Why Apple TV Matters - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 05:34 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Many people seem to be complaining about the Apple TV. It's simply meant to be a device allowing users to play their purchased iTMS videos to their TV. Did you complain that your DVD payer only played DVDs when it came onto the market? Or the CD player playing CDs? Or VHS players? HD-DVD? Blu-Ray? Your cable box? For the vast majority of people, this is simply a new device to allow them to buy a video conveniently from their computer and play it immediately. These average users think that's an innovative and cool idea. Many of them have never even thought of buying a DVR but think it'd be cool to buy a movie without leaving the house and view it where they watch all their other video content. And, it'll play their music from iTunes and show their digital photos, too. Amazing!

The concepts that we discuss here are too confusing for most people to even consider worrying about. I remember trying to explain, to my mother, my outrage about music publishers trying to keep me from copying songs into my computer as MP3s. You know what she said? "Why don't you just put the CD into a CD player like everyone else?" It's crazy, but she couldn't even comprehend why I would want to bother putting the songs into the computer. Now she has her own Mac with iTunes and she's ripping CDs into it. Last month she was telling me about how she had burned a CD of music for one of her friends.

Lot's of people now have iTunes and are playing music with it. They've gone to the iTMS and thought it would be cool to watch an episode they missed on TV or even buy a movie they want, right now, without going out. But, they don't want to watch some tiny picture on the computer. The concept that they could watch full-screen in Quicktime isn't even a thought that would enter their heads. A $300 device that plays these videos on their TV like the DVD player? That's exactly what they want.

While these forums were complaining that the iPod didn't play Ogg Vorbis, have wireless capabilities, or have a huge hard drive, the rest of the people were saying, "Hey I can just put my CDs onto this and listen to it while I'm out and about? Cool!"

There's a lot more I would like to see in the Apple TV. But most of the problems exist due to politics of a few companies (MPAA, television content producers, cable television providers, etc.) The issues seem obscure for most people and this is why the more advanced users, like us, can't have what we want. The companies will relax their grip on the content only after enough people demand it. Right now, the majority of people simply can't understand why they need less DRM, or MPEG-2 support, or CableCards. Once Apple gets enough of these devices into the marketplace, people will begin to understand and they'll demand the ability to do the things we're discussing. The few of us will not create this revolution, we need the masses to understand and demand this, too. The Apple TV is the beginning for this.

Once enough of them are sold, users will want these things. Apple will push a few updates out to their boxes and the features will start coming. I'm certain the USB port will eventually see use as an input from an Apple DVR once the CableCard starts to become more available. The integrated solution is coming. We've all been waiting for it for decades. The hurdles are not technical, they're political. The only way to overcome these political hurdles is for the masses to understand the issues. The Apple TV becoming popular will definitely help. We need for the Apple TV to be successful. Once our mothers understand what Divx files are and want to play them, the political barriers that stop us from doing it will disappear.
slarrg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 06:45 AM
Member
 
isbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I agree with this, but I'd take it even further. First, let me establish my geekhood.

I have three HDTVs, four TiVos including the HD TiVo, and my entire house is wired to distribute audio and HD video from sources in my basement. I have lots of other toys, too. Right now I'm typing this on a 30" monitor (actually I have the 30" + 20" hooked up to my G5 with 8GB of RAM here at home and a more impressive set up in my office--ask me about the 3D printer across from my lab). I have 16,011 songs and just under 1000 DVDs. I stream my music over the house and into speakers on my deck, and I love all this stuff. I have more tech toys than a few. And I'm married to a tech person as well. And she's hot.

So, I belong on a forum like this. I am not a typical consumer. And I have high demands.

But even for someone like me, this is a great solution. Heck, for $299 is practically a no-brainer. I use iTunes. Why? Because it works well. For some things I buy CDs and rip them, for some things I buy from the store (one of the few examples of a truly well-written web application... so well written that it's easy to forget that that's exactly what it is). I can unDRM when I want. Regardless, I stream audio throughout my house using airport express. Why? Because it is just too easy and too inexpensive.

Bascially, apple has given me an airport express that does HD. I'd have paid $200+ for that anyway. But you're telling me that it has a remote control and a front end for browsing my content so I don't actually have to go to my machine or laptop to choose a playlist? And that includes photos and other random stuff I might want to show? And it actually acts like an iPod and is sync'able as well as streamable? That's a whole lot of bonus. And it's only $299?! It's just too easy and inexpensive. What more do you want at that price point?

Now, I don't buy movies or TV shows from iTunes. First off, they aren't HD; however, onnce they are I almost certainly will, at least for a some of the stuff I want to have. And I'll be happy with it, too, because it won't suck and it will be easy. I don't have to build a custom solution and fiddle with finicky software (well, I'll probably do that, too, but at least there will be something there that anyone in my family can use without thinking about it).

Sure, it would have been nice to have a huge drive on the box (but hardly necessary), and it would have been great to have a DVR solution, and an OTA tuner built in the box (but I've got other devices for that, and BTW they cost more than $299) and 1080p and other stuff and other stuff.

But for $299, I see nothing to be unhappy about now, and I suspect it will actually get better later.

Peace.

Peace.
isbell is offline  
post #3 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 06:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Andrew67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I agree with most of what you wrote. The folks in this forum are never happy and greatly over-think products, how they should work, and who they actually target (which is rarely anyone in this forum). Simplicity rules the day. The Apple TV is basically an ipod for the TV. Will it succeed, that's yet to be determined, but that's what it is.

As to Apple DVR's, USB supported cable cards.... well, it's going to be cold day in you know where before these see the light of day. And the odds of them coming directly from Apple are even smaller. The Apple TV does not support HDCP on it's HDMI port and that's one limiting factor, the other is that it makes no business sense for Apple to provide DVR functionality. There's the internet and there is the iTunes Store. That's where Apple Inc's priorities are and that's where the Apple TV will succeed or fail.
Andrew67 is offline  
post #4 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 06:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisL01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

Many people seem to be complaining about the Apple TV. It's simply meant to be a device allowing users to play their purchased iTMS videos to their TV. Did you complain that your DVD payer only played DVDs when it came onto the market? Or the CD player playing CDs? Or VHS players? HD-DVD? Blu-Ray? Your cable box? For the vast majority of people, this is simply a new device to allow them to buy a video conveniently from their computer and play it immediately.

Good point. I think most people have determined that Apple TV is meant for those who want a simple and easy to access their iTunes Store content on a TV. It's basically plug-n-play, and even Mom's can set it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

These average users think that's an innovative and cool idea. Many of them have never even thought of buying a DVR but think it'd be cool to buy a movie without leaving the house and view it where they watch all their other video content.

You mean like Pay-Par-View? That's been around for years and years, and most Cable/Sat STB's already support it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

There's a lot more I would like to see in the Apple TV. But most of the problems exist due to politics of a few companies (MPAA, television content producers, cable television providers, etc.) The issues seem obscure for most people and this is why the more advanced users, like us, can't have what we want.

I don't understand this. What features can't they do? The main thing I have seen people complain about is file format support, mainly DivX support. Apple can support DivX with no problems, just include MPEG-4 Part 2 decode. You don't even have to pay for the DivX logo.

You talk about CableCARD below, CableCARD support is in Windows Vista. Politics aside, it's already been done and it ships in 3 weeks.

What other features can't be done due to politics?

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

The companies will relax their grip on the content only after enough people demand it. Right now, the majority of people simply can't understand why they need less DRM, or MPEG-2 support, or CableCards. Once Apple gets enough of these devices into the marketplace, people will begin to understand and they'll demand the ability to do the things we're discussing. The few of us will not create this revolution, we need the masses to understand and demand this, too. The Apple TV is the beginning for this.

Not sure about this. Like you have said, iTunes Store is the main draw of Apple TV. Apple TV isn't about DVD streaming, it's not about being a PVR, it's about you buying from the iTunes Store and then getting them to the TV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

Once enough of them are sold, users will want these things. Apple will push a few updates out to their boxes and the features will start coming. I'm certain the USB port will eventually see use as an input from an Apple DVR once the CableCard starts to become more available.

Seems most Apple employees have said the USB is worthless, not sure if you can expect external USB tuners on the Apple TV side.

To get CableCARD into a product you really have to design the product around it, not the only way around. What I mean is that there is a lot of planning, rules, and regulations that must be followed in order to get CableLabs on your side.

Also, that 40GB hard drive is worthless if this is to ever become a PVR.
ChrisL01 is offline  
post #5 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 07:14 AM
Senior Member
 
Lazlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In the steam tunnels
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Replying to the original post:

I agree with the first half. The market Apple is going for isn't the early adopters. It's the people who are buying music and tv shows at an unbelievable rate.

But, what makes anyone think that the AppleTV is ever going to support anything except what goes into iTunes? Was the video iPod not enough? In the same vein, why does anyone believe an Apple DVR is even a remote possibility, let alone an imminent product? Steve Jobs wants to provide all of our content through iTunes, and he's getting pretty close to being able to do that. He wants to provide exactly what many of us have been clamoring for for years - to pay only for what we want, a la carte, and not subsidize a bunch of channels that we never watch.

1) Apple will never produce or support a DVR as long as the iTS is growing.

2) Apple (and the AppleTV) will never support a codec that isn't natively supported in iTunes.

If my experience with Apple has taught me anything it is that they are going to force you to do things their way. If that means that you have to convert all of your video to H.264 to get it to play on their device, that's the way it is. Opening up their platform will only lead down the slippery slope of instability and support nightmares.
Lazlo is offline  
post #6 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 07:18 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
chefklc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 2,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
No, no, no.

Quote:


Many people seem to be complaining about the Apple TV. It's simply meant to be a device allowing users to play their purchased iTMS videos to their TV. Did you complain that your DVD payer only played DVDs when it came onto the market?

No, "we" complained about the initial high price, and then waited for it to drop. It represented a substantial improvement, nee, an exponential improvement, over what was currently available. We didn't complain that it only played dvds because we had no other "digital" option--superdrives weren't available--and we couldn't play back video at such high quality or in such small form. None of that applies to the present situation--every user of AppleTV will have to regress, to swallow picture and audio degradation, just to play along. Those of us who have raised eyebrows are complaining now that $299 is too steep a price for anyone to pay now just to play back iTS video content, especially Mom at home, with such an underwhelming, inherently limited device.

Quote:


Many of them have never even thought of buying a DVR but think it'd be cool to buy a movie without leaving the house and view it where they watch all their other video content. And, it'll play their music from iTunes and show their digital photos, too. Amazing!

Of course not, many of "us" wouldn't buy a "DVR" right now--our options still generally suck and are over-priced. "They" already have had a Series 2 Tivo for years and if not probably already have DVR functionality from their cable company. You want them to change course?

Many Moms and Dads are already watching high def, or at least digital cable, and already have a dvd collection. I can see this device working for some in a few special situations--even for the geekiest among us, isbell, you raised a couple--but otherwise I can't escape the feeling it's a miscalculation, for suckers and dopes. I actually hope initial sales disappoint, and that configured as is this is DOA right out of the box as a mainstream device.

Quote:


While these forums were complaining that the iPod didn't play Ogg Vorbis, have wireless capabilities, or have a huge hard drive, the rest of the people were saying, "Hey I can just put my CDs onto this and listen to it while I'm out and about? Cool!"

Save the patronizing tone and the poor attempt to draw a comparison. This forum, and no one that I know who's been here for the past few years, complained about any of this. That's because we knew you couldn't hear much of difference between compression rates with an iPod, were generally pleased as punch with iTunes and Apple lossless and other options, were smart enough not to care about buying anything from the iTMS or its DRM, realized a firewire iPod could also be a firewire external hard drive for other files, that we could keep a lossless iTunes library and compressed versions just for our iPods, felt that wireless capability would have been a gimmick we didn't really need anyway, and on and on. It served the geek, the status seeker, and the soccer Mom.

iPods do what they do, and do it exceptionally well. The "AppleTV as iPod for your TV" analogy stutters mightily along the way: it isn't even as open and flexible as the iPod, it's not even a glorified Front Row extender--which many of us thought would have at least some value--instead, it somehow manages to be significantly LESS than that, to be even more closed, more restrictive, more inadequate.

Quote:


A $300 device that plays these videos on their TV like the DVD player? That's exactly what they want.

Again, no, not when "they" get this thing home and find out it won't replace other devices they already have, won't help them with their Netflix dvds, and won't play nice with anything NOT inside iTunes folders. And to get it to play nice with any of this, they need their Macs and a steeper learning curve anyway.

Quote:


Once Apple gets enough of these devices into the marketplace, people will begin to understand and they'll demand the ability to do the things we're discussing.

No they won't. Far more likely that once they realize what's involved with being able to play their existing dvd collection back with this device--and everyone's Mom has at least a bunch of dvds--they'll return the thing or just use it for music--but come on, how many potential buyers from the supposed unwashed HT masses even have a stereo next to their TVs? They're not gonna want to buy content again, they like to "own" rather than rent, and if they've dropped a serious chunk of change on the new TV, don't you think they'll want a picture quality to match from all their devices?

This "us" versus "them" attitude has to stop, it's an insult to our intelligence implying that we aren't ALSO able to relate to Joe and Jane homeowner workaholic surburban soccer Mom types. We can genuinely disagree, we know exactly what they're up against, what they're frustrated by and how much time they have to devote to this. There's no way I can recommend anyone spend $300+ bucks for a different way to view the occasional downloaded low-res episode of "Heroes," when they can watch any ep they missed free online just to catch up, and are already paying for it, and probably recording it, via digital cable or high def.

Problem is, you can criticize the device on any number of valid grounds just like this, and we have very successfully; we can also be generally supportive of Apple and also say that we expected a lot more from Apple at that price point. Why? Because no matter what we're doing in our own homes, we're also the ones giving advice and tech support to our significantly less aware and less savvy friends and family. We've been there--and we're in the better position to assign "value"--which is different from price.
chefklc is online now  
post #7 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 07:27 AM
Senior Member
 
Lazlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In the steam tunnels
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
slarrg, especially since this is your first post, I hope all of these comments don't come across as harsh. We have seen a lot of complaints and speculation over the years about Apple and TiVo, opening up iTunes to plug-ins, supporting the EyeTV, etc. I think your post is a good start, especially the part about what is good about the AppleTV. But I think we all need to accept the fact that much of what we want in a set top box (everything) isn't going to come from Apple. Microsoft is trying to do that with MCE, and it will be fraught with problems. Apple's entire philosophy is "keep it simple", and unfortunately for geeks like us that means supporting only one way of doing things.
Lazlo is offline  
post #8 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 07:47 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew67 View Post

As to Apple DVR's, USB supported cable cards.... well, it's going to be cold day in you know where before these see the light of day. And the odds of them coming directly from Apple are even smaller.

ATI, has already announced a USB CableCard tuner for Windows Vista. If Apple doesn't get a system certified by CableLabs, it's unlikely that anyone else could do it. Precisely why the ATI system is Vista only not XP, for example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew67 View Post

The Apple TV does not support HDCP on it's HDMI port and that's one limiting factor, the other is that it makes no business sense for Apple to provide DVR functionality. There's the internet and there is the iTunes Store. That's where Apple Inc's priorities are and that's where the Apple TV will succeed or fail.

I've not seen anything saying Apple refuses to support HDCP on it's HDMI. Of course, we're talking about a product that still will not be released until next month. A similar argument could be made about PodCasts. Apple has no business reason to introduce them when they compete with a sellable product in the iTMS. Yet Apple did introduce them because they add a value to the iPod product line which sells more iPods thus increasing potential customers for iTMS. The same can be true with Apple TV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

You mean like Pay-Par-View? That's been around for years and years, and most Cable/Sat STB's already support it.

Pay-Per-View is very limited compared to iTMS and will become even more so as Apple continues to add content. No cable company even offers an interface capable of handling the sheer volume of individual items available through iTMS. Such an interface would be quite impossible on a television with a remote control.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

I don't understand this. What features can't they do? The main thing I have seen people complain about is file format support, mainly DivX support. Apple can support DivX with no problems, just include MPEG-4 Part 2 decode. You don't even have to pay for the DivX logo. You talk about CableCARD below, CableCARD support is in Windows Vista. Politics aside, it's already been done and it ships in 3 weeks. What other features can't be done due to politics?

They are not allowing MPEG-2 which makes streaming of DVD impossible without time consuming transcoding. Of course, it's simply a software update to provide the codecs to do MPEG-2. That was my point. It'll almost certainly be added later. DivX will be unlikely, especially if Apple wants to develop a CableCard system and get it approved by CableLabs. Also, CableCards are not required by the FCC until July and the cable lobbyists are trying to get the date pushed out again. Remember, the FCC mandated CableCards back in 1996 and the cable companies are still not required to make them available. Yesterday, Senator Sununu said that he will be introducing legislation to keep the FCC from mandating technology. I suspect this is related to the loss of the cable industry's loss of the integration case the same day. This is the same ruling that makes CableCards required.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

Not sure about this. Like you have said, iTunes Store is the main draw of Apple TV. Apple TV isn't about DVD streaming, it's not about being a PVR, it's about you buying from the iTunes Store and then getting them to the TV.

See above. The iPod was also not about internet enable Podcasts for free either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

Seems most Apple employees have said the USB is worthless, not sure if you can expect external USB tuners on the Apple TV side.

Of course it's worthless before the next product is released. The same way the 802.11n chips in every computer Apple has shipped in the last few months were useless. Of course, now that Apple is introducing the Airport Extreme they will be releasing drivers to allow the computers to use the hardware they put in from the beginning. This is quite common for Apple to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

To get CableCARD into a product you really have to design the product around it, not the only way around. What I mean is that there is a lot of planning, rules, and regulations that must be followed in order to get CableLabs on your side.

Which, I suspect, is exactly why Apple is avoiding DVD streaming and DivX at this point in time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

Also, that 40GB hard drive is worthless if this is to ever become a PVR.

The 40GB harddrive is simply meant to be a buffer for streaming media and for local storage of files to be played immediately. The whole point of Apple TV is that the content is stored on a computer somewhere else in your home. The DVR solution I mentioned would be another box that sits under the Apple TV and plugs into the USB port to stream live television into the Apple TV. Of course, it could be done through the network, but I see this as something that would be purchased for each Apple TV. It may even allow other DVRs, such as Tivo or the Dish Network's' DVR, to connect and be accessed by Apples FrontRow style interface (if Apple were to make agreements for them to do so.) In any case, the storage of any recorded shows would never be expected on the Apple TV but elsewhere (the DVR or iTunes.)

Obviously, this is pure speculation on my part, but I don't think Apple is unaware of the customer's desires here. I suspect they are not releasing it because they want to get Leopard out first to get CableLabs behind their ability to lock down content end-to-end. I don't think Apple would release this unless it were dead simple to setup and use and this is only possible once CableCard availability is mandatory.
slarrg is offline  
post #9 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisL01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

ATI, has already announced a USB CableCard tuner for Windows Vista. If Apple doesn't get a system certified by CableLabs, it's unlikely that anyone else could do it. Precisely why the ATI system is Vista only not XP, for example

A few things here. Much of getting that working would depend on CableLabs. Having said that, there are all of these huge things that matter to get it working that Apple would have to do a ton of work on. For example, the ATI OCUR will remove the OpenCable Protection and re-wrap the content with WMDRM. Apple doesn't support anything wih Windows Media, huge problem. I believe they could also use Real's stuff for that, I'm not sure that the ATI OCUR support it though, which would mean a huge cost of developing OCUR's that do. Yes, I'm sure Apple could get that done if it turned out that they needed to.

Then there is HDCP that is needed for a gurantee of full resolution output. Whether Apple TV supports HDCP is up in the air. The list goes on and on. Oh, then there is the huge problem of Vista being the only supported OS. The Protected Media Path in Vista is used for this, something Apple doesn't appear to have in OS X.


Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

Pay-Per-View is very limited compared to iTMS and will become even more so as Apple continues to add content. No cable company even offers an interface capable of handling the sheer volume of individual items available through iTMS. Such an interface would be quite impossible on a television with a remote control.

Haven't tried it, but you should look at AT&T HomeZone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

DivX will be unlikely, especially if Apple wants to develop a CableCard system and get it approved by CableLabs. Also, CableCards are not required by the FCC until July and the cable lobbyists are trying to get the date pushed out again. Remember, the FCC mandated CableCards back in 1996 and the cable companies are still not required to make them available. Yesterday, Senator Sununu said that he will be introducing legislation to keep the FCC from mandating technology. I suspect this is related to the loss of the cable industry's loss of the integration case the same day. This is the same ruling that makes CableCards required.

DivX has nothing to do with CableLabs or CableCARD. People get bent out of shape about DivX because of it's "pirate backing", and not enough people understand what it takes to support "DivX." DivX is nothing more than MPEG-4 Part 2. This is the same with XviD and various other codecs (Nero Digital, etc). DivX just happens to be a name brand. To decode DivX content, you also get decode of every other MPEG-4 Part 2 based codec. That means, all you need to be is support decode MPEG-4 Part 2 and you don't need to put the DivX logo on the product!

You can have a product that supports decode of MPEG-4 Part 2 and CableCARD without any problems, there is nothing that CableLabs puts fouth that disallows that.

H.264 happens to be MPEG-4 Part 10, so under the "no DivX" theory that you have the product already can't get CableCARD support, ever.

Chris
ChrisL01 is offline  
post #10 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:14 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
chefklc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 2,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Personally, I don't want everything in one box from Apple, ain't ever gonna happen for all the valid reasons put out there by Andrew and Lazlo and others. There's also no debate about who the intended audience is for "AppleTV" or who the audience "should" be.

Quote:


Steve Jobs wants to provide all of our content through iTunes, and he's getting pretty close to being able to do that. He wants to provide exactly what many of us have been clamoring for for years - to pay only for what we want, a la carte, and not subsidize a bunch of channels that we never watch.

1) Apple will never produce or support a DVR as long as the iTS is growing.

2) Apple (and the AppleTV) will never support a codec that isn't natively supported in iTunes.

If my experience with Apple has taught me anything it is that they are going to force you to do things their way. If that means that you have to convert all of your video to H.264 to get it to play on their device, that's the way it is. Opening up their platform will only lead down the slippery slope of instability and support nightmares.

This is very well said. Since we all know this, since we've studied Apple history, it's also why we should be encouraging every friend, relative and soccer Mom we run into at the supermarket not to get the AppleTV now but instead to wait, to put that money toward a real Mac like the cheapest Macbook or perhaps a mini, depending on their situation. It's not that hard to get your mini up and running, playing dvds AND downloading stuff from iTS, sharing libraries, getting actual honest to goodness AC-3 out to your stereo (IF you happen to have a stereo...) You can do everything you can do with the AppleTV (except easily connect via component, and if that's the case, frankly the AppleTV would work better for you, though you should probably put that money toward a better TV anyway. That reminds me, that $699 Vizio 32" high def LCD looks mighty sweet at Costco...) and you can do more should you eventually wish to, and in the process protect yourself a little better from what we know is Apple's controlling, inherently restrictive nature, and its ultimate goal.

The obvious alternative if we're advising Mom and Pop not to throw their $300 at it now: it's far better to promote that mini right now is AppleTV, a much more capable and diverse version that just doesn't sync right out of the box. Get a mini instead, even a used one and wait for Apple to roll out the improvements and enhancements that would make this device more tenable. The AppleTV is a great concept, there's no disagreement that much about it from a user perspective is actually ahead of its time--but if it ships as is I'm afraid we'll still feel there are too many future promises as yet unfulfilled--for us and for our parents--and that it'll better for everyone to wait for Apple to catch up. slarrg, you did a good job speculating about some of those possible future paths, problem is, with no hint of them anytime soon it's just not money well spent. Go with the mini instead.
chefklc is online now  
post #11 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ted Todorov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NYC, NY USA
Posts: 1,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by chefklc View Post

Of course not, many of "us" wouldn't buy a "DVR" right now--our options still generally suck and are over-priced. "They" already have had a Series 2 Tivo for years and if not probably already have DVR functionality from their cable company. You want them to change course?

Many Moms and Dads are already watching high def, or at least digital cable, and already have a dvd collection. I can see this device working for some in a few special situations--even for the geekiest among us, isbell, you raised a couple--but otherwise I can't escape the feeling it's a miscalculation, for suckers and dopes. I actually hope initial sales disappoint, and that configured as is this is DOA right out of the box as a mainstream device.

Look, I'm no defender of AppleTV, I have no intention of getting one, and if I ever got the itch, I'd pick up another Mini.

Still I don't think your analysis holds water. Mom & Dad may have a DVD collection: so what, they play them on a DVD player, they don't rip it to disk. They may have a Tivo or DVR (probably cable co. DVR -- Tivo's market penetration isn't all that high(?)), but their DVR is not HD and doesn't have a time machine -- so TV shows coming from the Apple store have a value -- to Mom & Pop they don't look worse than the DVR, they are there even when they forgot to record or erased something, and they are commercial free. The effort of skipping commercials with a DVR may be tiny, but there are people out there who would rather not have to. (We are talking 18!! minutes of commercials per one hour of network TV).

Indeed I don't even know why I'm bothering making this argument: iTunes TV shows are having a smashing success, startling the TV industry. Many of those iTunes customers would love an AppleTV, and because of AppleTV, iTunes will have even more TV customers. Add music and movies, and AppleTV will be a successful product, one which neither of us will buy in it's present form.
Ted Todorov is offline  
post #12 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:33 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazlo View Post

1) Apple will never produce or support a DVR as long as the iTS is growing.

There are two thing that prevent Apple from having the Apple TV as your primary media interface:

1. Live Television
2. DVR functionality

In my opinion, Apple will seek to become the only interface that ever appears on your television. They have a really slick FrontRow style of interface on the Apple TV that allows a user to access movies, television, music and photos. However, the current Apple TV cannot tune live TV nor can it schedule a recording. This forces the user to use an entirely different interface to do these tasks. I think Apple will not allow this to stand and will, over time, add these missing pieces to their system. Apple is smart enough to not do something until they can do it better. That's why I think they will wait to introduce these features until after they can be assured of CableCard support. They'll leave the clumsy interfaces and IR blasters to others until their interface can tune the channels directly. The stock holders have been demanding a product to show iTS content on the television and Apple has delivered this. It will undoubtedly help Apple to get more studios to add content to the iTS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazlo View Post

2) Apple (and the AppleTV) will never support a codec that isn't natively supported in iTunes.

I completely agree. However, this is not the same as saying that Apple will never add support for new codecs to both Apple TV and iTunes at a later date. Before Apple started selling video content there was no support for H.264 then one day we downloaded an update and had H.264 support. I suspect that other codecs will be added in the future.

Ultimately, a solution for ripping DVDs will be required by consumers. Legally, this is complicated because Apple must lock the system end-to-end and because such a large percentage of DVDs are rented. Therefore, I suspect Apple's initial entry into this will be streaming of DVDs to the Apple TV from a computer. This will require either real-time transcoding to H.264 (unlikely) or support for MPEG-2. However, I suspect that Apple will create a modified MPEG-2 codec that will allow iTunes to encrypt the MPEG-2 data as it streams the data. I would not expect to find this support listed in the technical features of the Apple TV product, though. Additionally, Apple may, at launch or a later date, rip DVDs to this same encrypted DVD format.
slarrg is offline  
post #13 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ted Todorov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NYC, NY USA
Posts: 1,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

Haven't tried it, but you should look at AT&T HomeZone.

You can't be seriously implying the PPV is in any way a viable competitor to Apple's Pay To OWN TV model. iTunes is ubiquitous, PPV is limited to that customer's particular provider. Some PPV may be decent (but I'd amazed if anyone's TV selection can touch iTunes). In any event, due to it's inherent inability to compete on a national let alone international scale, PPV will always lose to iTunes.
Ted Todorov is offline  
post #14 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:39 AM
Senior Member
 
Lazlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In the steam tunnels
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
But my point is that there is no reason for Apple to ever provide MPEG-2 support. Why? Because it doesn't make them any money. They will never do so because it doesn't support their intent to become a replacement for Netflix as well as Comcast or Cox. In fact, they are working to become the replacement for DVDs (and Blu-ray and HD-DVD before they make it out of the gate). They are already on their way. The best way for them to avoid the whole legal morass is to just keep using iTunes as their media solution. FairPlay works for them, and apparently for a bunch of other people as well.
Lazlo is offline  
post #15 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
snickersbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If it wont play multiplexed vog orbis in 7.1 with discreet subwoofer displexion, its garbage!
snickersbar is offline  
post #16 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:41 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
chefklc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 2,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Let me try to be more clear, Ted--$300+ for a new playback option, limited as it will be given that "common" folks won't be dumping their cable subscriptions or dvd players anytime soon because iTS isn't ready for them to do so yet--nor is there a financial incentive to do so--doesn't make too much sense. Add to that negative that the AppleTV as structured not only won't make it easy for them to integrate their existing libraries and content, but actively hinder their ability to do so, means that you'll still have to retain those legacy devices as you potentially got absorbed into the appeal of a "new" system. I'm not saying the downloads themselves don't have value, I'm saying its value is too limited right now, and $300+ too steep an entry. If AppleTV were less locked down, I think it would be easier to make the case that Mom and Dad could grow into it, but as it is now it seems too steep a price to pay for too little. Does that still not hold water?

I don't disagree video downloads from the iTS will continue to be extremely successful.
chefklc is online now  
post #17 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisL01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Todorov View Post

You can't be seriously implying the PPV is in any way a viable competitor to Apple's Pay To OWN TV model. iTunes is ubiquitous, PPV is limited to that customer's particular provider. Some PPV may be decent (but I'd amazed if anyone's TV selection can touch iTunes). In any event, due to it's inherent inability to compete on a national let alone international scale, PPV will always lose to iTunes.

No, I'm not. I was replying to "...but think it'd be cool to buy a movie without leaving the house and view it where they watch all their other video content." Meaning, people have been able to do this for a long long time. I'm not saying it's better then what iTunes offers, I was just saying we have had PPV for years and years.

I'm personally not going to spend money on content until it's HD and has got a DD 5.1 track.

Chris
ChrisL01 is offline  
post #18 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ted Todorov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NYC, NY USA
Posts: 1,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazlo View Post

But my point is that there is no reason for Apple to ever provide MPEG-2 support. Why? Because it doesn't make them any money...

I agree with you that Apple is unlikely to support MPEG2. However, your reasoning is wrong. As stated above, Podcasts are an excellent example of a service that makes Apple no money, but sells iPods. If Apple became convinced that supporting {Fill in the blank} would sell lots of AppleTVs, they would support it.

Remember, for the foreseeable future Apple remains a HARDWARE company, and software is there to sell hardware.
Ted Todorov is offline  
post #19 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:56 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

A few things here. Much of getting that working would depend on CableLabs. Having said that, there are all of these huge things that matter to get it working that Apple would have to do a ton of work on. For example, the ATI OCUR will remove the OpenCable Protection and re-wrap the content with WMDRM. Apple doesn't support anything wih Windows Media, huge problem...

I'm not suggesting that Apple would use the ATI product. Certainly Apple would roll their own solution. This was in response to the USB/CableCard not gonna happen remark by Andrew67.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

DivX has nothing to do with CableLabs or CableCARD. People get bent out of shape about DivX because of it's "pirate backing", and not enough people understand what it takes to support "DivX." DivX is nothing more than MPEG-4 Part 2...

Yes, I'm fully aware of what DivX is and have been using it since the day's when the name officially had a smily at the end: "DivX ". I know I probably didn't explain myself very well in this regard. I felt the post was too long and for brevity's sake didn't expound too much. My primary reasoning is that a specific DivX branded driver would not be allowed as it would require opening the codecs to third-parties. This will make it so that others can insert a codec that could be used to decode whatever end-to-end DRM that Apple would create to lock up the stream from a CableCard. This ability to add third-party codecs is what would keep CableLabs from certifying the device. I suspect a lot of this stuff is going to be added in Leopard. I don't think this is something that Apple will ned to begin working on, I think it's something they've been working on for some time. I suspect Apple already knows what products they are going to introduce over the next few months after Apple TV.
slarrg is offline  
post #20 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 08:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
telemike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Greensboro NC
Posts: 1,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
My take:

I'd use the Apple TV to stream/sync music and video from iTunes to my HDTV in the other room from the PC.

I can backup dvd's using Nero Recode to MPEG-4 (although divx is nice)

I primarily will watch dvd movies on my dvd player, although having some as mpeg-4 for convience.
telemike is offline  
post #21 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:19 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

I'm personally not going to spend money on content until it's HD and has got a DD 5.1 track.

I'm completely in agreement here. Of course, Apple will be improving the quality of the downloads from iTS once the Apple TV ships. But, already people have purchased 50 million television shows and over a million movies from iTS. This is with low quality video/audio and having to watch it either on their computer or a tiny iPod screen. I think there are a lot of people willing to spend money to get this content on the television where it belongs.
slarrg is offline  
post #22 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Andrew67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

I'm not suggesting that Apple would use the ATI product. Certainly Apple would roll their own solution. This was in response to the USB/CableCard not gonna happen remark by Andrew67.

It's not going to happen because CableCard is a monstorous undertaking. It involves changing the architecture of the computer, software support, and an extremely tough certification process. And what does Apple get out of it? Very little. DVR's sovle a problem based on past technology. Apple has proven to be a forward thinking company which is why they're basing their future on iTunes, portable media, impulse purchases and instant gratification.
Andrew67 is offline  
post #23 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:38 AM
Member
 
druber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: East Africa
Posts: 178
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Everyone's got content to bring to the table: DVDs or home videos for some, OTA HD content for others. Somewhere recently they compared the number of tracks sold on iTunes to the number of iPods sold. Worked out that the average iPod owner had bought less than 10 tracks from the iTS (IIRC). I'm a bit below that average, and I love my iPod because I can import CDs, create my own music and load it as easily as I can put on pants (and let me tell you, brother, I've got that process down pat).

CSS and the DMCA are stumbling blocks that don't exist for CD audio, and if you accept that video is most often enjoyed at home where expectations of quality are a bit higher (as opposed to the iPod where you may listen anywhere and very much enjoy lossy encoding) because you're paying more attention and new high-def displays can deliver obviously better detail/quality, the Apple TV has a much harder row to hoe than the iPod.

Were the Apple TV able to playback MPEG2 high-def content, Apple could turn to the content industry and say, "See how easy this is? See how good this looks? This is why we need to work together to provide HD content in the iTS." Even just streaming DVDs from a Mac/PC could give people the opportunity to take a device off the rack and replace it with an Apple TV. Apple isn't doing either of these things. It seems like the "Could I...?" questions are all being answered with, "Yes, with iTunes." If you have your own content, that yes doesn't get you anywhere.

This seems like a great opportunity for Apple to give people options, and if the product is successful, use that success as leverage with content providers. Instead, they've made an expensive media extender that plays the media Apple allows. Not a winner in my book, as it stands now.
druber is offline  
post #24 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisL01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

I'm not suggesting that Apple would use the ATI product. Certainly Apple would roll their own solution. This was in response to the USB/CableCard not gonna happen remark by Andrew67.

ATI has the first example of an OCUR, other companies are free to develop them but they must comply to the specs already set forth by CableLabs.

Apple is not developing a CableCARD solution outside of OCUR, nor will CableLabs allow it. They spent years developing the OCUR's with Microsoft. They are not going to develop a new product just for Apple. Apple can follow what's already set or they can forget about CableCARD in any products. Yes, I'm serious about all of that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

Yes, I'm fully aware of what DivX is and have been using it since the day's when the name officially had a smily at the end: "DivX ". I know I probably didn't explain myself very well in this regard. I felt the post was too long and for brevity's sake didn't expound too much. My primary reasoning is that a specific DivX branded driver would not be allowed as it would require opening the codecs to third-parties. This will make it so that others can insert a codec that could be used to decode whatever end-to-end DRM that Apple would create to lock up the stream from a CableCard. This ability to add third-party codecs is what would keep CableLabs from certifying the device. I suspect a lot of this stuff is going to be added in Leopard. I don't think this is something that Apple will ned to begin working on, I think it's something they've been working on for some time. I suspect Apple already knows what products they are going to introduce over the next few months after Apple TV.

It was actually a ; ) at the end of it IIRC.

Again, Apple can create a MPEG-4 Part 2 codec without using the DivX name, or allowing third parties codec access, etc. MPEG-4 is an open spec.

And no, third party codec's on a device will not limit CableCARD access. There would have to be an architecture built that would not allow users to interact with the codec's on the box (eg. using them to attempt to transcode protected content to non-protected formats). In 3 weeks you will be able to buy a Vista PC w/ CableCARD and you can install whatever codec's you like on it. DivX, XviD, Nero Digital, H.264, and so on. It will work just fine, and there is nothing that says it can't be done. Nor is there anything that will disable CableCARD from working when a user does install third party codec's on a Vista PC.

Chris
ChrisL01 is offline  
post #25 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:49 AM
Senior Member
 
GadgetFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ted points out that Apple is a hardware company. This brings up some conflicting arguments. When discussing record labels and iTunes, the prevailing opinion seems to be that Apple makes almost nothing on the music sales -- they make their money by selling iPods.

But when discussing DVR functions, people say that Apple wants you to buy everything through iTunes. If their goal is to maximize use of iTunes, then not providing DVR functions would help achieve that. But if their goal is to sell as much f*cking hardware as they can, then why not put DVR functionality in? People obviously like using tivo, etc -- so why not put it in?

Buying shows for $2 per episode is way more expensive than paying a monthly cable or DirecTV bill for most people. Assuming a bill of $50 per month:

If a show that you watch is on 4 times a month @ $2 per episode. If you only watch 6 shows then that would be $48 per month. But you can't watch Leno, ESPN, CNN, Kiddie shows, etc. And if you watch 7 shows you pay more. Some stuff you may want to keep, but most of it gets deleted after it is watched.
GadgetFreak is offline  
post #26 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 09:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Scarpad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 1,373
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by slarrg View Post

Many people seem to be complaining about the Apple TV. It's simply meant to be a device allowing users to play their purchased iTMS videos to their TV. Did you complain that your DVD payer only played DVDs when it came onto the market? Or the CD player playing CDs? Or VHS players? HD-DVD? Blu-Ray? Your cable box? For the vast majority of people, this is simply a new device to allow them to buy a video conveniently from their computer and play it immediately. These average users think that's an innovative and cool idea. Many of them have never even thought of buying a DVR but think it'd be cool to buy a movie without leaving the house and view it where they watch all their other video content. And, it'll play their music from iTunes and show their digital photos, too. Amazing!

The concepts that we discuss here are too confusing for most people to even consider worrying about. I remember trying to explain, to my mother, my outrage about music publishers trying to keep me from copying songs into my computer as MP3s. You know what she said? "Why don't you just put the CD into a CD player like everyone else?" It's crazy, but she couldn't even comprehend why I would want to bother putting the songs into the computer. Now she has her own Mac with iTunes and she's ripping CDs into it. Last month she was telling me about how she had burned a CD of music for one of her friends.

Lot's of people now have iTunes and are playing music with it. They've gone to the iTMS and thought it would be cool to watch an episode they missed on TV or even buy a movie they want, right now, without going out. But, they don't want to watch some tiny picture on the computer. The concept that they could watch full-screen in Quicktime isn't even a thought that would enter their heads. A $300 device that plays these videos on their TV like the DVD player? That's exactly what they want.

While these forums were complaining that the iPod didn't play Ogg Vorbis, have wireless capabilities, or have a huge hard drive, the rest of the people were saying, "Hey I can just put my CDs onto this and listen to it while I'm out and about? Cool!"

There's a lot more I would like to see in the Apple TV. But most of the problems exist due to politics of a few companies (MPAA, television content producers, cable television providers, etc.) The issues seem obscure for most people and this is why the more advanced users, like us, can't have what we want. The companies will relax their grip on the content only after enough people demand it. Right now, the majority of people simply can't understand why they need less DRM, or MPEG-2 support, or CableCards. Once Apple gets enough of these devices into the marketplace, people will begin to understand and they'll demand the ability to do the things we're discussing. The few of us will not create this revolution, we need the masses to understand and demand this, too. The Apple TV is the beginning for this.

Once enough of them are sold, users will want these things. Apple will push a few updates out to their boxes and the features will start coming. I'm certain the USB port will eventually see use as an input from an Apple DVR once the CableCard starts to become more available. The integrated solution is coming. We've all been waiting for it for decades. The hurdles are not technical, they're political. The only way to overcome these political hurdles is for the masses to understand the issues. The Apple TV becoming popular will definitely help. We need for the Apple TV to be successful. Once our mothers understand what Divx files are and want to play them, the political barriers that stop us from doing it will disappear.

Apple TV is valuable for me. I can take my currently connected Macmini back into my office (sitting in the Livingroom doing Quicken was odd) where it belongs, I can have better connections to my TV (HDMI and Toslink). I can place my video files on any drives as long as they are in Itunes they will be seen, I can stream my Lossless Music, browse my Pictures and listen to Podcasts. It fits what I Need
Scarpad is offline  
post #27 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 10:10 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew67 View Post

It's not going to happen because CableCard is a monstorous undertaking. It involves changing the architecture of the computer, software support, and an extremely tough certification process. And what does Apple get out of it? Very little. DVR's sovle a problem based on past technology. Apple has proven to be a forward thinking company which is why they're basing their future on iTunes, portable media, impulse purchases and instant gratification.

Live television is not a "past technology." People will still want to watch live TV and will want to do it from the FrontRow style interface without having to change to another device. Today's consumer also has become accustomed to being able to pause and rewind live television. To have an Apple interface to live TV with pause and rewind will require Apple to build everything from a DVR except the scheduling. If you're building that much, then adding the scheduling of recording becomes a trivial addition.

Apple has an incomplete solution without offering live TV. People still need news and live sports. Apple will undoubtedly fill this need at some point in the future. Apple likes to offer interfaces that are better and easier than the competition and they will simply not offer the live TV component until they have a simple installation and configuration. This requires CableCard. This is why Apple will make their own DVR system.
slarrg is offline  
post #28 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 10:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
snickersbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarpad View Post

Apple TV is valuable for me. I can take my currently connected Macmini back into my office (sitting in the Livingroom doing Quicken was odd) where it belongs, I can have better connections to my TV (HDMI and Toslink). I can place my video files on any drives as long as they are in Itunes they will be seen, I can stream my Lossless Music, browse my Pictures and listen to Podcasts. It fits what I Need

My Mini has Toslink and HDMI. All you need is a DVI to HDMI cable (same price as an HDMI-HDMI cable and same quality) and a Toslink to 3.5mm adapter (probably $1 but mine came with my $10 optical cable from walmart)
snickersbar is offline  
post #29 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 10:31 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
slarrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

ATI has the first example of an OCUR, other companies are free to develop them but they must comply to the specs already set forth by CableLabs.

Apple is not developing a CableCARD solution outside of OCUR, nor will CableLabs allow it.

Of course. I simply said they wouldn't need to use ATI's hardware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL01 View Post

In 3 weeks you will be able to buy a Vista PC w/ CableCARD and you can install whatever codec's you like on it. DivX, XviD, Nero Digital, H.264, and so on. It will work just fine, and there is nothing that says it can't be done. Nor is there anything that will disable CableCARD from working when a user does install third party codec's on a Vista PC.

At this point we're comparing my vision of an unannounced Apple product with an unreleased ATI hardware and an unreleased Microsoft operating system.
slarrg is offline  
post #30 of 156 Old 01-12-2007, 10:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Scarpad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 1,373
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by snickersbar View Post

My Mini has Toslink and HDMI. All you need is a DVI to HDMI cable (same price as an HDMI-HDMI cable and same quality) and a Toslink to 3.5mm adapter (probably $1 but mine came with my $10 optical cable from walmart)


Power PC Mini
Scarpad is offline  
Reply HTPC - Mac Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off