Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple TV vs. WD TV HD Live Plus. Why did Apple destroy functionality?

The elephant in the room is surely illegal HD downloads - most of which are in mkv format. Apple (like Sony) cant "bless" this format - especially Apple as their business plan is to lock you into itunes based content.

I've got an old Apple TV which i only use in my spare room to access iTunes. But I have two WD HD Live boxes.

I have no problems accessing content from either a local USB drive or my Macs via the WDHD - it found the network connection straight out of the box with no adjustment needed.

Remote control is a bit small but does the job pretty well. Also have no issues with m4v files.

I use it to supplement my PS3s when streaming video - the Apple TV I'm afraid wouldnt get a look in
 
Duncan-UK said:
The elephant in the room is surely illegal HD downloads - most of which are in mkv format. Apple (like Sony) cant "bless" this format - especially Apple as their business plan is to lock you into itunes based content.

I've got an old Apple TV which i only use in my spare room to access iTunes. But I have two WD HD Live boxes.

I have no problems accessing content from either a local USB drive or my Macs via the WDHD - it found the network connection straight out of the box with no adjustment needed.

Remote control is a bit small but does the job pretty well. Also have no issues with m4v files.

I use it to supplement my PS3s when streaming video - the Apple TV I'm afraid wouldnt get a look in
Click to expand...

Sadly neither the WD or the PS3 have a decent Front End :( that's the plus of the Apple TV.
 
mkaake said:
The reason I'm interested in one (and the reason I think this one will do better with the non-techie market) is that I know if I hook up an aTv in my living room, my wife and kids will be able to use it without any problems - doesn't matter if they're watching TV, streaming netflix, or want to watch a slideshow of pictures we have on the computer - it will be simple for them to ues and figure out. A comparable streamer, which may handle more exotic formats (none of which I have on my computer), that may have better technical specifications, means nothing if the UI doesn't work well. Apple is trying what they did with computers and phones - on a technical level, it may seem less capable than other options on the market, but it's focused on what it does do, and doing it well - techies have a tendancy to ignore or brush aside issues of the actual user interface, but it's *huge* for everyone else.

Just my opinion, honestly.

Good timing too - I wanted a better netflix streaming option than I'm currently using, and was considering 79 bucks or so for a roku... now I can spend 20 more, stream titles from my main machine (which is always turned on anyway), rent movies, and watch slideshows - all with an interface I know other people in the house can enjoy. To me, that's worth the extra 20 bucks, and worth not having some whiz-bang features (or codec support) of other players.
Click to expand...

I am in the same conundrum.
I am also looking at the new Boxee Box to see if they might end up being a good alternative.
Two issues I have with ATV are:
lack of 1080p so I can't rip my blu-ray discs in full res.
Lack of external drive support, so I don't need to have my Mac on at all times to watch something.

Finally like you, the family friendly UI is huge for me. I need them to have no issues using it. If they think the UI is clunky or difficult to use, they will not use at all. This is the ONLY thing that might make me buy the ATV and go through the hassle of the missing features I want.
 
petvas said:
As a former owner of a WDTV I can tell you the following:
  • WDTV's interface isn't as sleek and cool as the Apple TV
  • Configuring network connectivity between the WDTV and other computers is highly problematic.
  • There is no nice cover art, renting of movies and TV shows
  • The remote control sucks big time

The only thing that keeps me from buying an Apple TV is the 720p maximum resolution. It is really a shame...
Click to expand...

+1 from this soon to be former WD TV Live owner; I am bypassing the Apple TV and going with a Mac Mini with Plex.
 
I have the original WDTV, the WDTV Live, an Appletv and a HTPC running XBMC.

The WDTVs never get any use. I simply got tired of manually adding thumbnails to my films so that my kids could choose the movies they wanted to watch, ejecting drives to copy over films since the WDTV lacked a network interface and my WDTV Live frequently drops connection, prompting frantic phone calls from my family to trouble shoot how to reconnect etc. The GUI on the WDTVs is a joke and completely unintuitive, especially if you are accessing files from more than one source. In short, from a general user standpoint, the WDTV is a complete failure and can't touch the user friendliness of both the Appletv and XBMC.

The Appletv is not for everyone, but IF you have your media stored and organized in iTunes, it is a fantastic little device. I use my existing Appletv for all my music files but I am slowly adding my film collection to iTunes in anticipation of the new Appletv.
 
Markusp said:
The WDTVs never get any use. I simply got tired of manually adding thumbnails to my films so that my kids could choose the movies they wanted to watch, ejecting drives to copy over films since the WDTV lacked a network interface and my WDTV Live frequently drops connection, prompting frantic phone calls from my family to trouble shoot how to reconnect etc. The GUI on the WDTVs is a joke and completely unintuitive, especially if you are accessing files from more than one source. In short, from a general user standpoint, the WDTV is a complete failure and can't touch the user friendliness of both the Appletv and XBMC.

The Appletv is not for everyone, but IF you have your media stored and organized in iTunes, it is a fantastic little device. I use my existing Appletv for all my music files but I am slowly adding my film collection to iTunes in anticipation of the new Appletv.
Click to expand...

Agreed.. my 4 year old can easily navigate and select movies or shows on our Apple TV's. WDTV is an entirely different story.. WDTV UI is written by a company that makes hard drives, and it's very apparent.

And as far as MKV/DiVX playback goes - my "tweaked" v1 ATV is perfectly capable of playing this content over the network. I am hoping the same thing will be possible on new ATV down the road, but since MKV/DiVX represents less than 5% of my content I am not too concerned.
 
I only have a 720p TV, so I don't care about 1080p.

Software updates can be delivered over Wifi. Do you really want to have to do software updates via tethering a set top box to your computer?

I agree that iOS apps should be added. I believe it runs iOS, but that's yet to be seen. I expect it to be jailbroken, rooted, h4x3d, whatever you want to call it.

Apple TV is a set top box, not a computer. It's for people who watch movies and TV shows, not h264, avi, and mkv.

It's replacing my PowerMac G4 that I use as a HTPC.
 
I have no problems personally with the front ends of either the PS3 or the WD box. After all its just looking at lists of folders. I can understand why thumbnails etc are attractive though, but for my uses they arent important.

I also record lots of BBC HD material off satellite, and this wont play back on the Apple TV unless its converted down to 720p via handbrake, so again another reason why the Apple TV is reduced to being a seldom used iTunes music streamer in my spare room.

I've no illusions about being an average user though, so I expect the Apple TV to do the job just nicely for those who want to rent things.

As for using plex or VLC - well I've always had lipsync problems with plex and the user interface is a bit of a dog. Plus the absence of a decent remote control is a real bind (thats the beauty of using the PS3).

I also seem to get a visible line through the bottom of the picture when watching on my Mac Pro with VLC - so again its not ideal.
 
Duncan-UK said:
I have no problems personally with the front ends of either the PS3 or the WD box. After all its just looking at lists of folders. I can understand why thumbnails etc are attractive though, but for my uses they arent important.
Click to expand...

It's not only the thumbnail is all the info presented in an organized way on the ATV instead of a mere list. I have a lot of TV Shows in my iTunes and organization is key to handle all of them.
 
hitekalex said:
Boxee/XBMC are junk
Click to expand...

A quite strong sentiment in which almost noone agrees, good job.

There isn't a better mediaplayer than XBMC and it's forks. 99.99% of the mac HTPC solution use XBMC or Plex. And for the ATV XBMC is a must have.

Oh and don't even try to be funny by going on about complexity^^. Navigating XBMC is something the aforementioned three year old can do (starting a movie can take as little as three pushes on the same remote button). As it actually accepts a lot more file formats than the other solutions it's pretty easy to make a case that it is indeed easier.

The funny part is that many of those who cheer about the ATV simplicity don't even know how good Plex/XBMC is and on the other hand come with geeky statements as "720P isn't discernible worse than 1080P".

It's generally a true statement, but the non-geeky consumer, exactly the target demographic actually thinks 1080P is better... as that's what the TV salesmen have been successfully pushing through their throats for years.

Not being 1080P will hurt Apple in the eye of the intended demographic... because they have no technical knoledge to see its a wash.
 
Duncan-UK said:
I can understand why thumbnails etc are attractive though, but for my uses they arent important.
Click to expand...

It's not just about pretty thumbnails.. I have a library of 500+ movies and 200+ shows - all fully tagged (things like movie director / actors / description / movie art). Since WDTV doesn't understand video metadata - my library would have been a mess.. For example, I'd be unable to quickly look up movie description, if I forgot what the movie was about.. etc etc.

And yes, it's a much more pleasant and satisfying experience to navigate a nice looking and feature-rich UI, as opposed to browsing through file folders like it's 1995.

Seydlitz said:
A quite strong sentiment in which almost noone agrees, good job.

There isn't a better mediaplayer than XBMC and it's forks. 99.99% of the mac HTPC solution use XBMC or Plex. And for the ATV XBMC is a must have.
Click to expand...

OK didn't mean to slam XBMC specifically. My comment was directed to Boxee on ATV, which was a pretty bad experience early on. XBMC on ATV - I haven't specifically played with.. and frankly didn't see why I'd want to. ATV native interface is already very good, don't know what XBMC could possibly offer over and above the native interface.

In the end of the day, most of us who have ATV just want to play content.. not mess around with home-grown add-ons. But for the record - I have patched all my ATVs, and I use ATVfiles with Perian to play XviD video over the network. The reason why I like ATVfiles is because it's simple, lightweight and functions within the native ATV UI.. not attempts to replace it. So I don't need XBMC.
 
USB Port---Not for end users--yet lol!!!

bamf said:
There is a USB port right under the HDMI port.
Click to expand...

Ports and interfaces
HDMI2
Optical audio
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in IR receiver

*******Micro-USB (for service and support)********

Meaning that you cannot plug in an external drive. This is used for Apple to diagnose and service the ATV. I am sure with time someone will figure out a work around though. And for all those people who don't like the new version....please don't buy one. It is that simple.
 
heywoodja said:
. And for all those people who don't like the new version....please don't buy one. It is that simple.
Click to expand...

No, no, no. It's not "that simple". People who are unhappy about Apple's choice have the right (maybe even the duty^^) to complain and question the decisions.

Mind you that they have an Apple product that has great options and that the successor is a completely different beast. In other words, there won't be a successor for their needs.

Apple can do whatever they want and people are free to like or to dislike. But airing disgruntlement about it isn't a bad thing. Maybe they listen and will cater to the needs of that group as well. Of course, this isn't an official Apple forum, but I assume you agree that there is room here for other than "Hosanna" stories.
 
mkaake said:
The reason I'm interested in one (and the reason I think this one will do better with the non-techie market) is that I know if I hook up an aTv in my living room, my wife and kids will be able to use it without any problems - doesn't matter if they're watching TV, streaming netflix, or want to watch a slideshow of pictures we have on the computer - it will be simple for them to ues and figure out. A comparable streamer, which may handle more exotic formats (none of which I have on my computer), that may have better technical specifications, means nothing if the UI doesn't work well. Apple is trying what they did with computers and phones - on a technical level, it may seem less capable than other options on the market, but it's focused on what it does do, and doing it well - techies have a tendancy to ignore or brush aside issues of the actual user interface, but it's *huge* for everyone else.

Just my opinion, honestly.

Good timing too - I wanted a better netflix streaming option than I'm currently using, and was considering 79 bucks or so for a roku... now I can spend 20 more, stream titles from my main machine (which is always turned on anyway), rent movies, and watch slideshows - all with an interface I know other people in the house can enjoy. To me, that's worth the extra 20 bucks, and worth not having some whiz-bang features (or codec support) of other players.
Click to expand...

This is a good point indeed. If it was just me I would have every box made with wiring that looks like a spaghetti dinner, or a complicated wireless system that no one else but me can operate. But that's not the case. I have family members that need to use it too. So the famous "Apple products are easy to use" goes a long way.

I have a professional music recording studio in a specially built room in the house. My wife could NEVER even play a cd that she wants to hear on a good system. She couldn't even turn all the equipment on. Does the family no good.

So the real battle in all these threads seems to be people arguing that either want simple that works for them or more complicated that does more. There is no right or wrong to this question. Besides, this crap changes by the month so this will never end. Get what does you for now and buy again next year. We are consumers aren't we?
 
Duncan-UK said:
The elephant in the room is surely illegal HD downloads - most of which are in mkv format. Apple (like Sony) cant "bless" this format - especially Apple as their business plan is to lock you into itunes based content.
Click to expand...

Getting MKV files to play on your Apple Tv 2 is a 2 min job. 720p all of them play 1080p some do and some don't.
 
petvas said:
As a former owner of a WDTV I can tell you the following:
  • WDTV's interface isn't as sleek and cool as the Apple TV
  • Configuring network connectivity between the WDTV and other computers is highly problematic.
  • There is no nice cover art, renting of movies and TV shows
  • The remote control sucks big time
Click to expand...

I second all that.
 
As an owner of a WDTV and a WDTV Live . . . I can say that they are both nothing more than a headache (at least for me) I'm assuming the Live 'plus' is no different.

I snatched up an Apple TV as soon as I had the chance and haven't hooked up either of the WD devices since.

-their software is buggy . . . . very buggy.

-playing different file types is a crap-shoot. neither of my devices have consistently played any one file type (mp4's especially have issues)

-rather than releasing new firmware, they just release new product (ie, WDTV, WDTV Gen2, WDTV Live, WDTV Live Plus, WDTV Mini, and then some new WD 'home theater' thing.)

Check out their support forums to get a good look at how unhappy many of their customers are - it's has gotten better in the past few months but is still pathetic.

Meanwhile, my new apple TV plays all of my mp4's flawlessly, has a MUCH better interface and remote, and basically 'just works'.

Apple RARELY releases buggy software. . . . with WD, you'd think they have a religious obligation to it.
 
I've used both systems, the WDTV and the Apple TV 1 and 2, and I must say that the Apple TV is amazingly superior to the WDTV. It's easy to use, has a nice looking interface and you can rent and buy movies easily.

Add to it the new features of being able to stream from the iPhone and iPad and you get a much better experience.


As for the WDTV, I know of 4 persons that own it. And all of them have it because it is the one single box that can play mkv and avi files. And you know why they want to play that files? Because they download movies from torrents.

I'm not saying that all the people who want to watch avi files have downloaded them from torrents, but I must say that the majority do use it for that purpose.
 
HarryPot said:
I've used both systems, the WDTV and the Apple TV 1 and 2, and I must say that the Apple TV is amazingly superior to the WDTV. It's easy to use, has a nice looking interface and you can rent and buy movies easily.

Add to it the new features of being able to stream from the iPhone and iPad and you get a much better experience.


As for the WDTV, I know of 4 persons that own it. And all of them have it because it is the one single box that can play mkv and avi files. And you know why they want to play that files? Because they download movies from torrents.

I'm not saying that all the people who want to watch avi files have downloaded them from torrents, but I must say that the majority do use it for that purpose.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are most probably right, but the problem is that there is not a single legitimate offering that does the job good. iTunes Movies don't have the best quality, the video store of the Playstation Network also not. I don't know about Netflix as I don't live in the States, but I am sure it is nothing near to a Blu-Ray.
There are many people who love Blu-Ray quality but also want to have the benefits of an electronic video library. They do not want to have to manage all those Blu-Ray discs.
Another thing to consider are the various restrictions most movie studios impose. Here in Germany, most movies and TV series are in the German language. The original audio isn't always included. I hate that. I want to hear the original sounds and not a crappy audio translation. The iTunes store has only a small selection of movies in original audio. The Playstation Movie network also.
The only way for me to get the original sound in a movie is by buying the Blu-Ray or downloading an mkv file from the Internet!

What I need is a service that allows me to download all movies (legitimate), without any silly restrictions (copy protection for example), offering Blu-Ray quality in an mkv file and at a great price.
Prices at the moment are more than ridiculous. A movie should never cost more than 9.99$. A rented movie should cost max 1.99$ and all these in Blu-Ray quality. When the Movie Studios stop being greedy, I will also acknowledge that and start paying for my mkv files.
 
As noted, the AppleTV has a more polished and "friendly" interface and is easier to set-up and configure than the WDTV. And Apple is all about "the user experience".

I imagine playing pirated content is not something Apple gives too much thought to. It's easy enough to convert MKVs and AVIs to M4Vs with applications like Handbrake, after all.
 
CWallace said:
As noted, the AppleTV has a more polished and "friendly" interface and is easier to set-up and configure than the WDTV. And Apple is all about "the user experience".

I imagine playing pirated content is not something Apple gives too much thought to. It's easy enough to convert MKVs and AVIs to M4Vs with applications like Handbrake, after all.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I own many Bluray films and I like the AppleTV interface and ease of use, so I converted them to mp4. Many times I don't really. Care about having the greatest quality, but like to browse through my movie collection in a nice way. The AppleTV offers that, so I have started using it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back