the iTunes store is all that's needed.
Alternatively, they could've added another HD plus a slightly beefier processor and made the device, in effect, a 80GB, dual-turner DVR/media streamer (granted it would probably be a little thicker). Since DVRs are all the rage these days, Apple could see the DVR features available today and raise media streaming... all for a very low price of $400, flat.
Perhaps this will be a future version of the device, and Apple might just be testing the waters, but if the device fails, primarily because it doesn't include DVR capabilities, the AppleTV will not have a second chance. Apple needs to get the product right the first time, not the second time. Same goes for all their computers/devices, practically... 2nd gen is always better. I know I'll receive some flak for saying this, but that's why I'm waiting for the 2nd gen iPhone... that and I don't have money for it now
-Clive
I think any 4:3 TV will work on the following conditions:
1. (There is a component input OR you have a component-to-composite adapter) AND
2. Your TV is able to "detect" OR you can set your TV to "know" that it is a 16:9 signal,
.....ie. Your TV will letterbox 16:9 signals if it autodetects or you force it to letterbox.
The tech specs on apple.com say otherwise.
Not all sets that have component in from a few years ago support 480p and you cannot convert a 480p signal to composite using just a (physical) cable adapter.