So, considering the fact that Apple's Q1 2007 ends December 31st 2006, when do you think the product will be released? Is this why they announced it now (only a month or two away vs almost 6)?
Boom! All of a sudden, iTunes is competing directly with Blu-ray and HD-DVD sales at essentially the same price and the iTV will handle both resolutions.
Could be, but what about download times? I don't see internet speeds being fast enough to make HD downloads feasible. An HD movie is going to be what - 10 gigabytes? More? How many days will it take the average person to download?
I thought the only major problem with the Cube was the price. I don't think anyone is saying that Apple can't make a bad product, but I didn't think the Cube was bad.
Apple generally seems to make nice products, though I don't think the Mighty Mouse is good.
True, if you ignore cost the Cube was not a "bad" product. However, unless you have money to burn, cost is a major factor. We don't have hydrogen powered cars (for many reasons) but a big one is cost. BMW just announced their first hydro/hybrid, but due to the cost, they will only release it on their high-end model, as a lease, to various companies only.
What am I trying to say? Well a product is directly tied to its cost and if you can't make something at a price that people will buy it for, then it's a "bad" product in that it will fail, and the market will be like "wow, shiny neat object, but way too much money" and simply move on. However, I digress.
The issue is the iTV, and as I stated, given its currently announced capabilities, I believe it will be a big belly-flop. That said, I also believe (and hope) that Apple is working to bring something to market that will fit more in line with what I *believe* the home-theater market would readily accept and rush out to buy.
Since Apple doesn't like to pre-announce stuff, I'm hoping the "one more thing" is that this new device is actually capable of more than has been revealed. Time will tell...
I'm currently in the market for a media center PC, but am waiting for one to appear with an HD-DVD drive.
The iTV could be an ideal device for people like me, but I have a nasty feeling it's going to be a locked device and not open to user added codecs and updates. Without xVid, DIVX and the other very common internet video standards I just can't see it being much use to me. I'd end up transcoding all my video as I do when I take my iPod away on long journeys, and that's absolutely no fun at all.
I also think the lack of an HD-DVD drive (or even blu-ray for the Sony fanboys) is brave, but may prove to be a mistake. The kind of people who have big flat screen TVs with HDMI connections are going to be looking for HD content (and to buy an HD-DVD player), and that seems somewhat impractical with the crappy boradband speeds most of us have right now. Can you imagine downloading a 15gb movie file? That's going to take some time, and your HD is going to be complaining rather quickly. Hardly surprising Apple are sticking to SD resolutions, but that's something I'm particularly interested in paying for any more.
So yeah, it's brave but flawed. Still, it's 1st gen and things will surely get better.
Take the DVD you bought, rip it using Handbrake, make it a Quicktime movie and import it to your iTunes lIbrary, and watch it on yer iPod or through the iTV.
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Multiply the time it takes to rip a DVD (on the order of 40 minutes to a couple of hours depending on what codec you prefer) by the number of DVDs you own, add to that the time to label your video files with all the information required to search your collection in various and sundry ways, add to that the time it takes to set up a wireless file server, add to that the time it takes to keep adding more hard drives to your wireless server as your collection grows, and add to that the time spent cursing your wireless network because of hiccups and random disappearances, etc, etc.
I just don't understand why the average consumer would want to complicate their life this way...
Don't get me wrong, I currently have a similar setup for my MP3 collection (MP3 file server hooked up to a Sonos wireless audio network). But I'm a very technically inclined person, and I still find it a lot of work to maintain at times. I could never see the average consumer maintaining something that complicated.
Why add a 500 GB HD? Apple can simply put a 60 GB HD and a regular DVD drive for $100 which still adds up to $200 less than the low end mac mini. If people want more hard drive space they can simply add a usb hard drive like people already do with the mac mini.
Because a 60 Gb won't be big enough for HD content, and that's what all these geeks in this forum are howling for.
And I don't NEED an HD and Optical drive inside this baby. That's why it has wifi, so I can stream it from my Mac. Apple doesn't want to dilute the central hub of Steve's vision, and that's the Mac, not a set-top box appliance.
I don't care what products are competing, either. Neither does Apple. There were plenty of mp3 players on the market when they released the first iPod, too.
What they are doing, in my opinion, is putting out a product that will, like the original iPod, kick off the market, and get Apple's foot in the door. First, if I am to believe all the rumor sites, Apple has to convince the studios that their business model will fly. Remember the original iPod? Small 5 GB footprint, b&w screen? Not, in and of itself, very exciting.
But it was integrated with the ITMS and the Mac computers running iTunes, and it was that integration that kicked it off from the git go. So is the iTV. You'll notice that the iPod is greatly enhanced from the first generation, right?
What makes you think they won't do that for the iTV? This is, for the want of a better term, a trial balloon. Apple wants to send it up the flagpole and see how many salute. If it gets a good reception, they'll give it a big send-off. If not, it'll get delayed until they can improve it. You think Apple doesn't have folks trolling these forums to find out what their prime targets think about it?
In the meantime, like I said, there are enough folks on here complaining about the cost at just $300. Add even a 60 GB HD and an optical drive, (with the requisite controlling electronics - and the redesign of the case to accommodate the drives) and the cost goes up to over 4 or 500 bucks. (If you think they can hold the cost down to under a $100 increase after redesigning the case you're dreaming.) Then how many will buy it?
Could be, but what about download times? I don't see internet speeds being fast enough to make HD downloads feasible. An HD movie is going to be what - 10 gigabytes? More? How many days will it take the average person to download?
Considering people sleep 8 hours, work 8 hours, commute 1-2 hours, I'd say this is plenty of time to have a couple movies download by the time you get home to watch them.
It's NetFLIX minus the postal service, basically (plus you own it).
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Multiply the time it takes to rip a DVD (on the order of 40 minutes to a couple of hours depending on what codec you prefer) by the number of DVDs you own, add to that the time to label your video files with all the information required to search your collection in various and sundry ways, add to that the time it takes to set up a wireless file server, add to that the time it takes to keep adding more hard drives to your wireless server as your collection grows, and add to that the time spent cursing your wireless network because of hiccups and random disappearances, etc, etc.
I just don't understand why the average consumer would want to complicate their life this way...
Don't get me wrong, I currently have a similar setup for my MP3 collection (MP3 file server hooked up to a Sonos wireless audio network). But I'm a very technically inclined person, and I still find it a lot of work to maintain at times. I could never see the average consumer maintaining something that complicated.
Personally, I agree with you, but there were a lot of folks talking like they wanted to go that route, so I just provided the link.
With Front row, and its access to the DVD player, that's the route I'd go, too. I have better things to do with my time and disk space than rip DVD's, thankyouverymuch!
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Or just buy it on iTunes in the first place and watch it after a suitable amount is buffered. The average consumer lets Apple manage the servers and the library. As long as they have internet connection they have access. The only thing on the local machine would be home movies...and even there it might be on a .mac server accessible via iTunes as well.
I saw the iTV proto and thought why can't it be integrated into the Mac mini? I am going to use my parents for an example. They are not going to want to change the input to the iTV, then have to trek over to the computer to put in a DVD. I know that my parents would probably use the computer in the house more if it were on the TV. And they would totally take advantage if it incorporated some form of DVR facility.
I don't like to rain on the parade, but this is plain old needless complication. Buying or renting a DVD is easier.
The closest analogy for iTV so far is "video on demand", but even there the comparison is bad because (A) you pay more for it, but you "own" it, (B) you "own" it but cannot do anything with it but watch it on your streaming video whozit or iPod.
A DVD can be resold, given away as a gift, etc., etc. Having a physical object of some value is more important for re-use. Even people who buy a lot of songs from iTunes admit it's better to own the physical CD as a backup.
Considering people sleep 8 hours, work 8 hours, commute 1-2 hours, I'd say this is plenty of time to have a couple movies download by the time you get home to watch them.
It's NetFLIX minus the postal service, basically (plus you own it).
Don't forget, $14.99 for one movie on one computer versus $14.99 for 10 movies a month watchable at home, in the car, or when we get to the ski cabin.
Or just buy it on iTunes in the first place and watch it after a suitable amount is buffered. The average consumer lets Apple manage the servers and the library. As long as they have internet connection they have access. The only thing on the local machine would be home movies...and even there it might be on a .mac server accessible via iTunes as well.
Vinea
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
The point is that there wouldn't be any media except for some buffering on the local PC. Not as compelling for DVD but much more so for HD content ESPECIALLY with the idiotic format war and the war between Comcast and telcos like Verizon. 15Mbps FiOS for $45/mo and streamed HD is a reality if you can live with a couple minutes worth of buffering while you make popcorn.
The point is that there wouldn't be any media except for some buffering on the local PC. Not as compelling for DVD but much more so for HD content ESPECIALLY with the idiotic format war and the war between Comcast and telcos like Verizon. 15Mbps FiOS for $45/mo and streamed HD is a reality if you can live with a couple minutes worth of buffering while you make popcorn.
Vinea
Y'know, if there was a LOT more worthwhile "on demand" programming, that might make it worthwhile... such as sporting events, concerts, seminars & conferences... Perhaps these are the REAL target products for iTV, not movies... hmmmm. If you combine that with yer 24" iMac (with iChat), or your iPad... that makes for a more compelling experience!
Y'know, if there was a LOT more worthwhile "on demand" programming, that might make it worthwhile... such as sporting events, concerts, seminars & conferences... Perhaps these are the REAL target products for iTV, not movies... hmmmm. If you combine that with yer 24" iMac (with iChat), or your iPad... that makes for a more compelling experience!
NFL highlights will be on iTunes for 2006. ESPN is owned by Disney.
24" is far too small for HDTV at normal seating distances.
Comments
So, considering the fact that Apple's Q1 2007 ends December 31st 2006, when do you think the product will be released? Is this why they announced it now (only a month or two away vs almost 6)?
They were referring to calendar year.
They were referring to calendar year.
what makes you so sure?
Later spring 2007
-Library content, DVD-quality $9.99
-Debut content, DVD-quality $14.99
-Library content, HD-quailty $18.99
-Debut content, HD-quailty $24.99
Boom! All of a sudden, iTunes is competing directly with Blu-ray and HD-DVD sales at essentially the same price and the iTV will handle both resolutions.
Could be, but what about download times? I don't see internet speeds being fast enough to make HD downloads feasible. An HD movie is going to be what - 10 gigabytes? More? How many days will it take the average person to download?
I thought the only major problem with the Cube was the price. I don't think anyone is saying that Apple can't make a bad product, but I didn't think the Cube was bad.
Apple generally seems to make nice products, though I don't think the Mighty Mouse is good.
True, if you ignore cost the Cube was not a "bad" product. However, unless you have money to burn, cost is a major factor. We don't have hydrogen powered cars (for many reasons) but a big one is cost. BMW just announced their first hydro/hybrid, but due to the cost, they will only release it on their high-end model, as a lease, to various companies only.
What am I trying to say? Well a product is directly tied to its cost and if you can't make something at a price that people will buy it for, then it's a "bad" product in that it will fail, and the market will be like "wow, shiny neat object, but way too much money" and simply move on. However, I digress.
The issue is the iTV, and as I stated, given its currently announced capabilities, I believe it will be a big belly-flop. That said, I also believe (and hope) that Apple is working to bring something to market that will fit more in line with what I *believe* the home-theater market would readily accept and rush out to buy.
Since Apple doesn't like to pre-announce stuff, I'm hoping the "one more thing" is that this new device is actually capable of more than has been revealed. Time will tell...
what makes you so sure?
I watched the presentation.
He did say first quarter of calendar year 2007.
The iTV could be an ideal device for people like me, but I have a nasty feeling it's going to be a locked device and not open to user added codecs and updates. Without xVid, DIVX and the other very common internet video standards I just can't see it being much use to me. I'd end up transcoding all my video as I do when I take my iPod away on long journeys, and that's absolutely no fun at all.
I also think the lack of an HD-DVD drive (or even blu-ray for the Sony fanboys) is brave, but may prove to be a mistake. The kind of people who have big flat screen TVs with HDMI connections are going to be looking for HD content (and to buy an HD-DVD player), and that seems somewhat impractical with the crappy boradband speeds most of us have right now. Can you imagine downloading a 15gb movie file? That's going to take some time, and your HD is going to be complaining rather quickly. Hardly surprising Apple are sticking to SD resolutions, but that's something I'm particularly interested in paying for any more.
So yeah, it's brave but flawed. Still, it's 1st gen and things will surely get better.
The Mac version of an app that will rip DVDs is called Handbrake, it can be downloaded at:
http://handbrake.m0k.org/?page_id=24
Take the DVD you bought, rip it using Handbrake, make it a Quicktime movie and import it to your iTunes lIbrary, and watch it on yer iPod or through the iTV.
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Multiply the time it takes to rip a DVD (on the order of 40 minutes to a couple of hours depending on what codec you prefer) by the number of DVDs you own, add to that the time to label your video files with all the information required to search your collection in various and sundry ways, add to that the time it takes to set up a wireless file server, add to that the time it takes to keep adding more hard drives to your wireless server as your collection grows, and add to that the time spent cursing your wireless network because of hiccups and random disappearances, etc, etc.
I just don't understand why the average consumer would want to complicate their life this way...
Don't get me wrong, I currently have a similar setup for my MP3 collection (MP3 file server hooked up to a Sonos wireless audio network). But I'm a very technically inclined person, and I still find it a lot of work to maintain at times. I could never see the average consumer maintaining something that complicated.
Why add a 500 GB HD? Apple can simply put a 60 GB HD and a regular DVD drive for $100 which still adds up to $200 less than the low end mac mini. If people want more hard drive space they can simply add a usb hard drive like people already do with the mac mini.
Competing products to iTV currently: http://www.zensonic.com/z500_overview.php
http://www.buildyourowncomputer.com/...PROD/J5/13184B
Because a 60 Gb won't be big enough for HD content, and that's what all these geeks in this forum are howling for.
And I don't NEED an HD and Optical drive inside this baby. That's why it has wifi, so I can stream it from my Mac. Apple doesn't want to dilute the central hub of Steve's vision, and that's the Mac, not a set-top box appliance.
I don't care what products are competing, either. Neither does Apple. There were plenty of mp3 players on the market when they released the first iPod, too.
What they are doing, in my opinion, is putting out a product that will, like the original iPod, kick off the market, and get Apple's foot in the door. First, if I am to believe all the rumor sites, Apple has to convince the studios that their business model will fly. Remember the original iPod? Small 5 GB footprint, b&w screen? Not, in and of itself, very exciting.
But it was integrated with the ITMS and the Mac computers running iTunes, and it was that integration that kicked it off from the git go. So is the iTV. You'll notice that the iPod is greatly enhanced from the first generation, right?
What makes you think they won't do that for the iTV? This is, for the want of a better term, a trial balloon. Apple wants to send it up the flagpole and see how many salute. If it gets a good reception, they'll give it a big send-off. If not, it'll get delayed until they can improve it. You think Apple doesn't have folks trolling these forums to find out what their prime targets think about it?
In the meantime, like I said, there are enough folks on here complaining about the cost at just $300. Add even a 60 GB HD and an optical drive, (with the requisite controlling electronics - and the redesign of the case to accommodate the drives) and the cost goes up to over 4 or 500 bucks. (If you think they can hold the cost down to under a $100 increase after redesigning the case you're dreaming.) Then how many will buy it?
I didn't think so.
Could be, but what about download times? I don't see internet speeds being fast enough to make HD downloads feasible. An HD movie is going to be what - 10 gigabytes? More? How many days will it take the average person to download?
Considering people sleep 8 hours, work 8 hours, commute 1-2 hours, I'd say this is plenty of time to have a couple movies download by the time you get home to watch them.
It's NetFLIX minus the postal service, basically (plus you own it).
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Multiply the time it takes to rip a DVD (on the order of 40 minutes to a couple of hours depending on what codec you prefer) by the number of DVDs you own, add to that the time to label your video files with all the information required to search your collection in various and sundry ways, add to that the time it takes to set up a wireless file server, add to that the time it takes to keep adding more hard drives to your wireless server as your collection grows, and add to that the time spent cursing your wireless network because of hiccups and random disappearances, etc, etc.
I just don't understand why the average consumer would want to complicate their life this way...
Don't get me wrong, I currently have a similar setup for my MP3 collection (MP3 file server hooked up to a Sonos wireless audio network). But I'm a very technically inclined person, and I still find it a lot of work to maintain at times. I could never see the average consumer maintaining something that complicated.
Personally, I agree with you, but there were a lot of folks talking like they wanted to go that route, so I just provided the link.
With Front row, and its access to the DVD player, that's the route I'd go, too. I have better things to do with my time and disk space than rip DVD's, thankyouverymuch!
...or just take the DVD you bought, pop it in your DVD player, and watch it.
Or just buy it on iTunes in the first place and watch it after a suitable amount is buffered. The average consumer lets Apple manage the servers and the library. As long as they have internet connection they have access. The only thing on the local machine would be home movies...and even there it might be on a .mac server accessible via iTunes as well.
Vinea
The closest analogy for iTV so far is "video on demand", but even there the comparison is bad because (A) you pay more for it, but you "own" it, (B) you "own" it but cannot do anything with it but watch it on your streaming video whozit or iPod.
A DVD can be resold, given away as a gift, etc., etc. Having a physical object of some value is more important for re-use. Even people who buy a lot of songs from iTunes admit it's better to own the physical CD as a backup.
Incomplete pass!
Considering people sleep 8 hours, work 8 hours, commute 1-2 hours, I'd say this is plenty of time to have a couple movies download by the time you get home to watch them.
It's NetFLIX minus the postal service, basically (plus you own it).
Don't forget, $14.99 for one movie on one computer versus $14.99 for 10 movies a month watchable at home, in the car, or when we get to the ski cabin.
Or just buy it on iTunes in the first place and watch it after a suitable amount is buffered. The average consumer lets Apple manage the servers and the library. As long as they have internet connection they have access. The only thing on the local machine would be home movies...and even there it might be on a .mac server accessible via iTunes as well.
Vinea
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
Exactly my point.
People already have their DVD players. Does it make sense to go out and buy another device that does the same thing, buy movies that only plays on your computer, backup that movie, have yet another format for my movie media? I think I will wait until HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, or whatever sorts itself out and see what gets the best bang for my bucks.
The point is that there wouldn't be any media except for some buffering on the local PC. Not as compelling for DVD but much more so for HD content ESPECIALLY with the idiotic format war and the war between Comcast and telcos like Verizon. 15Mbps FiOS for $45/mo and streamed HD is a reality if you can live with a couple minutes worth of buffering while you make popcorn.
Vinea
The point is that there wouldn't be any media except for some buffering on the local PC. Not as compelling for DVD but much more so for HD content ESPECIALLY with the idiotic format war and the war between Comcast and telcos like Verizon. 15Mbps FiOS for $45/mo and streamed HD is a reality if you can live with a couple minutes worth of buffering while you make popcorn.
Vinea
Y'know, if there was a LOT more worthwhile "on demand" programming, that might make it worthwhile... such as sporting events, concerts, seminars & conferences... Perhaps these are the REAL target products for iTV, not movies... hmmmm. If you combine that with yer 24" iMac (with iChat), or your iPad... that makes for a more compelling experience!
Y'know, if there was a LOT more worthwhile "on demand" programming, that might make it worthwhile... such as sporting events, concerts, seminars & conferences... Perhaps these are the REAL target products for iTV, not movies... hmmmm. If you combine that with yer 24" iMac (with iChat), or your iPad... that makes for a more compelling experience!
NFL highlights will be on iTunes for 2006. ESPN is owned by Disney.
24" is far too small for HDTV at normal seating distances.
Vinea