The practical max throughput of "54mbps" wireless is more like 20Mbps. That is barely enough for full ATSC. That assumes a good link.
Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ATSC 1080i is sending 30 full frames a second, 60 half-frames, 24 full frames per second of 1080p is actually less data.
Apple has already announced they're releasing some new 802.11n products towards the end of the year, calling them Airport Extreme <something>. That new protocol is supposed to really increase the throughput, and will usher in a new generation of video streaming products.
I agree with the article as to the digital hub idea, but I think it'll be integrated into the basic Mac, with specialized peripherals for the streaming tasks using 802.11n protocols. This being Apple, look for something pretty different from what most pundits think...
(BLACK boxes?!! Think white, people! At least that's what Apples been using, but that could change...)
I read the article. Good read. Always fun to read Mossberg. But I have one nit to pick...when are otherwise intelligent people going to stop perpetuating the following myth?
Quote:
The jury is still out on whether the end-to-end model will prevail in the long term. Many at Microsoft, and some outside analysts as well, believe the new devices will eventually succumb to the component model, and that Apple's success with the iPod will fade, just as its early dominance of the PC market did.
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
They are working on the video content, but the resolution is not there and they still need to get movie studio's on board. When they have the content to deliver and appropriate contracts for price and delivery resolution then they will be ready to release the home satelite digital video device. They may not need the movie studios on board, as long as they have enough TV content available, for this, instead relying on tryign to reach critical mass market penetration to "Force" acceptance of their deliver model on the movie industry. However with Steve's new relationship with Disney I would expect that when all the peices of this puzzle are ready for prime time Apple will anounce the home media hub.
I think the movie content is already there. Look at who Apple has already signed up for TV -- Disney, Universal, Viacom and Fox -- and you have a huge critical mass for film content. (Of the three major content players that are not on iTunes -- Sony, WB and CBS -- only the first two make movies.)
Look at what content from summer movies Apple could have available for a iTunes movie launch this fall: "Mission:Impossible 3" (Viacom/Paramount), "X-Men: The Last Stand" (Fox), "Cars" (Disney) and "Miami Vice" (Universal).
Sony and Warner Brothers will be along soon enough.
As for resolution, I think Apple knows the difference between a three-inch screen and a 42-inch HD display. Apple won't put a true media player on the market without HD content.
dammit.. and I'm JUST about to get a Nokia N80 slider phone.. the thing is amazing... but I would really love to see an Apple phone too.
Then again, I should try to actually adhere to the mantra of "never, ever buy 1st gen Apple products". They are always full of glitches, and they get it spot on in the 2nd gen.
Sigh... ok.. fine.. I'll get the N80.. hoping to hell that the Apple phone sucks
dammit.. and I'm JUST about to get a Nokia N80 slider phone.. the thing is amazing... but I would really love to see an Apple phone too.
Then again, I should try to actually adhere to the mantra of "never, ever buy 1st gen Apple products". They are always full of glitches, and they get it spot on in the 2nd gen.
Sigh... ok.. fine.. I'll get the N80.. hoping to hell that the Apple phone sucks
See, now that you've made that decision, Apple's going to introduce a gorgeous, flawless product. Next Tuesday.
Originally posted by JeffDM ?Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ?
Sony announced today, the will use h264 on mini-dvds for HDcamcorders as an inbetween solution before blueray gets a launch?_and as mentioned above, HDTV will be broadcasted in Europe with h264... to my knowledge, you get same pic quality with less bandwidth compared to "old" mpeg2..
The practical max throughput of "54mbps" wireless is more like 20Mbps. That is barely enough for full ATSC. That assumes a good link.
Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ATSC 1080i is sending 30 full frames a second, 60 half-frames, 24 full frames per second of 1080p is actually less data.
Jeff, You got thewre first!
Yes, he made an error about 36Kb/s. It's actually 38Mb/s for 1080p. Cable is broadcasting 1080i at 19Mb/s.
So 20Mb/s is out. A 54Mb/s wireless ius just barely able to manage 1080i. There is no room in the effective bandwidth available for the error crooection code.
I've seen some demo's of this over 54Mb/s, at the Home Entertainment Expo here in NYC, as well as elsewhere. There were glitches. When someone walked between the transmitter and the receiver, the video stuttered. Apparently, that slowed the transmission down to below the required rate, and the correction signals couldn't keep up.
The newer trchnologies running at 108 and above should solve that.
Apple has already announced they're releasing some new 802.11n products towards the end of the year, calling them Airport Extreme <something>. That new protocol is supposed to really increase the throughput, and will usher in a new generation of video streaming products.
I agree with the article as to the digital hub idea, but I think it'll be integrated into the basic Mac, with specialized peripherals for the streaming tasks using 802.11n protocols. This being Apple, look for something pretty different from what most pundits think...
(BLACK boxes?!! Think white, people! At least that's what Apples been using, but that could change...)
Supposedly, the new MBP's already access 108Mb/s, as long as the routers use it. There have been reports about this on:
I read the article. Good read. Always fun to read Mossberg. But I have one nit to pick...when are otherwise intelligent people going to stop perpetuating the following myth?
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
Apple did have dominance of the pc market with the Apple 11. As long as people remember that before IBM trademarked the "Pc®" letters, it ONLY stood for "personal computer". Apple dominated that early era.
In fact, it was that domination, and the fact that IBM's sales people were seeing the machines inside the offices of their mainframe and mini customer sites, that spurred IBM into thinking that there might be a market there, and that they didn't like the idea of another company's computers at their own customers sites.
That information was in the book that the President of IBM's Pc division wrote after he retired. I can't spell his name, but it started with a "C".
I think the movie content is already there. Look at who Apple has already signed up for TV -- Disney, Universal, Viacom and Fox -- and you have a huge critical mass for film content. (Of the three major content players that are not on iTunes -- Sony, WB and CBS -- only the first two make movies.)
Look at what content from summer movies Apple could have available for a iTunes movie launch this fall: "Mission:Impossible 3" (Viacom/Paramount), "X-Men: The Last Stand" (Fox), "Cars" (Disney) and "Miami Vice" (Universal).
Sony and Warner Brothers will be along soon enough.
As for resolution, I think Apple knows the difference between a three-inch screen and a 42-inch HD display. Apple won't put a true media player on the market without HD content.
Just becouse iTMS has some TV content from the broadcast end of these companies does not mean that they are going to hand over digital versions in full 1080p from their movie divisions to Apple for distribution. TV shows are one thing, its an extra source of revenue for content that is largely paid for by the initial advertising, and due to the low res files this distribution method does not endanger future sales of DVD's when they are released the following year or future syndication deals that are other sources of revenue for TV shows. The Movie divisions are a lot more protective of their content, that is why movie releases to broadcasters for cable and over the air transmission which is susceptable to recoding by viewers comes after Theater and DVD distribution of new movies.
Just becouse iTMS has some TV content from the broadcast end of these companies does not mean that they are going to hand over digital versions in full 1080p from their movie divisions to Apple for distribution. TV shows are one thing, its an extra source of revenue for content that is largely paid for by the initial advertising, and due to the low res files this distribution method does not endanger future sales of DVD's when they are released the following year or future syndication deals that are other sources of revenue for TV shows. The Movie divisions are a lot more protective of their content, that is why movie releases to broadcasters for cable and over the air transmission which is susceptable to recoding by viewers comes after Theater and DVD distribution of new movies.
I don't think they would "hand them over". But other companies are already doing movie deals. There isn't any reason to believe that Apple wouldn't be able to do them as well.
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
Chris, since you're so confident in your claims and numbers, please cite the personal computer market share numbers for 1980 and 1981.
Chris, since you're so confident in your claims and numbers, please cite the personal computer market share numbers for 1980 and 1981.
1980:
Apple II (8%)
Atari 400/800 (22%)
TRS-80 (24%)
Others (46%)
1981:
PC (3%)
Apple II (15%)
Atari 400/800 (21%)
TRS-80 (18%)
Others (43%)
EDIT: My source doesn't have a break down for VIC-20 and C-64 in that time frame. Probably rolled into "Others". These would be have been bigger (huge) players 1981-1983 time frame. Atari really exploded onto the scene in 1979 and blew past Apple and started carving up Tandy.
EDIT 2: Another source has Apple's 1980 % closer to TRS-80. But still not dominant by any stretch. So Apple II might have hit closer to 20% early on...but once the PC got traction it was all over but the shouting.
I don't think they would "hand them over". But other companies are already doing movie deals. There isn't any reason to believe that Apple wouldn't be able to do them as well.
But from what I have read, rumor of course, is that they are reluctant to sign over too much power to Apple in the deal. Apple already has a lot of power in the online distribution of music to dictate price to the content owners, and have recently exercised that power in the continuation of 99¢ price per song.
Comments
Originally posted by JeffDM
The practical max throughput of "54mbps" wireless is more like 20Mbps. That is barely enough for full ATSC. That assumes a good link.
Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ATSC 1080i is sending 30 full frames a second, 60 half-frames, 24 full frames per second of 1080p is actually less data.
Apple has already announced they're releasing some new 802.11n products towards the end of the year, calling them Airport Extreme <something>. That new protocol is supposed to really increase the throughput, and will usher in a new generation of video streaming products.
I agree with the article as to the digital hub idea, but I think it'll be integrated into the basic Mac, with specialized peripherals for the streaming tasks using 802.11n protocols. This being Apple, look for something pretty different from what most pundits think...
(BLACK boxes?!! Think white, people! At least that's what Apples been using, but that could change...)
Cellphone = iTunes with Motorola
Home Media Hub = FrontRow and MacMini
I'm not sure I would read anything more into his comments.
The jury is still out on whether the end-to-end model will prevail in the long term. Many at Microsoft, and some outside analysts as well, believe the new devices will eventually succumb to the component model, and that Apple's success with the iPod will fade, just as its early dominance of the PC market did.
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
Originally posted by @homenow
They are working on the video content, but the resolution is not there and they still need to get movie studio's on board. When they have the content to deliver and appropriate contracts for price and delivery resolution then they will be ready to release the home satelite digital video device. They may not need the movie studios on board, as long as they have enough TV content available, for this, instead relying on tryign to reach critical mass market penetration to "Force" acceptance of their deliver model on the movie industry. However with Steve's new relationship with Disney I would expect that when all the peices of this puzzle are ready for prime time Apple will anounce the home media hub.
I think the movie content is already there. Look at who Apple has already signed up for TV -- Disney, Universal, Viacom and Fox -- and you have a huge critical mass for film content. (Of the three major content players that are not on iTunes -- Sony, WB and CBS -- only the first two make movies.)
Look at what content from summer movies Apple could have available for a iTunes movie launch this fall: "Mission:Impossible 3" (Viacom/Paramount), "X-Men: The Last Stand" (Fox), "Cars" (Disney) and "Miami Vice" (Universal).
Sony and Warner Brothers will be along soon enough.
As for resolution, I think Apple knows the difference between a three-inch screen and a 42-inch HD display. Apple won't put a true media player on the market without HD content.
Then again, I should try to actually adhere to the mantra of "never, ever buy 1st gen Apple products". They are always full of glitches, and they get it spot on in the 2nd gen.
Sigh... ok.. fine.. I'll get the N80.. hoping to hell that the Apple phone sucks
Originally posted by ZO
dammit.. and I'm JUST about to get a Nokia N80 slider phone.. the thing is amazing... but I would really love to see an Apple phone too.
Then again, I should try to actually adhere to the mantra of "never, ever buy 1st gen Apple products". They are always full of glitches, and they get it spot on in the 2nd gen.
Sigh... ok.. fine.. I'll get the N80.. hoping to hell that the Apple phone sucks
See, now that you've made that decision, Apple's going to introduce a gorgeous, flawless product. Next Tuesday.
Originally posted by JeffDM ?Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ?
Sony announced today, the will use h264 on mini-dvds for HDcamcorders as an inbetween solution before blueray gets a launch?_and as mentioned above, HDTV will be broadcasted in Europe with h264... to my knowledge, you get same pic quality with less bandwidth compared to "old" mpeg2..
You became a Senior member in a very short period of time.
632 posts in less than 4 months.
I remember your first post.
Man you are spending too much time in front of the computer.
Originally posted by JeffDM
The practical max throughput of "54mbps" wireless is more like 20Mbps. That is barely enough for full ATSC. That assumes a good link.
Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ATSC 1080i is sending 30 full frames a second, 60 half-frames, 24 full frames per second of 1080p is actually less data.
Jeff, You got thewre first!
Yes, he made an error about 36Kb/s. It's actually 38Mb/s for 1080p. Cable is broadcasting 1080i at 19Mb/s.
So 20Mb/s is out. A 54Mb/s wireless ius just barely able to manage 1080i. There is no room in the effective bandwidth available for the error crooection code.
I've seen some demo's of this over 54Mb/s, at the Home Entertainment Expo here in NYC, as well as elsewhere. There were glitches. When someone walked between the transmitter and the receiver, the video stuttered. Apparently, that slowed the transmission down to below the required rate, and the correction signals couldn't keep up.
The newer trchnologies running at 108 and above should solve that.
Originally posted by rwahrens
Apple has already announced they're releasing some new 802.11n products towards the end of the year, calling them Airport Extreme <something>. That new protocol is supposed to really increase the throughput, and will usher in a new generation of video streaming products.
I agree with the article as to the digital hub idea, but I think it'll be integrated into the basic Mac, with specialized peripherals for the streaming tasks using 802.11n protocols. This being Apple, look for something pretty different from what most pundits think...
(BLACK boxes?!! Think white, people! At least that's what Apples been using, but that could change...)
Supposedly, the new MBP's already access 108Mb/s, as long as the routers use it. There have been reports about this on:
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/archives/apr06/041006.html
as well as other sites.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I read the article. Good read. Always fun to read Mossberg. But I have one nit to pick...when are otherwise intelligent people going to stop perpetuating the following myth?
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
Apple did have dominance of the pc market with the Apple 11. As long as people remember that before IBM trademarked the "Pc®" letters, it ONLY stood for "personal computer". Apple dominated that early era.
In fact, it was that domination, and the fact that IBM's sales people were seeing the machines inside the offices of their mainframe and mini customer sites, that spurred IBM into thinking that there might be a market there, and that they didn't like the idea of another company's computers at their own customers sites.
That information was in the book that the President of IBM's Pc division wrote after he retired. I can't spell his name, but it started with a "C".
Originally posted by netdog
Is this also true for the iMac?
That's a good question. I haven't seen reports on that, just for the MBP.
Originally posted by Porchland
I think the movie content is already there. Look at who Apple has already signed up for TV -- Disney, Universal, Viacom and Fox -- and you have a huge critical mass for film content. (Of the three major content players that are not on iTunes -- Sony, WB and CBS -- only the first two make movies.)
Look at what content from summer movies Apple could have available for a iTunes movie launch this fall: "Mission:Impossible 3" (Viacom/Paramount), "X-Men: The Last Stand" (Fox), "Cars" (Disney) and "Miami Vice" (Universal).
Sony and Warner Brothers will be along soon enough.
As for resolution, I think Apple knows the difference between a three-inch screen and a 42-inch HD display. Apple won't put a true media player on the market without HD content.
Just becouse iTMS has some TV content from the broadcast end of these companies does not mean that they are going to hand over digital versions in full 1080p from their movie divisions to Apple for distribution. TV shows are one thing, its an extra source of revenue for content that is largely paid for by the initial advertising, and due to the low res files this distribution method does not endanger future sales of DVD's when they are released the following year or future syndication deals that are other sources of revenue for TV shows. The Movie divisions are a lot more protective of their content, that is why movie releases to broadcasters for cable and over the air transmission which is susceptable to recoding by viewers comes after Theater and DVD distribution of new movies.
Originally posted by JCG
Just becouse iTMS has some TV content from the broadcast end of these companies does not mean that they are going to hand over digital versions in full 1080p from their movie divisions to Apple for distribution. TV shows are one thing, its an extra source of revenue for content that is largely paid for by the initial advertising, and due to the low res files this distribution method does not endanger future sales of DVD's when they are released the following year or future syndication deals that are other sources of revenue for TV shows. The Movie divisions are a lot more protective of their content, that is why movie releases to broadcasters for cable and over the air transmission which is susceptable to recoding by viewers comes after Theater and DVD distribution of new movies.
I don't think they would "hand them over". But other companies are already doing movie deals. There isn't any reason to believe that Apple wouldn't be able to do them as well.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market. Never. Say it with me: "Apple never, ever had any dominance of the PC market."
They certainly never had the market share in PCs (peak of just over 11% for Macintosh and just under 16% for Apple II) that they do now with iPod. Never. Not even close. Thus, beginning with that assumption to perform any analysis of what might happen to Apple in this instance is flawed.
EDIT: The most "dominance" Apple could have claimed is when they had 6% for Mac and 16% for Apple II for a total of 22%.
Chris, since you're so confident in your claims and numbers, please cite the personal computer market share numbers for 1980 and 1981.
Originally posted by ClimbingTheLog
Chris, since you're so confident in your claims and numbers, please cite the personal computer market share numbers for 1980 and 1981.
1980:
Apple II (8%)
Atari 400/800 (22%)
TRS-80 (24%)
Others (46%)
1981:
PC (3%)
Apple II (15%)
Atari 400/800 (21%)
TRS-80 (18%)
Others (43%)
EDIT: My source doesn't have a break down for VIC-20 and C-64 in that time frame. Probably rolled into "Others". These would be have been bigger (huge) players 1981-1983 time frame. Atari really exploded onto the scene in 1979 and blew past Apple and started carving up Tandy.
EDIT 2: Another source has Apple's 1980 % closer to TRS-80. But still not dominant by any stretch. So Apple II might have hit closer to 20% early on...but once the PC got traction it was all over but the shouting.
Originally posted by melgross
I don't think they would "hand them over". But other companies are already doing movie deals. There isn't any reason to believe that Apple wouldn't be able to do them as well.
But from what I have read, rumor of course, is that they are reluctant to sign over too much power to Apple in the deal. Apple already has a lot of power in the online distribution of music to dictate price to the content owners, and have recently exercised that power in the continuation of 99¢ price per song.