Sure did. All 197 of them. Everyone commenting about whether 1080p or 720p is better, why, Blu-Support, and how Apple should do this, and should do that, which way the market is going, etc.
But not a single person pointing out the headline is just plain incorrect. How can Apple be "dropping" something they never supported to begin with? That is my argument. The headline is misleading. It should say "Apple still not adding 1080p support with new AppleTV" or something like that.
...But not a single person pointing out the headline is just plain incorrect. How can Apple be "dropping" something they never supported to begin with? That is my argument. The headline is misleading. It should say "Apple still not adding 1080p support with new AppleTV" or something like that.
Whoops. I see I missed Gordy's original comment on the same issue. Apologies. Well, at least two people came up with the same observation \
Because people claim streaming/downloads are a competitor to Blu-ray,a nd since I have poor bandwidth Blu-ray is my choice of product as I prefer the quality.
A competitor in convenience not raw quality.
Blu-Ray would need 60Mbps sustained to stream down as it is. They could get away with under 20Mbps but current itunes movies only need under 4Mbps, which is how the FCC define a broadband connection.
In the interests of accessibility, Apple would offer 720p streaming well within this limit to allow for drops and can scale it up as they see fit in future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
I didn't realise you were my mother, I can sit as close, or far away from the TV as I choose.
Sure you can but you can't expect the rest of the world to accommodate your choice if it's not feasible to do it. You can tell Apple that you aren't happy with the iPhone 4 display because you choose to hold it 3 inches from your eyes. It doesn't mean they are going to recognise any urgency in upping the resolution again.
If you look close, you can see the difference. If you sit back to normal computer viewing distance, the difference between 720p and 1080p is noticeable but slight, 480p is clearly blurry. Back at 8ft, the top two slices don't look much different in terms of sharpness.
No doubt there are people with projectors making an 80" picture complaining that 1080p isn't enough while sitting 3 feet away from it.
Once broadband speeds catch up, Apple can easily bump up the resolution for people who are able to benefit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
It won't combat online piracy, the reason most people pirate movies are because they don't want to pay for them, getting them to buy isn't going to fix it.
It depends on the pricing model. If they have a subscription or pay per minute, the ability to simply get in from work, click on a movie and start watching is better than P2P methods. Like with Blu-Ray, even pirates using P2P have to prepare their choice in advance and then watch it later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
So they can call it iTV everywhere but the UK. and call it something else in UK only. not a big deal in the global scheme of things.
They can also license the name like they did with the iPad.
Apple have obviously tested the streaming capabilities and quality as well as looked into the use of the iTV name so I reckon they have a good idea of where they want to go with this. I personally think the concept is entirely sound and an extremely viable product, far better than the current ATV.
In true Apple minimalism, this would essentially be a modem for your TV. The full internet is one place that TVs haven't done right yet but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to browse the web from your sofa. The magic trackpad would be a great accessory for it. Imagine there being a large cursor on screen that you can use to click on iOS icons and use two fingers to scroll and zoom in. This is one reason why 720p makes sense too - 1080p would be tiny to see text on.
I think this will be the point ATV stops being a hobby.
1080p streaming isn’t feasible for most people. Maybe it will be in a few years.
Streaming has nothing to do with it, it's the marketing feature of 1080p that's important.
Stream 720p into the box if you like, stream whatever, just deliver 1080p to the set. Upconvert. It needs to be there to support full sized 1080p movies, too - maybe you ripped something & fed it into iTunes. Certainly, we'll be able to move our cache of movies into & out of it, I can't imagine that Apple would lock this out.
To really sell & be recognized as supporting higher quality video, it has to output 1080p. That's what's being discussed.
As far as the 1080p up conversion topic goes I am pulling that off right now with my current Apple TV and my Onkyo TX-SR608 receiver I recently bought. I have the HDMI of the Apple TV running thru the receiver then to the TV and it is up converting the movies to 1080p. Well worth the $490 if you want a theater system.
I'm wondering thou if Apple is going to allow the new iTV to sync with iTunes and play the movies I have on my computer like I currently do. I'm going to be hating it if Apple forces people into using the cloud system that they in the process of setting up. Nobody is going to want to buy a device for $99 then be told "Oh you have to pay a monthly fee for it to function with our cloud sync system for it to work properly". But it won't surprise me that Apple will do that. And I do hope they continue to support the current Apple TV after this new device is released. I don't really care if I can play movies or shows from Netflix or Hulu.
... all your considerations about 1080p are untrue.
In Europe we have NOTHING coming in 720p. Everything is in 1080p.
The only videos we could get in 720p come from the US.
If you're talking about the idea of streaming in 720p, nobody there will buy any streaming in 720p except the US HDTV series.
For real cinema, Apple won't sell anything in Europe because we know the difference between 720p and 1080p when you get at least a 40" screen..
Are you sure about this? or is it 1080i, like iTV's HD broadcasts and the BBC's HD broadcasts?
In the US, broadcasts are pretty much all 720p or 1080i - over the air are MPEG-2, which is far less efficient than today's h.264. But there is little, if any, 1080p content other than Blu-ray.
Are you sure about this? or is it 1080i, like iTV's HD broadcasts and the BBC's HD broadcasts?
In the US, broadcasts are pretty much all 720p or 1080i - over the air are MPEG-2, which is far less efficient than today's h.264. But there is little, if any, 1080p content other than Blu-ray.
DirecTV has a bunch of HD PPV channels in 1080p. My assumption is that they're doing 1080/24p to save on bandwidth.
it is only a handful of On Demand movies, and to access most of them in 1080p, you need an internet-connected receiver.
the fact that they wont estimate the number of actual movies they offer in 1080p makes me assume it isn't many. and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
it is only a handful of On Demand movies, and to access most of them in 1080p, you need an internet-connected receiver.
the fact that they wont estimate the number of actual movies they offer in 1080p makes me assume it isn't many. and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
That is weird that the link you provided only refers to OnDemand programming. Their guide shows 2 PPV movies as well. You are right though, it isn't many. As to your last point, I rather take the native 1080/24p stream over the 1080/60i stream with the TV doing 3/2 pulldown if I have a choice.
and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
I was under the impression that 1080p capable TVs de-interlace 1080/60i programming to 1080/60p, not to 1080/24p.
In true Apple minimalism, this would essentially be a modem for your TV. The full internet is one place that TVs haven't done right yet but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to browse the web from your sofa. The magic trackpad would be a great accessory for it. Imagine there being a large cursor on screen that you can use to click on iOS icons and use two fingers to scroll and zoom in. This is one reason why 720p makes sense too - 1080p would be tiny to see text on.
I think this will be the point ATV stops being a hobby.
It appears the rumored chip can output either 720p & 1080p over the same HDMI iO. It would be simple to use whatever resolution looks better for the menus and then, whatever output resolution looks better for the video, allowing the user to override if desired. If the box auto-selected or chose 480i for my movie but I wanted 1080p, I could should be able to order the box to provide this. But the menus can be anything, it doesn't much matter as long they look good. Nobody will care.
Some people will want the internet on their TV, but many others won't. Internet enabled TV's have traditionally not been big sellers and not a successful product segment for one reason or another. Complexity is an issue, I think; availability of quality high speed internet accessibility is a big issue; and, I also think there's a lot of folks who - after working all day - just don't want more of it in their family room at night.
However, virtually all HDTV owners will want 1080p output for any HDTV-attached box they are considering purchasing.
...However, virtually all HDTV owners will want 1080p output for any HDTV-attached box they are considering purchasing.
Agreed. It is probably the de-facto spec that virtually everyone looks for when shopping for a new flat-panel TV. Getting peripherals to go along with that spec is simply the logical extension of it.
Agreed. It is probably the de-facto spec that virtually everyone looks for when shopping for a new flat-panel TV. Getting peripherals to go along with that spec is simply the logical extension of it.
they have a list of services and bitrates. I'd say only the 8Mbps PSN store has an acceptable 1080p bitrate. Netflix are sticking to 720p this year. The Zune 1080p uses a lower bitrate than Apple's 720p.
720p certainly won't stop people from buying the iTV given that they will already own cable and other services that stream 720p.
THE TOUCHPAD in your livingroom with the Apps and iTV. Apple has found the next best thing to the holy grail. Games internet and the whole ball of wax.
they have a list of services and bitrates. I'd say only the 8Mbps PSN store has an acceptable 1080p bitrate. Netflix are sticking to 720p this year. The Zune 1080p uses a lower bitrate than Apple's 720p.
720p certainly won't stop people from buying the iTV given that they will already own cable and other services that stream 720p.
I don't disagree with you. All I was saying is that the 1st thing people look for when buying a new flat panel TV is if it's 1080p. It only stands to reason that they'll (incorrectly) assume that all their peripherals will have to be 1080p as well. I've been a custom A/V integrator since 1994 and one thing I've learned is that people will latch onto whatever the latest hyped feature is at the time. It was 1080p last year and the year before that and now 3D is trying to be the next "must have" feature. BTW, I'm sure you realize this, but most people don't even know what resolution their content is arriving in. They just know what they're told to want or need.
Comments
Wow dude. Do you read the comments?
Sure did. All 197 of them. Everyone commenting about whether 1080p or 720p is better, why, Blu-Support, and how Apple should do this, and should do that, which way the market is going, etc.
But not a single person pointing out the headline is just plain incorrect. How can Apple be "dropping" something they never supported to begin with? That is my argument. The headline is misleading. It should say "Apple still not adding 1080p support with new AppleTV" or something like that.
...But not a single person pointing out the headline is just plain incorrect. How can Apple be "dropping" something they never supported to begin with? That is my argument. The headline is misleading. It should say "Apple still not adding 1080p support with new AppleTV" or something like that.
Whoops. I see I missed Gordy's original comment on the same issue. Apologies. Well, at least two people came up with the same observation
Because people claim streaming/downloads are a competitor to Blu-ray,a nd since I have poor bandwidth Blu-ray is my choice of product as I prefer the quality.
A competitor in convenience not raw quality.
Blu-Ray would need 60Mbps sustained to stream down as it is. They could get away with under 20Mbps but current itunes movies only need under 4Mbps, which is how the FCC define a broadband connection.
In the interests of accessibility, Apple would offer 720p streaming well within this limit to allow for drops and can scale it up as they see fit in future.
I didn't realise you were my mother, I can sit as close, or far away from the TV as I choose.
Sure you can but you can't expect the rest of the world to accommodate your choice if it's not feasible to do it. You can tell Apple that you aren't happy with the iPhone 4 display because you choose to hold it 3 inches from your eyes. It doesn't mean they are going to recognise any urgency in upping the resolution again.
Here's an image that compares the resolutions:
http://blog.isnoop.net/wp-content/up...view_large.png
If you look close, you can see the difference. If you sit back to normal computer viewing distance, the difference between 720p and 1080p is noticeable but slight, 480p is clearly blurry. Back at 8ft, the top two slices don't look much different in terms of sharpness.
No doubt there are people with projectors making an 80" picture complaining that 1080p isn't enough while sitting 3 feet away from it.
Once broadband speeds catch up, Apple can easily bump up the resolution for people who are able to benefit.
It won't combat online piracy, the reason most people pirate movies are because they don't want to pay for them, getting them to buy isn't going to fix it.
It depends on the pricing model. If they have a subscription or pay per minute, the ability to simply get in from work, click on a movie and start watching is better than P2P methods. Like with Blu-Ray, even pirates using P2P have to prepare their choice in advance and then watch it later.
So they can call it iTV everywhere but the UK. and call it something else in UK only. not a big deal in the global scheme of things.
They can also license the name like they did with the iPad.
Apple have obviously tested the streaming capabilities and quality as well as looked into the use of the iTV name so I reckon they have a good idea of where they want to go with this. I personally think the concept is entirely sound and an extremely viable product, far better than the current ATV.
In true Apple minimalism, this would essentially be a modem for your TV. The full internet is one place that TVs haven't done right yet but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to browse the web from your sofa. The magic trackpad would be a great accessory for it. Imagine there being a large cursor on screen that you can use to click on iOS icons and use two fingers to scroll and zoom in. This is one reason why 720p makes sense too - 1080p would be tiny to see text on.
I think this will be the point ATV stops being a hobby.
1080p streaming isn’t feasible for most people. Maybe it will be in a few years.
Streaming has nothing to do with it, it's the marketing feature of 1080p that's important.
Stream 720p into the box if you like, stream whatever, just deliver 1080p to the set. Upconvert. It needs to be there to support full sized 1080p movies, too - maybe you ripped something & fed it into iTunes. Certainly, we'll be able to move our cache of movies into & out of it, I can't imagine that Apple would lock this out.
To really sell & be recognized as supporting higher quality video, it has to output 1080p. That's what's being discussed.
I'm wondering thou if Apple is going to allow the new iTV to sync with iTunes and play the movies I have on my computer like I currently do. I'm going to be hating it if Apple forces people into using the cloud system that they in the process of setting up. Nobody is going to want to buy a device for $99 then be told "Oh you have to pay a monthly fee for it to function with our cloud sync system for it to work properly". But it won't surprise me that Apple will do that. And I do hope they continue to support the current Apple TV after this new device is released. I don't really care if I can play movies or shows from Netflix or Hulu.
Most consumers can't even tell the difference between 720p, 1080p and upscaled DVD ???????
Are you kidding ??? Just open your eyes ....
The difference between 720p and 1080p is just HUGE !!!!!!!!!!!!
completely depends on your viewing distance:
http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
simply put, at specific viewing distances the extra resolution loses its benefits. this is all based on the resolving power of the human eye:
http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter
... all your considerations about 1080p are untrue.
In Europe we have NOTHING coming in 720p. Everything is in 1080p.
The only videos we could get in 720p come from the US.
If you're talking about the idea of streaming in 720p, nobody there will buy any streaming in 720p except the US HDTV series.
For real cinema, Apple won't sell anything in Europe because we know the difference between 720p and 1080p when you get at least a 40" screen..
Are you sure about this? or is it 1080i, like iTV's HD broadcasts and the BBC's HD broadcasts?
In the US, broadcasts are pretty much all 720p or 1080i - over the air are MPEG-2, which is far less efficient than today's h.264. But there is little, if any, 1080p content other than Blu-ray.
I would say an upscaled DVD is pretty close to on par with Broadcast HD.
That doesn't say much for broadcast HD.
Are you sure about this? or is it 1080i, like iTV's HD broadcasts and the BBC's HD broadcasts?
In the US, broadcasts are pretty much all 720p or 1080i - over the air are MPEG-2, which is far less efficient than today's h.264. But there is little, if any, 1080p content other than Blu-ray.
DirecTV has a bunch of HD PPV channels in 1080p. My assumption is that they're doing 1080/24p to save on bandwidth.
Jó napot.
DirecTV has a bunch of HD PPV channels in 1080p. My assumption is that they're doing 1080/24p to save on bandwidth.
Jó napot.
interesting. they do - good for them. according to their website:
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global...ssetId=3720002
it is only a handful of On Demand movies, and to access most of them in 1080p, you need an internet-connected receiver.
the fact that they wont estimate the number of actual movies they offer in 1080p makes me assume it isn't many. and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
interesting. they do - good for them. according to their website:
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global...ssetId=3720002
it is only a handful of On Demand movies, and to access most of them in 1080p, you need an internet-connected receiver.
the fact that they wont estimate the number of actual movies they offer in 1080p makes me assume it isn't many. and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
That is weird that the link you provided only refers to OnDemand programming. Their guide shows 2 PPV movies as well. You are right though, it isn't many. As to your last point, I rather take the native 1080/24p stream over the 1080/60i stream with the TV doing 3/2 pulldown if I have a choice.
and they are 1080p24, which is already available via 1080i60 via 3:2 pulldown, which is usually flagged hollywood 24p features, so 1080p capable tv's can convert 1080i back to 1080p24.
I was under the impression that 1080p capable TVs de-interlace 1080/60i programming to 1080/60p, not to 1080/24p.
I don't think that will matter too much given that iphone.com, ipad.com etc don't point to Apple websites
Sorry but iphone.com is registered to Apple Inc. and redirects to apple.com.
In true Apple minimalism, this would essentially be a modem for your TV. The full internet is one place that TVs haven't done right yet but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to browse the web from your sofa. The magic trackpad would be a great accessory for it. Imagine there being a large cursor on screen that you can use to click on iOS icons and use two fingers to scroll and zoom in. This is one reason why 720p makes sense too - 1080p would be tiny to see text on.
I think this will be the point ATV stops being a hobby.
It appears the rumored chip can output either 720p & 1080p over the same HDMI iO. It would be simple to use whatever resolution looks better for the menus and then, whatever output resolution looks better for the video, allowing the user to override if desired. If the box auto-selected or chose 480i for my movie but I wanted 1080p, I could should be able to order the box to provide this. But the menus can be anything, it doesn't much matter as long they look good. Nobody will care.
Some people will want the internet on their TV, but many others won't. Internet enabled TV's have traditionally not been big sellers and not a successful product segment for one reason or another. Complexity is an issue, I think; availability of quality high speed internet accessibility is a big issue; and, I also think there's a lot of folks who - after working all day - just don't want more of it in their family room at night.
However, virtually all HDTV owners will want 1080p output for any HDTV-attached box they are considering purchasing.
...However, virtually all HDTV owners will want 1080p output for any HDTV-attached box they are considering purchasing.
Agreed. It is probably the de-facto spec that virtually everyone looks for when shopping for a new flat-panel TV. Getting peripherals to go along with that spec is simply the logical extension of it.
Agreed. It is probably the de-facto spec that virtually everyone looks for when shopping for a new flat-panel TV. Getting peripherals to go along with that spec is simply the logical extension of it.
About half-way down this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_video
they have a list of services and bitrates. I'd say only the 8Mbps PSN store has an acceptable 1080p bitrate. Netflix are sticking to 720p this year. The Zune 1080p uses a lower bitrate than Apple's 720p.
720p certainly won't stop people from buying the iTV given that they will already own cable and other services that stream 720p.
About half-way down this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_video
they have a list of services and bitrates. I'd say only the 8Mbps PSN store has an acceptable 1080p bitrate. Netflix are sticking to 720p this year. The Zune 1080p uses a lower bitrate than Apple's 720p.
720p certainly won't stop people from buying the iTV given that they will already own cable and other services that stream 720p.
I don't disagree with you. All I was saying is that the 1st thing people look for when buying a new flat panel TV is if it's 1080p. It only stands to reason that they'll (incorrectly) assume that all their peripherals will have to be 1080p as well. I've been a custom A/V integrator since 1994 and one thing I've learned is that people will latch onto whatever the latest hyped feature is at the time. It was 1080p last year and the year before that and now 3D is trying to be the next "must have" feature. BTW, I'm sure you realize this, but most people don't even know what resolution their content is arriving in. They just know what they're told to want or need.