It's obvious that content providers want ATV to fail because, like the short-sighted music industry, they fear Apple's volume over cost-per-unit business model. The only sure solution I can see is for Apple to buy a media company (other than ABC and Fox). Then they can do what is being done to them--deny content access to their competitors.
Why doesn't Apple allow the ATV to play more codecs/video formats like VLC? Currently the ATV is only good for playing over-priced content from the iTunes Store.
Think back to the early days of iTunes. I think it became successful before there even was an iTunes store because people either ripped their music off of CDs or downloaded it freely off the internet. A lot of that happens today with video and movies, but its in formats the ATV can't play. Expand the gamut of playable formats, and the ATV becomes an awesome playing device at a price competitive with Roku and Boxee. It will then end up in more homes and ill give Apple more leverage with the studios which currently overprice their content. $4.99 rental - no way!
Yes, it is conflating two things but it still proves the point that you need a capable remote to play any real game 'on' the AppleTV.
And Apple is simply not developing a separate remote when they already have the iPod touch (get a 8 GB 1st gen used iPod touch if you will). And they won't allow third-party remotes because this would not provide a unified user experience as each remote would act differently.
You're now arguing my point. You responded to my post to AppleStud where he suggested that an AppleTV SDK and App Store was pointless when you can mirror content via AirPlay. I disagree with him and you disagreed with me so your position can't switch to an iOS-based iDevice being used a basic remote, not as mirrored content, as that is part of the core statement.
I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
We use the ATV so much we are thinking of canceling TV from Verizon. We only watch the news and that's even rare these days. Netflix is awesome on a large HD TV screen from ATV screen via FiOS. I read many complaining they get signal break up and buffering issues on Netflix but we never do.
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
Anyone know the average bit rates between the different streaming services/sites?
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help on Netflix. I hear you on iTunes that is great. Unless Netflix service varies in different regions ... we are in SW Florida.
We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help on Netflix. I hear you on iTunes that is great. Unless Netflix service varies in different regions ... we are in SW Florida.
I wonder if there are ports that need to be forwarded for Netlifx streaming on the AppleTV for 3rd-party routers.
What content does AppleTV have that GoogleTV doesn't? (This is a genuine question. Not owning either device, I am not sure what the answer is).
From the outside looking in, it really seems to me the biggest issue for Google TV is a terrible interface, which requires the usage of a keyboard, for it to be useful.
GoogleTV seems to add complexity, while AppleTV reduces it. In the living room, adding complexity is a complete no-no.
I have never owned a Google TV but own both the original Apple TV and the new gen Apple TV. From my understanding of articles I've read and the original Kevin Bacon commercials for Google TV, it works as a aggregator. Search "Kevin Bacon" and it will tell you any movies, television shows, etc. with Kevin Bacon not only on regular broadcast television (cable included) but also available internet content (Hulu, youtube, etc.). The problem with it is that Google didn't work with content providers so most of the online goodies are currently blocked from view. This makes the Google TV basically a DVR and channel guide.
Apple TV on the other hand is a souped up ipod for your television. Whatever is in your itunes can be played on your TV, you can rent TV shows and movies through itunes, there's netflix, sports streaming channels, youtube, podcasts (which has NPR BTW. Somebody mentioned that as a want which is actually already provided), photo galleries from your computer, mobileme and flickr.
I have given both versions as gifts and the people really liked them a lot.
Oh, also, someone mentioned not being able to play different codecs like VLC. Actually, this is where airplay shines. Any app on your ipad that plays multiple video codecs can flick the video to your Apple TV which eliminates that shortcoming.
One more thing (lol), I doubt there will be an SDK for apps on this until there is a hardware refresh. The current model has only 8GB of storage used for buffering video. After two or three apps stored on there, I could see some major problems with streaming.
Doesn't matter because your eyes are not quick enough to see that. Your eyes will see 1080i/60 as 1080p/30, therefore you will have problem only with fast moving objects.
On topic, it doesn't surprise me at all. Google always release half-baked product on their 1st version. Too bad there's nothing it can copy from Apple here to speed the process.
let's not pretend we're all videophiles, here. Or that we all have unlimited bandwidth and super-high speed connections. 720p is plenty for most people.
720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.
And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.
Holy shit. This is pretty banana insane. Nintendo is getting destroyed by apple on handheld and now even on console area. I think Wee U will be a fail unless their price point is 199.
give me a future-proof 1080p capability and I'd buy one in a second ...
Sadly there is no such thing.
1080p is already "low res" on some of the monitors you can buy today, and there are likely just as many higher res formats above it in the future as there are below it today.
One very important thing is frame rate. Anyone with good eyesight can see flicker and stutter even in an uncompressed 1080p format when the camera moves, simply because they eye can detect higher frame rates than 30 or 60 fps. Don't you want to go to a movie someday and have the camera pan across a gigantic detailed scene and actually be able to see the elements clearly?
Here's hoping we FINALLY get an update that enables viewing iTunes LP and iTunes Extras content. That stuff seems made for the Apple TV and it's been nearly a year and it still can't play content that the old Apple TV can. How hard can it be? C'mon, Apple!
[...] It's guiding net profit of 20 billion yen, down 82 percent from its previous outlook, on sales of 900 billion yen -- blaming the skid on a shortage of hit titles for the Wii and 3DS. [...]
A shortage of hit titles, eh? There can only be two reasons for that:
1. Nintendo and their 3rd party developers don't know how to make hit games any more.
2. There aren't enough games for Wii because it's difficult to develop for Wii.
I suspect the latter. The word "difficult" is overloaded here.
You run into the first barrier to Wii development immediately. Nintendo won't even talk to you unless you're a well-established game developer with a long track record of successes. The EAs of the world are "in." You average iOS game developer working at home is "out."
Then, if you meet Nintendo's requirements, you need to buy the proprietary development software and hardware tools. $2k -> $10k on a sliding scale.
After that, you're under NDA and although I have only very briefly done any coding for any console, I hear that coding for today's consoles is tough. Especially as you try to wring out every last erg of performance using assembly code, etc.
Compare all that with Apple's iOS and Mac developer program. Sign up free if you just want to play around. Pay $100/year if you want to submit apps to the iOS App Store or Mac App Store. Yes, you need to toe the line on many App Store rules. But the development environment is relatively straightforward. Apple provides ample reference guides, tutorials, and sample projects. The Xcode development environment is free, and it works for Mac, iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.
Nintendo seems to be acting like a movie studio. Cherry-picking what they perceive to be the best developers and games the way movie studios (attempt to) cherry-pick the best directors and movie projects. They want a blockbuster every time. Doesn't always happen.
Apple acts more like a gigantic film school. They just tell their students to make the best films they can. There is, of course, a huge number of average students and there is a huge number of average projects. But there will occasionally be the over-achieving Spielberg or Lucas or Fincher.
For Nintendo, having hit titles is a do-or-die imperative. Hit titles are what sell Wii consoles, and they are relatively few and far between. On the other hand, the App Store isn't the only reason why people buy Apple products. All those apps add significant value to iOS devices and Macs, to be sure, but they are only one component in the Apple ecosystem (iTunes, AirPlay, and soon iCloud etc.)
I think people underestimate the value of having many good and great developers working on apps for a platform. The console gaming world doesn't allow for large numbers of developers to write titles for the consoles out there, as far as I know. And that will be one of the constraints to the consoles' success.
I've purchased three aTV's-- one first generation and two second generation. Two of the units are for a digital sign in our office... first one died after a few years, so on to the second generation.
The one at home... is cute and all... but there really isn't much content available. Wife and I were going to rent a movie... it comes up... but not available for rental. So, we switch back to the STB and watch something from FiOS... and let the aTV collect dust for another month or two.
Maybe it is different for people that use Netflix, but from where I sit it needs to offer more than "just TV." The only way to get there is with a dedicated SDK and the seamless ability to interact with other iOS devices and storage. Then, maybe it would also live up to its prospects for a digital sign driver at the same time.
The way AirDrop makes a secure, direct connection between Macs gives me hope that the same tech will be used to make a secure direct connection between an iOS-based iDevice and AppleTV for keynote and other apps for use in schools and businesses, instead of passing through a router.
720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.
And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.
And it's actually a good stream. I'm usually quite picky on video quality but haven't had any issues with it. If it's an epic movie I really want to see perfectly I still get the Blu ray. But if it's just a comedy I want to rent it is more than acceptable.
Comments
Apple doesn't "do" content creation...
But Steve Jobs does. And quite successfully.
It's obvious that content providers want ATV to fail because, like the short-sighted music industry, they fear Apple's volume over cost-per-unit business model. The only sure solution I can see is for Apple to buy a media company (other than ABC and Fox). Then they can do what is being done to them--deny content access to their competitors.
Why doesn't Apple allow the ATV to play more codecs/video formats like VLC? Currently the ATV is only good for playing over-priced content from the iTunes Store.
Think back to the early days of iTunes. I think it became successful before there even was an iTunes store because people either ripped their music off of CDs or downloaded it freely off the internet. A lot of that happens today with video and movies, but its in formats the ATV can't play. Expand the gamut of playable formats, and the ATV becomes an awesome playing device at a price competitive with Roku and Boxee. It will then end up in more homes and ill give Apple more leverage with the studios which currently overprice their content. $4.99 rental - no way!
Yes, it is conflating two things but it still proves the point that you need a capable remote to play any real game 'on' the AppleTV.
And Apple is simply not developing a separate remote when they already have the iPod touch (get a 8 GB 1st gen used iPod touch if you will). And they won't allow third-party remotes because this would not provide a unified user experience as each remote would act differently.
You're now arguing my point. You responded to my post to AppleStud where he suggested that an AppleTV SDK and App Store was pointless when you can mirror content via AirPlay. I disagree with him and you disagreed with me so your position can't switch to an iOS-based iDevice being used a basic remote, not as mirrored content, as that is part of the core statement.
Why in the world do you think that 1080i is good? -- it's like 540 lines of resolution! 1080i is actually lower quality than 720p!
1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).
while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.
I mean that the current ATV only seems to support 720p. There's almost no current content that I'd view through the ATV that is higher res, but I can already get some 1080i stuff through netflix streaming so it's on the way. It seems silly to buy an ATV without 1080p.
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
1080i is still more discrete pixels of information (approx 1,000,000) per frame compared to 720p (approx 920,000).
while motion artifacts can be present due to the interlacing, 1080i will still give you more information than 720p.
Plus there will be less aliasing from upscaling the resolution if you're displaying on a 1080p panel.
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
Anyone know the average bit rates between the different streaming services/sites?
netflix highest def doesn't look as good as apples.... no freakin way. been there done that so many times. Couple that fact with the horrible buffering that occurs with netflix shoddy service and their poor selection of good movie titles and you easily realize the "you get what you pay for" scenario is slapping you in the face.
BTW, I do have a 35 mbit bad ass connection to the interwebs that NEVER buffers on apples rentals and starts playing in 5 seconds or so.
We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help
We have similar connection speed. It has to be something else causing your problem. Are you using an Apple AE at .11n? We are and never see buffering or picture problems. Just trying to help
I wonder if there are ports that need to be forwarded for Netlifx streaming on the AppleTV for 3rd-party routers.
What content does AppleTV have that GoogleTV doesn't? (This is a genuine question. Not owning either device, I am not sure what the answer is).
From the outside looking in, it really seems to me the biggest issue for Google TV is a terrible interface, which requires the usage of a keyboard, for it to be useful.
GoogleTV seems to add complexity, while AppleTV reduces it. In the living room, adding complexity is a complete no-no.
I have never owned a Google TV but own both the original Apple TV and the new gen Apple TV. From my understanding of articles I've read and the original Kevin Bacon commercials for Google TV, it works as a aggregator. Search "Kevin Bacon" and it will tell you any movies, television shows, etc. with Kevin Bacon not only on regular broadcast television (cable included) but also available internet content (Hulu, youtube, etc.). The problem with it is that Google didn't work with content providers so most of the online goodies are currently blocked from view. This makes the Google TV basically a DVR and channel guide.
Apple TV on the other hand is a souped up ipod for your television. Whatever is in your itunes can be played on your TV, you can rent TV shows and movies through itunes, there's netflix, sports streaming channels, youtube, podcasts (which has NPR BTW. Somebody mentioned that as a want which is actually already provided), photo galleries from your computer, mobileme and flickr.
I have given both versions as gifts and the people really liked them a lot.
Oh, also, someone mentioned not being able to play different codecs like VLC. Actually, this is where airplay shines. Any app on your ipad that plays multiple video codecs can flick the video to your Apple TV which eliminates that shortcoming.
One more thing (lol), I doubt there will be an SDK for apps on this until there is a hardware refresh. The current model has only 8GB of storage used for buffering video. After two or three apps stored on there, I could see some major problems with streaming.
Why in the world do you think that 1080i is good? -- it's like 540 lines of resolution! 1080i is actually lower quality than 720p!
Watch this for explanation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-JXfyvlPh0
iOS Apple TV *is* capable of decoding 1080p video, see:
http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title...S_specific_FAQ
Doesn't matter because your eyes are not quick enough to see that. Your eyes will see 1080i/60 as 1080p/30, therefore you will have problem only with fast moving objects.
On topic, it doesn't surprise me at all. Google always release half-baked product on their 1st version. Too bad there's nothing it can copy from Apple here to speed the process.
let's not pretend we're all videophiles, here. Or that we all have unlimited bandwidth and super-high speed connections. 720p is plenty for most people.
720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.
And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.
give me a future-proof 1080p capability and I'd buy one in a second ...
Sadly there is no such thing.
1080p is already "low res" on some of the monitors you can buy today, and there are likely just as many higher res formats above it in the future as there are below it today.
One very important thing is frame rate. Anyone with good eyesight can see flicker and stutter even in an uncompressed 1080p format when the camera moves, simply because they eye can detect higher frame rates than 30 or 60 fps. Don't you want to go to a movie someday and have the camera pan across a gigantic detailed scene and actually be able to see the elements clearly?
[...] It's guiding net profit of 20 billion yen, down 82 percent from its previous outlook, on sales of 900 billion yen -- blaming the skid on a shortage of hit titles for the Wii and 3DS. [...]
A shortage of hit titles, eh? There can only be two reasons for that:
1. Nintendo and their 3rd party developers don't know how to make hit games any more.
2. There aren't enough games for Wii because it's difficult to develop for Wii.
I suspect the latter. The word "difficult" is overloaded here.
You run into the first barrier to Wii development immediately. Nintendo won't even talk to you unless you're a well-established game developer with a long track record of successes. The EAs of the world are "in." You average iOS game developer working at home is "out."
Then, if you meet Nintendo's requirements, you need to buy the proprietary development software and hardware tools. $2k -> $10k on a sliding scale.
After that, you're under NDA and although I have only very briefly done any coding for any console, I hear that coding for today's consoles is tough. Especially as you try to wring out every last erg of performance using assembly code, etc.
http://www.ehow.com/how_4597196_deve...-wii-game.html
Compare all that with Apple's iOS and Mac developer program. Sign up free if you just want to play around. Pay $100/year if you want to submit apps to the iOS App Store or Mac App Store. Yes, you need to toe the line on many App Store rules. But the development environment is relatively straightforward. Apple provides ample reference guides, tutorials, and sample projects. The Xcode development environment is free, and it works for Mac, iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.
Nintendo seems to be acting like a movie studio. Cherry-picking what they perceive to be the best developers and games the way movie studios (attempt to) cherry-pick the best directors and movie projects. They want a blockbuster every time. Doesn't always happen.
Apple acts more like a gigantic film school. They just tell their students to make the best films they can. There is, of course, a huge number of average students and there is a huge number of average projects. But there will occasionally be the over-achieving Spielberg or Lucas or Fincher.
For Nintendo, having hit titles is a do-or-die imperative. Hit titles are what sell Wii consoles, and they are relatively few and far between. On the other hand, the App Store isn't the only reason why people buy Apple products. All those apps add significant value to iOS devices and Macs, to be sure, but they are only one component in the Apple ecosystem (iTunes, AirPlay, and soon iCloud etc.)
I think people underestimate the value of having many good and great developers working on apps for a platform. The console gaming world doesn't allow for large numbers of developers to write titles for the consoles out there, as far as I know. And that will be one of the constraints to the consoles' success.
The one at home... is cute and all... but there really isn't much content available. Wife and I were going to rent a movie... it comes up... but not available for rental. So, we switch back to the STB and watch something from FiOS... and let the aTV collect dust for another month or two.
Maybe it is different for people that use Netflix, but from where I sit it needs to offer more than "just TV." The only way to get there is with a dedicated SDK and the seamless ability to interact with other iOS devices and storage. Then, maybe it would also live up to its prospects for a digital sign driver at the same time.
720p is about all most ISPs can reliably stream anyhow.
And lets be realistic. It's a 99 dollar box. If things change in a year or two, buy a new one and dump the old one on ebay for $30.
And it's actually a good stream. I'm usually quite picky on video quality but haven't had any issues with it. If it's an epic movie I really want to see perfectly I still get the Blu ray. But if it's just a comedy I want to rent it is more than acceptable.