Then your beef is with the music industry execs who mandate that DRM be in the music in the first place....
What does that have to do with Apple iTunes music being incompatible with other non-Apple music devices? Buy an mp3 anywhere else and it'll play on any other machine - as bought! And that includes iPods!
The biggest issue isn't the AppleTV or the content providers.
It's Apple.
The content providers want a DRM system that allows time limited playback. Fairplay doesn't do that so they all use Microsoft DRM.
In the UK there's no content at all except for some US derived shows, mostly dross. There's no movies at all. And of course they charge us more here than the USA for less!
Apple is it's own worst enemy here.
Just to be clear--are you saying that the content owners and their various existing legal agreements are not what dictates what countries Apple can sell TV shows in? Apple is the one deciding what markets a show can sell to?
And are you saying Apple is the problem for not letting the content holders make DRM even WORSE?
As for time-limited, if you mean movie/TV rentals... what service currently does that well? Easily, painlessly, and cross-platform? I can't think of one. Are you sure Apple isn't at work on doing rentals right? I'd love it if they did.
The biggest issue isn't the AppleTV or the content providers.
It's Apple.
The content providers want a DRM system that allows time limited playback. Fairplay doesn't do that so they all use Microsoft DRM.
In the UK there's no content at all except for some US derived shows, mostly dross. There's no movies at all. And of course they charge us more here than the USA for less!
The only place i've ever heard of NBC wanting to raise thier prices was from apple. I have yet to see NBC actually do it. They offer their shows for free on thier site or on Amazon for a fee, but not for the $4.99 price mentioned by apple. Which makes me wonder if it was even true.
NBC execs have admitted that they wanted to try raising the price on Heroes to see if people would pay more although I forget what the number was.
I assume they haven't done it because of the backlash that happened when the news of a possible price increase got out. And I'm sure they realize that if they went to Amazon and raised prices on the switch, it would hurt Amazon and make it difficult for them to get established - the whole story would be about how Amazon charges more for TV episodes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB
Which makes a point against DRM, not Apple.
Again... what was Apple supposed to do? Offer no content?
And if you say 'license their DRM', you're just delusional about how capitalism works.
You just answered your own question. Apple definitely could license their DRM if they wanted, it seems ridiculous to say that their only alternative is to offer no content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
...and it DOES do 5.1 surround sound. The iTunes Store doesn't sell content to take advantage of these yet, but iTunes will sync real 5.1 to AppleTV, and AppleTV will play it properly.
That link uses an example of a wav test file. Is there any evidence of anyone successfully playing back a video file with 5.1 sound from the appleTV? I can't find one. And using that method, wouldn't the movie not be able to play back sound correctly in quicktime or iTunes, since it's a raw format?
Steve Jobs believes that he knows what is best for all of us. I don't think anything will ever change his mind.
This forum is filled with people who use Apple products, but don't drink the Kool Aid. SJ must think there's something wrong with us that we can't see the beauty of the path he has laid before us. To him we're that 5% who'll never be satisfied regardless of how realistic or practical our suggestions may be.
Neither Steve Jobs nor Apple ever thought Apple TV was best for "all of us." In fact they called it an experiment. It's a first step toward something that can BECOME great. A new option for obtaining video that will ultimately have great selection and flexibility--just not overnight. What's wrong with making that new option happen? It doesn't hurt us to have another option. It hurts us if Apple forces us to use it before it's ready. Apple has not done so. Apple never promoted AppleTV as being more than it is. It's a step on the way--and Apple alone can't make the journey quicker. They are fighting content owners who are stuck in the past.
AppleTV is not of much use to most people right now, and Apple never thought differently. Some people will find value in it now, but most people--like me--will only find value in the later steps that follow. I'm certainly not going to complain about the early steps that I'm not forced into using, when I know later steps will be much appreciated.
That link uses an example of a wav test file. Is there any evidence of anyone successfully playing back a video file with 5.1 sound from the appleTV? I can't find one. And using that method, wouldn't the movie not be able to play back sound correctly in quicktime or iTunes, since it's a raw format?
The point is that the hardware supports true surround sound, in spite of the common misunderstanding. You're right that there's no content that can (easily) be used that way. AppeTV is about downloads, and surround-sound content--like high def--is yet to come.
I'm sure Apple can add any necessary technical capabilities to the software--even dual-format audio in downloads--as long as the hardware is ready. The holdup is simply the content I think.
While being a little disappointed that so little recent effort appears to have gone into A-TV, I think the concept is brilliant and I use mine constantly. Combined with EyeTV it offers in my view the best way of watching TV shows/Movies recorded on a Mac, linking the computer to the living room. I think a few aspects could be thought of better, but overall I think it's a wonderful product. One detail I like is that you can interrupt the film at any time and jump back into the same spot you left from - something some DVD players (but not all) offer.
What could be thought of better is how to network it better with a hard disk. I have a nice collection now of recorded material which fills >500 Gb - no problem for an external hard disk. But to always have to run that via a computer is a little silly, why not enable A-TV to read straight from an external disk connected to its USB port? Also, why not allow it to update podcasts on its own without the computer in between? It's networked after all!
But otherwise it's a great product, and very stylish too. I hope more effort will go into it.
Apple could've bought and still could buy TiVo for a relative bargain-basement price. Imagine the headlines.
Apple TV with TiVo would fly off the shelves, even at $800 per box with a monthly subscription fee. Instead, TiVo will probably die a slow death and Apple TV will die within two years.
What does that have to do with Apple iTunes music being incompatible with other non-Apple music devices? But an mp3 anywhere else and it'll play on any other machine - as bought! And that includes iPods!
Selling unprotected mp3's is pretty recent.
Before that, other sales were just in a different DRM scheme that also had compatibility issues. Not long ago, you couldn't buy a major label song that would play on any machine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB
So you WANT exploding content?
Seems like Apple's on my side here.
I'd like rentals. Unless you can explain a way it would be possible to do that without "exploding" then yeah, I think I do want "exploding" content, just with terms that are reasonable. Obviously, rental content needs some way to ensure that I just don't keep the file forever, and it's not like netflix where there's a disk to mail back.
Steve Jobs believes that he knows what is best for all of us. I don't think anything will ever change his mind.
This forum is filled with people who use Apple products, but don't drink the Kool Aid. SJ must think there's something wrong with us that we can't see the beauty of the path he has laid before us. To him we're that 5% who'll never be satisfied regardless of how realistic or practical our suggestions may be.
Unfortunately for us Apple doesn't need us any more. Even if we all abandoned the platform Apple would continue to be immensely profitable selling gadgets and "cool" Macs to people with limited technical knowledge.
Trying to get Apple to make products for us is like asking Microsoft to release Office for Linux.
Awww.... Apple doesn't love us anymore.
Hell hath no fury... and all that I guess.
Luckily the other 95% are pretty f-ing thrilled with the direction Jobs has taken the company (including out of probably bankruptcy) and the products they're offering.
Write when you find that company that meets 100% of your needs. Bet they'll be around a long time.
I'd like rentals. Unless you can explain a way it would be possible to do that without "exploding" then yeah, I think I do want "exploding" content, just with terms that are reasonable. Obviously, rental content needs some way to ensure that I just don't keep the file forever, and it's not like netflix where there's a disk to mail back.
Sorry...Contexts got mixed. I was referring to audio content. I'm in the rental school for most video myself.
The point is that the hardware supports true surround sound, in spite of the common misunderstanding. You're right that there's no content that can (easily) be used that way. AppeTV is about downloads, and surround-sound content--like high def--is yet to come.
I'm sure Apple can add any necessary technical capabilities to the software--even dual-format audio in downloads--as long as the hardware is ready. The holdup is simply the content I think.
The hardware DOESN'T support true surround. The DTS wav files work because the AppleTV INCORRECTLY thinks it's playing a standard wav file, thus passes the data unmolested through the digital audio port. It's up to the user's receiver to CORRECTLY process that signal and actually extract the 5.1 audio.
Compare that with AAC 5.1 files which the AppleTV CORRECTLY identifies as 5.1 and then downmixes to Dolby Pro Logic before sending to the receiver thus destroying the discrete surround sound.
Also, the only method I have read of actually creating a movie file for AppleTV that contained a DTS track required the use of a Windows PC (and wasn't a particularly short process, basically encoding the audio and video separately and trying to get them to match back up).
The DTS wav files work because the AppleTV INCORRECTLY thinks it's playing a standard wav file, thus passes the data unmolested through the digital audio port. It's up to the user's receiver to CORRECTLY process that signal and actually extract the 5.1 audio.
Compare that with AAC 5.1 files which the AppleTV CORRECTLY identifies as 5.1 and then downmixes to Dolby Pro Logic before sending to the receiver thus destroying the discrete surround sound.
Thanks for the clarification.
I would still hope for surround-sound movies on iTunes, with software support when the time comes. But I don't expect it soon.
A DVD player slot loading drive would go along ways to help it out. If it had DVR, that would be nice. If it had a DVD player, I could kill two birds with one stone. I want the DVD player to belike DVD player on my Mac.
I have one and intend to purchase another as soon as I get another HD tv.
Neither Steve Jobs nor Apple ever thought Apple TV was best for "all of us." In fact they called it an experiment.
AppleTV is not of much use to most people right now, and Apple never thought differently. Some people will find value in it now, but most people--like me--will only find value in the later steps that follow. I'm certainly not going to complain about the early steps that I'm not forced into using, when I know later steps will be much appreciated.
That's BS. If it was an experiment than it should not have been sold.
Is the iPhone an experiment?
Stop defending something that you don't know anything about with such esoteric rhetoric. Who sells something on the market as a prototype for people to buy and fool them into thinking it's a finished product? No one is forcing anyone into using or buying anything but the promise was that Apple TV was going to be great product and That hasn't fanned out.
Comments
Then your beef is with the music industry execs who mandate that DRM be in the music in the first place....
What does that have to do with Apple iTunes music being incompatible with other non-Apple music devices? Buy an mp3 anywhere else and it'll play on any other machine - as bought! And that includes iPods!
The biggest issue isn't the AppleTV or the content providers.
It's Apple.
The content providers want a DRM system that allows time limited playback. Fairplay doesn't do that so they all use Microsoft DRM.
In the UK there's no content at all except for some US derived shows, mostly dross. There's no movies at all. And of course they charge us more here than the USA for less!
Apple is it's own worst enemy here.
Just to be clear--are you saying that the content owners and their various existing legal agreements are not what dictates what countries Apple can sell TV shows in? Apple is the one deciding what markets a show can sell to?
And are you saying Apple is the problem for not letting the content holders make DRM even WORSE?
As for time-limited, if you mean movie/TV rentals... what service currently does that well? Easily, painlessly, and cross-platform? I can't think of one. Are you sure Apple isn't at work on doing rentals right? I'd love it if they did.
The biggest issue isn't the AppleTV or the content providers.
It's Apple.
The content providers want a DRM system that allows time limited playback. Fairplay doesn't do that so they all use Microsoft DRM.
In the UK there's no content at all except for some US derived shows, mostly dross. There's no movies at all. And of course they charge us more here than the USA for less!
Apple is it's own worst enemy here.
So you WANT exploding content?
Seems like Apple's on my side here.
The only place i've ever heard of NBC wanting to raise thier prices was from apple. I have yet to see NBC actually do it. They offer their shows for free on thier site or on Amazon for a fee, but not for the $4.99 price mentioned by apple. Which makes me wonder if it was even true.
NBC execs have admitted that they wanted to try raising the price on Heroes to see if people would pay more although I forget what the number was.
I assume they haven't done it because of the backlash that happened when the news of a possible price increase got out. And I'm sure they realize that if they went to Amazon and raised prices on the switch, it would hurt Amazon and make it difficult for them to get established - the whole story would be about how Amazon charges more for TV episodes.
Which makes a point against DRM, not Apple.
Again... what was Apple supposed to do? Offer no content?
And if you say 'license their DRM', you're just delusional about how capitalism works.
You just answered your own question. Apple definitely could license their DRM if they wanted, it seems ridiculous to say that their only alternative is to offer no content.
...and it DOES do 5.1 surround sound. The iTunes Store doesn't sell content to take advantage of these yet, but iTunes will sync real 5.1 to AppleTV, and AppleTV will play it properly.
That link uses an example of a wav test file. Is there any evidence of anyone successfully playing back a video file with 5.1 sound from the appleTV? I can't find one. And using that method, wouldn't the movie not be able to play back sound correctly in quicktime or iTunes, since it's a raw format?
Steve Jobs believes that he knows what is best for all of us. I don't think anything will ever change his mind.
This forum is filled with people who use Apple products, but don't drink the Kool Aid. SJ must think there's something wrong with us that we can't see the beauty of the path he has laid before us. To him we're that 5% who'll never be satisfied regardless of how realistic or practical our suggestions may be.
Neither Steve Jobs nor Apple ever thought Apple TV was best for "all of us." In fact they called it an experiment. It's a first step toward something that can BECOME great. A new option for obtaining video that will ultimately have great selection and flexibility--just not overnight. What's wrong with making that new option happen? It doesn't hurt us to have another option. It hurts us if Apple forces us to use it before it's ready. Apple has not done so. Apple never promoted AppleTV as being more than it is. It's a step on the way--and Apple alone can't make the journey quicker. They are fighting content owners who are stuck in the past.
AppleTV is not of much use to most people right now, and Apple never thought differently. Some people will find value in it now, but most people--like me--will only find value in the later steps that follow. I'm certainly not going to complain about the early steps that I'm not forced into using, when I know later steps will be much appreciated.
That link uses an example of a wav test file. Is there any evidence of anyone successfully playing back a video file with 5.1 sound from the appleTV? I can't find one. And using that method, wouldn't the movie not be able to play back sound correctly in quicktime or iTunes, since it's a raw format?
The point is that the hardware supports true surround sound, in spite of the common misunderstanding. You're right that there's no content that can (easily) be used that way. AppeTV is about downloads, and surround-sound content--like high def--is yet to come.
I'm sure Apple can add any necessary technical capabilities to the software--even dual-format audio in downloads--as long as the hardware is ready. The holdup is simply the content I think.
you are clearly wrong and clearly a troll
Let me get this right-Your username is Walter Slocombe and I'm the troll??!?!!?!?? LOL
You spot it; you got it.
What could be thought of better is how to network it better with a hard disk. I have a nice collection now of recorded material which fills >500 Gb - no problem for an external hard disk. But to always have to run that via a computer is a little silly, why not enable A-TV to read straight from an external disk connected to its USB port? Also, why not allow it to update podcasts on its own without the computer in between? It's networked after all!
But otherwise it's a great product, and very stylish too. I hope more effort will go into it.
Apple TV with TiVo would fly off the shelves, even at $800 per box with a monthly subscription fee. Instead, TiVo will probably die a slow death and Apple TV will die within two years.
What a shame!
What does that have to do with Apple iTunes music being incompatible with other non-Apple music devices? But an mp3 anywhere else and it'll play on any other machine - as bought! And that includes iPods!
Selling unprotected mp3's is pretty recent.
Before that, other sales were just in a different DRM scheme that also had compatibility issues. Not long ago, you couldn't buy a major label song that would play on any machine.
So you WANT exploding content?
Seems like Apple's on my side here.
I'd like rentals. Unless you can explain a way it would be possible to do that without "exploding" then yeah, I think I do want "exploding" content, just with terms that are reasonable. Obviously, rental content needs some way to ensure that I just don't keep the file forever, and it's not like netflix where there's a disk to mail back.
Apple can you hear me?
Your username is Walter Slocombe and I'm the troll??!?!!?!?? LOL
Oh, don't take it personally. After all, an anagram of his name is "latecomers blow."
Steve Jobs believes that he knows what is best for all of us. I don't think anything will ever change his mind.
This forum is filled with people who use Apple products, but don't drink the Kool Aid. SJ must think there's something wrong with us that we can't see the beauty of the path he has laid before us. To him we're that 5% who'll never be satisfied regardless of how realistic or practical our suggestions may be.
Unfortunately for us Apple doesn't need us any more. Even if we all abandoned the platform Apple would continue to be immensely profitable selling gadgets and "cool" Macs to people with limited technical knowledge.
Trying to get Apple to make products for us is like asking Microsoft to release Office for Linux.
Awww.... Apple doesn't love us anymore.
Hell hath no fury... and all that I guess.
Luckily the other 95% are pretty f-ing thrilled with the direction Jobs has taken the company (including out of probably bankruptcy) and the products they're offering.
Write when you find that company that meets 100% of your needs. Bet they'll be around a long time.
I'd like rentals. Unless you can explain a way it would be possible to do that without "exploding" then yeah, I think I do want "exploding" content, just with terms that are reasonable. Obviously, rental content needs some way to ensure that I just don't keep the file forever, and it's not like netflix where there's a disk to mail back.
Sorry...Contexts got mixed. I was referring to audio content. I'm in the rental school for most video myself.
The point is that the hardware supports true surround sound, in spite of the common misunderstanding. You're right that there's no content that can (easily) be used that way. AppeTV is about downloads, and surround-sound content--like high def--is yet to come.
I'm sure Apple can add any necessary technical capabilities to the software--even dual-format audio in downloads--as long as the hardware is ready. The holdup is simply the content I think.
The hardware DOESN'T support true surround. The DTS wav files work because the AppleTV INCORRECTLY thinks it's playing a standard wav file, thus passes the data unmolested through the digital audio port. It's up to the user's receiver to CORRECTLY process that signal and actually extract the 5.1 audio.
Compare that with AAC 5.1 files which the AppleTV CORRECTLY identifies as 5.1 and then downmixes to Dolby Pro Logic before sending to the receiver thus destroying the discrete surround sound.
Also, the only method I have read of actually creating a movie file for AppleTV that contained a DTS track required the use of a Windows PC (and wasn't a particularly short process, basically encoding the audio and video separately and trying to get them to match back up).
The DTS wav files work because the AppleTV INCORRECTLY thinks it's playing a standard wav file, thus passes the data unmolested through the digital audio port. It's up to the user's receiver to CORRECTLY process that signal and actually extract the 5.1 audio.
Compare that with AAC 5.1 files which the AppleTV CORRECTLY identifies as 5.1 and then downmixes to Dolby Pro Logic before sending to the receiver thus destroying the discrete surround sound.
Thanks for the clarification.
I would still hope for surround-sound movies on iTunes, with software support when the time comes. But I don't expect it soon.
I have one and intend to purchase another as soon as I get another HD tv.
Neither Steve Jobs nor Apple ever thought Apple TV was best for "all of us." In fact they called it an experiment.
AppleTV is not of much use to most people right now, and Apple never thought differently. Some people will find value in it now, but most people--like me--will only find value in the later steps that follow. I'm certainly not going to complain about the early steps that I'm not forced into using, when I know later steps will be much appreciated.
That's BS. If it was an experiment than it should not have been sold.
Is the iPhone an experiment?
Stop defending something that you don't know anything about with such esoteric rhetoric. Who sells something on the market as a prototype for people to buy and fool them into thinking it's a finished product? No one is forcing anyone into using or buying anything but the promise was that Apple TV was going to be great product and That hasn't fanned out.