Cook: Apple TV sales up 35 percent, won't remain dormant, hardware not a priority

[dynaflash]

It might be worth noting however that the jump to 720p was achieved via software only. Very little investment on apples parts vs. the jump to 1080p which would require a hadware update. As a hobby and test bed jumping to 720p was a no brainer as there was little investment risk comparatively. I would wager if they were comfortable with a 1080p jump being successful just via sofware we might have it.*

 

[AnalyzeThis]

The rise of the phoenix, indeed

Something over six million units if you believe the estimates that have been given by several analysts. It's certainly one of the most successful dedicated, set-top media players on the market.

Wow, Apple sold ~ 350,000 more units! LOL. Look around, there are infinite number of set-top boxes with features that would leave AppleTV in the dinosaur age. Just because of you are resident of the "Apple" LA-La world, even failed gadget looks like a success. Mr. Cook should drink less of Steve's "woo-do magic" cool-aid

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I understand your point better now. However, I think if studios wanted 1080p to test they would tell Apple they want it added as option, and it would be added (even if it was just added to iTunes).

Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s a big concern for them (the studios or Apple).

OK. So put yourself in the Studio's shoes. Suppose your biggest concern is making as much money as possible from your product. You notice that BD 1080p content is rising in sales volume. So, clearly there is a market for 1080p versions of your content, probably because it maxes out the resolution of all those new HDTVs that keep selling in high volume. You've got one stream of that working pretty well with the new discs, but there you still have to manufacture all the packaging, distribute physical media to stores all over the world, and give the likes of Walmart, Best Buy, etc a big cut of each sale.

You notice that iTunes revenues for purely digital distribution is working OK, and that is a channel that can reach nearly everyone on the planet via direct distribution with relatively insignificant (e)packaging costs. Eureka, you connect the dots with an idea that owners of 1080p HDTVs probably want 1080p content to max out what their TVs can produce via digital distribution too.

So, you call Apple to set up a marketing test to see if your latest & greatest new release in 1080p would boost digital sales to their TV owners. Apple educates you that their TV owners CAN'T watch 1080p even if you want to give it away. There's NO way for you to execute this test to gauge profit potential of 1080p digital distribution via the #1 DD store to (apparently) the #1-selling dedicated DD box.

Perhaps its "no big concern" to Studios NOT because they don't care about testing new revenue potentials, but just because it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to test it via this channel. I'd like to sell my company's products in a number of world markets, but if it is impossible to sell into some markets, there's no reason to even try.

As to why its "no big concern" to Apple, that confounds me to no end (I believe this thing could become their hottest product, especially in terms of reaching out to first-time Apple-product buyers). Obviously, very cheap 1080p chipsets are readily available (as there are plenty of other boxes- even boxes with a BD drive built in- that retail for well below TVs price). So it should be obvious there is no great hardware cost hurdle to adopting 1080p in a next-gen box. As I've mention before in this same kind of discussion, it seems to me that the most likely issue is a simple lack of will to move this hobby to a fairly future proof platform. Why? I have no idea, as I do know that the market size for this kind of device is MUCH LARGER than the potential market of iPad buyers.

I'd be first in line to buy at least one to replace my current TV. If I am not alone in that line, it seems Apple would do what they do very well: roll out a modestly enhanced next-gen bit of hardware and immediately sell a lot of them... just like they do with Macs, iPhones, Touch, etc. Until enough units are sold to make it an interesting test for the Studios, I would expect- and could care less- about a 1080p content option in the iTunes store (some Podcasts will come along, and all our 1080p camcorder movies will finally be able to flow to the HDTV via the elegant interface). But then, just like they did with the 720p option, at least one Studio will decide to test 1080p. And if the test proves profitable, more 1080p content for sale that way will quickly appear in the iTunes Store.

Again, Apple must lead in this... doing exactly what they do when they advance Macs and iPhones and Touch with features not yet supported with software or content (then let the software/content producers "catch up" when they decide to take advantage of those new features). It works with everything else that Apple makes. Why would it NOT work with this particular product?

 

[NightStorm]

Wow, Apple sold ~ 350,000 more units! LOL. Look around, there are infinite number of set-top boxes with features that would leave AppleTV in the dinosaur age. Just because of you are resident of the "Apple" LA-La world, even failed gadget looks like a success. Mr. Cook should drink less of Steve's "woo-do magic" cool-aid

And yet I've seen no numbers to support the fact that these other boxes are selling as well as the "underpowered" and "feature-poor" AppleTV.

 

[VTMac]

OK. So put yourself in the Studio's shoes.

Too much to quote everything. Here is the bottom line. The Studios DO NOT WANT 1080p content digitally distributed. They make a *LOT* less money on an iTunes sales than a BD disc sale. The entire content industry (music and video) are currently dedicated to creating a many impediments to digital content as possible to preserve their existing outrageous margins on physical disc related sales.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Too much to quote everything. Here is the bottom line. The Studios DO NOT WANT 1080p content digitally distributed. They make a *LOT* less money on an iTunes sales than a BD disc sale. The entire content industry (music and video) are currently dedicated to creating a many impediments to digital content as possible to preserve their existing outrageous margins on physical disc related sales.

How do you know this (that Studios make more on physical discs than they could on digital distribution)? That is counter intuitive unless you assume current iTunes pricing would apply to 1080p content (thus the extra money made is a disc at a lot higher price vs. a DD version sold at- say- current iTunes movie prices).

I'm under the impression that Apple doesn't take that big of a cut of media sales. I perceive it would definitely be less than Walmarts, etc cut of physical media sales. I'm under the impression that costs to manufacture, package and distribute discs greatly exceeds costs to master a digital copy for downloads. How do they make more money on BD disc sales vs. going the DD route?

I would more believe they have a great fear of joining their music industry buddies heavily pinched under Apple's thumb, thus they are thoroughly motivated to support all mediums and channels beyond Apple's iTunes. But even there, greed would motivate one of them to test the market for 1080p DD (if it was possible to do so). And if it made them money, more would quickly follow. When the choice is make money or don't make (that) money, they always choose the former.

 

[AnalyzeThis]

And yet I've seen no numbers to support the fact that these other boxes are selling as well as the "underpowered" and "feature-poor" AppleTV.

Try to get popcornhour - the line is like a month long for a new unit. I am sure "vendor does everything in their power to make sure they sell less units as possible".
I sold my used A110 for more than I paid for on eBay, figures...
Currently, I am on WDTV Live on every HDTV in the house with HP MediaSmart WHS steaming full (32Mbs) 1080P HD. No need to rob a bank for $99 a piece and they play my HD/DVD collection without re-encoding anything.
Apple is not always the only answer for everything. I use Apple when they have the best product, but ATV is not one of them, by far. Just check Cook's comment about ATV hardware - it is awesome "as is" by him.

 

[SiliBear]

I'm sick of waiting for a hardware refresh and have decided to finally give up on the Apple TV altogether. Its fantastic promise just isn't fully delivered on the dated equipment that barely handles its basic functions - this product is not a big win for Apple even though with even the most minimal effort on their part it would be.

Lets face it - Apple TV struggles with its own 720p content, frequently has issues synching after fast forward/rewind, "instant" HD rental downloads are hit and miss (sometimes they are ready to play in 1 min, sometimes in 6 hours, regardless of your Internet bandwidth), many people complain about having the device disconnect from their iTunes (luckily I've never experienced this particular issue). It would seem like a trivial exercise to simply update the existing hardware to make the Apple TV deliver a better user experience without all the annoyances and inconveniences that we currently have to put up with from a "hobby" product from a company that easily can...and nearly always does...do much better.

While I agree with many other posters that adding the ability to do 1080p via hardware would also be a nice addition (I would still enjoy 720p iTunes video for a long while and am not clamoring for 1080p downloads or BD), personally I'd be content with the Apple TV "just working" as it should, like all other Apple products do. The current device is perilously close to being a lemon when it should be lemonade.

Since I'm giving up on Apple TV, I really also have no more use for purchasing video content in form of movies and television series from iTunes any longer given that it is DRM protected media. I will now probably also take a pass on the iPad since one of its most compelling (for me at least) features is to watch stored media on the go. If Apple wants to sell video media through iTunes, it really needs its hardware devices to be able to chew through its existing content with ease...which the Apple TV today does not.

I would very much appreciate any comments or recommendations on competitors products that do a decent job of delivering on the basic functions of the Apple TV.

What I am looking for:

- single source needed for media storage (can be on a computer or on a network)
- able to access from any set in my house (wirelessly or through coax or network cabling)
- able to be accessed from the internet over a mobile device

I'm just not familiar enough with what is out there and had been hoping for too long that Apple would deliver the total experience. What hardware combinations would some of you guys recommend as a replacement?

 

[mchalebk]

Most of the arguments about 720p vs 1080p revolve around movie rentals/purchase. However, that's not the only source of 1080p video.

Apple computers have always been popular for editing video. Most HD camcorders are capable of producing video that either has too high a resolution or too high a frame rate for the AppleTV to play back. Add in the fact that Apple computers don't support Blu-ray and the consumer is left with missing links in the home video chain.

Even if the studios don't want 1080p downloads available, Apple should still make their hardware capable of playing 1080p 24/30 fps video. It is ridiculous that you have to shoot at 24 fps 720p to display HD home video on the AppleTV. You should be able to shoot 720p/1080p at 24 or 30 fps and play it on the AppleTV. Otherwise, people who want the best playback for home video are left looking at other (non-Apple) options.

 

[tommylotto]

I like to rent movies in HD from the iTunes store directly from my AppleTv's. 1080p would be nice, but I do not sit close enough to my 50 inch plasmas to see the difference -- neither do most consumers.

It is a good product. Not great, but good. I will stick with it.

 

[Rich1963]

People on these boards make 1080p sound like it is the only thing consumers want. But people on this board and others aren't the mainstream. The average consumer still has difficulty understanding the difference between the words digital, HD, 1080p. I had a person the other day telling me he was finally getting wi-fi from Qwest so he could surf the internet faster. I said, 'oh, so you're getting DSL?' he replied, 'No. I said I'm getting wi-fi'.

1080p may be a necessity for some. Others are convinced that having basic digital cable hooked up to their new 1080p 50 incher is high-def. Apple is thinking of the broadest market possible. The market at large just doesn't get the difference yet.

And as alluded to earlier, alot of people I know are starting to run into a storage problem with their itunes libraries. These aren't people like us with 1000 movie libraries; these are people with maybe 1000 songs and 10-20 purchased movies from iTunes. Educating them on increasing storage RELIABLY is a nightmare. I cannot imagine giving them a third download on top of the 480p and 720p iTunes already provides that further eats up hard drive real estate.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Rich, give people some credit- even average Joe's are not as limited as your post would imply. When they bought their HDTV, they were probably educated about what "full HD" means right there. And while the technical meanings in that are many, the one thing that almost always stands out is a number- 1080p. Much like people understand other computing tech numbers, pretty much bigger is almost always better (faster processors, more processors, bigger hard drive, more ram, more megapixels, etc).

I hold the opinion that as soon as even the most average of average Joe's goes out to buy his first HDTV, probably the ONE thing he actually soaks in is resolution info, where, once again, bigger is always better. Even the (usual) dummies at the TV retailer leverage resolution as one of their first punches to move their customers to buy an HDTV.

If average Joe's were lacking/uninterested in resolution, there would be little reason to pay up for BD players (and they're selling pretty well). There would be little reason to pay (more) to (re)buy their movies (again) in BD. There would be little reason to pay up for 1080p camcorders, but they also are selling very well. The market has chosen 1080p as the standard; Apple is just clinging to some minimal derivative.

So, while I can agree that there are always some who think analog SD cable is HD as soon as they hook up their cable (sometimes because the program opens with "in HD (where available)", I would suggest the crowd of average Joes who have actually purchased an HDTV (the market for TV devices) likely grasps the concept, and does not buy into an idea that 720p is good enough (because Apple says so).

I've got a tech "average Joe" neighbor who recently purchased a 1080p set. Comcast hooked it up in such a way that only the analog SD signal as getting displayed. He came to me telling me about the set confident that something was wrong: "the picture looks pretty good, but not nearly as good as the HD I was seeing at the store". I took a look, fixed the cabling, put the TV in the mode to default to the HD signal source, and boom, the difference was obvious. Even (many) average Joes can tell.

Sales of BD players and other TV-like boxes with less functionality or elegance than TV (but offering 1080p playback) somewhat support this stance. Else, one could take the "good enough" stance with everything Apple makes. No need to update those iPhones, they're good enough. No need to build new Macs, they're way beyond what the average Joes use them for now. Etc.

1080p will be THE standard for a long time. The ability to deliver hardware that can support this max standard has also been available to Apple for a long time. Handicapped 720p is only a stepping stone for now, and apparently mostly hooked to Apple deciding it is good enough, and a bunch of Apple (is always right) fans agreeing with them.

In the meantime, every other link in Apple chain- from shooting with 1080p camcorders to importing and rendering with iMovie to databasing and playing 1080p in iTunes ALL supports 1080p NOW. Just this one link- the last link to the HDTV- is still limited for no great reason other than Apple deciding 720p is good enough.

Apple is not always right.

• Apple says we don't need BD drives, but BDs 50gb storage on a thin,small disc would sure be nice
• Apple says we don't need Flash in the "ultimate mobile internet device" but that means lots of website features in the present are not going to work at all (not quite an ultimate experience)
• Apple says we don't need an isight camera in a device that is supposed to be traveling around with us wherever we go

Etc. Then, when Apple rolls out a feature it previously said we didn't need, it is heralded as a breakthrough by Apple (recall when Intel chips were junk, until they replaced PowerPC; recall how video on portable devices like iPods were undesirable until Apple rolled out iPod 5 with video; etc).

I appreciate the pro-720p arguments while Apple has chosen the limitation of 720p for us, but it doesn't change the fact that 1080p is well within reach (for a couple of years now), and issues like storage space become less of an issue every day, as ever-greater storage comes available at increasingly lower prices.

IMO, a 1080p TV would yield a significant upswing in sales, as what is probably the #1 buyer obstacle would be cast out of the way. Who really wants to over-pay for 3+ year old technology that is incapable of maxing out the #1 benefit for the new HDTV someone just bought?

It's "a hobby" because it's not a major seller. However it might not be a major seller because it simply lacks a few features the market expects to roll out any day now in a next-gen version. Apple could find out pretty easily by doing what it does with everything else it makes- a modest hardware refresh. In the meantime, all those people that decide to embrace 1080p BD players and other TV-like boxes are entrenching other options NOT connected to the iTunes Store in their living rooms.

Given the massive entrenchment of iTunes itself, I bet a lot of those buyers would at least give a next-gen TV more consideration if it just had a few important features lacking in the current model.

 

[SiliBear]

I appreciate the pro-720p arguments while Apple has chosen the limitation of 720p for us, but it doesn't change the fact that 1080p is well within reach (for a couple of years now), and issues like storage space become less of an issue every day, as ever-greater storage comes available at increasingly lower prices.

IMO, a 1080p TV would yield a significant upswing in sales, as what is probably the #1 buyer obstacle would be cast out of the way. Who really wants to over-pay for 3+ year old technology that is incapable of maxing out the #1 benefit for the new HDTV someone just bought?

It's "a hobby" because it's not a major seller. However it might not be a major seller because it simply lacks a few features the market expects to roll out any day now in a next-gen version. Apple could find out pretty easily by doing what it does with everything else it makes- a modest hardware refresh. In the meantime, all those people that decide to embrace 1080p BD players and other TV-like boxes are entrenching other options NOT connected to the iTunes Store in their living rooms.

Given the massive entrenchment of iTunes itself, I bet a lot of those buyers would at least give a next-gen TV more consideration if it just had a few important features lacking in the current model.

Amen brother!

 

[jaw04005]

The 1080p issue has been beat to death. At this point, the 1080p crowd should get together with the crowd that wants FLAC support in the iTunes Store and storm Cupertino!

 

[kiranmk2]

It seems fairly simple to me that it's a "hobby" because they don't have a business model for it. When the ATV launched it was described as an iPod for your TV - a way to get your iTunes videos to your TV. This is where they may have considered a 1080p upgrade as a lot of legal itunes video sources come from camcorders which have now settled on 1080p. However, Apple came out and admitted that they got it wrong with that philosophy and what people really wanted was movies. This is when 2.x came out and introduced the HD rentals. At this point the ATV was marketed as an HD instant rental box. The big difference between the ATV and the iPod is that Apple realised the iPod could be sold as an means to use what people already had (a CD collection). They ran a lot of commercials encouraging people to rip their collections and sync them to an iPod and as the capacities went up and prices came down, people embraced the idea. Who wouldn't like to consign a large collection of CDs (and portable CD player) to the attic and carry your complete music collection around on a small device. As time passed, a new generation became accustomed to buying songs digitally. We're now nearly 10 years into the iTMS and there are a lot of people in the younger generation who buy exclusively from it. The problem with the ATV is that not only is illegal to rip your DVDs, but it's a much more time-consuming procedure. If people can't all rush out to buy a device which will contain all your films and convert your films easily (i.e. insert a disc, ok the metadata and have the process completed in about 10 minutes), then the majority of people won't even consider buying movies digitally. The sellers of other media streamers don't really care about selling you media - they just want to sell hardware - so they throw 1080p playback and mkv/divx/xvid playback into their boxes which are in competition with each other. Apple, meanwhile are trying to buddy up to the studios as they are envisioning subscription plans - possibly for tv shows only, but perhaps movies too - and probably don't want to risk appearing to condone piracy. After all, an mkv file is often the same as an m4v file (h264 video, ac3 audio) just in a different container. At the moment the ATV is essentially just a box to enables you to rent films (and playback music) - Youtube and the photo/internet radio features are nice addons, but aren't deal clinchers. The market for this is obviously quite small and until Apple and the studios can reach a new deal, there is no point releasing new hardware. If a deal is reached in 6 months we would get a better new model than we would if it launched now. When the subscription plans are agreed, the ATV suddenly becomes more than a simple movie-rental device and opens up the new, potentially-mainstream market of IPTV box. I imagine, work is commencing on a new model due to the adverts placed looking for people to extend iPhoneOS to other devices - an ARM/iPhoneOS box makes perfect sense as it would reduce component costs and help thermal management. 1080p files are another proposition as that would depend on studio willingness to issue them and broadband quality to receive them. It seems obvious that the Studios do want to offer 1080p as a way to counter Apple's desire to lower prices. Reduce the price of the 720p version as Apple wishes and introduce the 1080p version at the same old price (or more expensive) - how many people would automatically pick the best version without even thinking? They keep pushing BluRay sales (which aren't that good) but promoting the better bit-rates and HD audio.

 

[LeoFio]

I bought my AppleTV within the first few months it came out, and havent regretted my purchase since. At the time, I accepted it for what it was and didn't expect anything more, it was merely a way to get my itunes content on my tv. If i wanted more, I connected my laptop to the TV. Now after recently installing aTV flash, new life has been brought to the unit with much more functionality. I can't ask for anything more, except upgraded hardware.

 

[dynaflash]

The 1080p issue has been beat to death. At this point, the 1080p crowd should get together with the crowd that wants FLAC support in the iTunes Store and storm Cupertino!

lol.

HobeSoundDaryll:
Okay, its an iPod for your tv, which is what apple has said all along. So can you play your camcorder 1080p vids on your iPod ? No. While it may wrankle those that want 1080p ... 1080p is in no way promised or even hinted at by apple for the atv. Basically you have the wrong device for what you want to do. Deal with it. No matter how many paragraphs you write saying the same thing over and over it is not reality. Maybe some day but not today. I really think its obvious that apple could care less about your four years of home video's shot at 1080p. Not to be crass, but it appears to be the truth.

Seems to me the atv is not dead by any means, it is just not what you would like it to be.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Dynaflash, last sentence is correct. It is not dead by any means- I love mine- but it's not exactly what I would like it to be. On the latter, I think I'm not alone.

kiranmk2, I can generally agree with much of what you say. But consider this: if Apple is dragging its feet because of the lack of a business model, working toward something in maybe 6 more months, etc, why not LEAD with some new hardware that could fire up sales of this little box. Then, Apple could negotiate a deal from a more powerful position (a more dominant (the people have spoken) position), just like they have for iPod content in the past.

Recall when Universal quit iTunes in what was apparently a battle of "who's more important?" Was it not about 6 months later that Universal came (crawling) back? Why? Because Apple was in the power position with a dominant chunk of the market locked into the iTunes system. Universal quit iTunes to show Apple, and cash flows from digital distribution of Universal content plunged. Studios want to make as much money as they can. They'll play ball with anyone that can make them a good chunk of money. But they can't make any money on 1080p digital distribution until there is a 1080p TV through which to rent/sell it.

Apparently, TV "as is" is the best selling of these little boxes too. Why? Could the reason be exactly the same? In spite of its shortcomings, lots of people have generally committed to iTunes for their media management. Thus, TV is the most obvious choice to maximize that commitment.

However, the problem with that is that unless Apple makes the first move, there's no reason whatsoever for Studios to even consider 1080p content for TV. Even if they ALL wanted to go there today, the entrenched boxes can't play it. Again, Apple must lead so that the Studios can be tempted to follow. It doesn't work the other way.

And, if a 1080p content deal is to be struck, wouldn't Apple want to come from a maximum position of power... just like they do when it's iPod content negotiations, ebook negotiations for iPad, etc? Letting other boxes get much more entrenchment for an apparent reason of hobby complacency only weakens Apple's negotiating strength. Let that go long enough and the hold on the living room can be lost.

I keep watching for something to come out that reasonably replicates the TV UI (what I think is still best about THIS little box) with a "good as possible" link to the iTunes database, and that might get my next-gen TV money. I'd much rather that box come from Apple (for 100% iTunes compatibility) but it seems it's Apples race to win or lose... mostly on a relatively modest choice to evolve the computer hardware inside (just like they regularly do with everything else they make).

Several of you seem to take the stance of no need to evolve the hardware until someone else- outside of Apple- takes steps to create the business model. But that's NEVER how Apple approaches this stuff. We have iMacs with quad cores that the vast majority of software doesn't yet capitalize upon. We have iPhones with tethering capability that AT&T does not yet support. Apple almost always is (reasonably) leading their software and content partners with newer hardware. Why should it be different with TV?

Besides, as I've now beat to death, there were no 1080p BD discs available before there were BD players on which to play them. The hardware must lead and the software follows. Pumping 1080p BD discs into stores without any BD players would have resulted in the same situation: since they're impossible to play without the hardware, no need even trying to make or sell those discs. This is NO different.

 

[dynaflash]

Dynaflash, last sentence is correct. It is not dead by any means- I love mine- but it's not exactly what I would like it to be. On the latter, I think I'm not alone.

Agreed on the latter, we really are in the same camp. I would just love it if I could get weightp to work as well as 720p @ 30 fps ( which from hacking the playlist I have found the current hardware *can* handle but is artificially limited from syncing by iTunes). weightp is a deficiency of the modified Qt 7.0 which the atv *still* runs. An atv quicktime core update would solve that which would be great given weightp's distinct advantages over no weightp.

Alas given I do not see a hardware refresh around the corner, I tend to hang my hat on what they can still do in software as it the most likely upgrade at this point imho. They can still wring more out of that gpu as far as I am concerned.

 

[zedsdead]

Agreed on the latter, we really are in the same camp. I would just love it if I could get weightp to work as well as 720p @ 30 fps ( which from hacking the playlist I have found the current hardware *can* handle but is artificially limited from syncing by iTunes). weightp is a deficiency of the modified Qt 7.0 which the atv *still* runs. An atv quicktime core update would solve that which would be great given weightp's distinct advantages over no weightp.

Alas given I do not see a hardware refresh around the corner, I tend to hang my hat on what they can still do in software as it the most likely upgrade at this point imho. They can still wring more out of that gpu as far as I am concerned.

I still want new hardware for performance reasons since the current one can barely handle its functions, but if they remove the 24fps cap it would at least be better. My eyeTV shows are about half in 720/60p, so the detelecine doesn't work for it at 24fps, so I am stuck at 540p at 30fps. The other half, in 1080i, can be worked into handbrake with detelecine on and keep it at 720/24p with the correct pulldown.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

dynaflash, it's good to know that there's a bit more potential in that thar hardware. 30fps would potentially reduce the stutter every time I'm panning camcorder footage shot at 1080p and converted down to 720p. That would be better than nothing (I've pretty much given in to just rendering everything in 960 x 540).

But, like zedsdead, I keep feeling like this platform is struggling to do what it's doing now... like it is just begging for some "help" that can't really come (other than hardware updates). For what it is, and for as old as it is, it is FANNNNtastic. But quoting Oliver: "Please sir, can I have a little more?" (with Apple solely in charge of the stew).

 

[AnalyzeThis]

There is a On Demand and DRV "App" for that.

People on these boards make 1080p sound like it is the only thing consumers want. But people on this board and others aren't the mainstream. The average consumer still has difficulty understanding the difference between the words digital, HD, 1080p. I had a person the other day telling me he was finally getting wi-fi from Qwest so he could surf the internet faster. I said, 'oh, so you're getting DSL?' he replied, 'No. I said I'm getting wi-fi'.

1080p may be a necessity for some. Others are convinced that having basic digital cable hooked up to their new 1080p 50 incher is high-def. Apple is thinking of the broadest market possible. The market at large just doesn't get the difference yet.

And as alluded to earlier, alot of people I know are starting to run into a storage problem with their itunes libraries. These aren't people like us with 1000 movie libraries; these are people with maybe 1000 songs and 10-20 purchased movies from iTunes. Educating them on increasing storage RELIABLY is a nightmare. I cannot imagine giving them a third download on top of the 480p and 720p iTunes already provides that further eats up hard drive real estate.

For those folks there is thing called Comcast On Demand (free) and DRV and NetFlix. ATV was designed for folks with libraries of movies/video in mind. Now, imagine the world where NetFlix would rent music CDs, iTunes would not even exist in this universe and it would be NetFlix bragging of renting 100 billions CDs a year. Well, NetFlix is the reason ATV will never succeed in our universe. You should figure out why on your own (see for a clue ^^^ above).

 

[dynaflash]

There is no question we all would want a hardware refresh ... I think its fair to say thats a given. However, I prefer to hope for the most likely outcome, which is a software upgrade to push the existing hardware further.

 

[AnalyzeThis]

I still want new hardware for performance reasons since the current one can barely handle its functions, but if they remove the 24fps cap it would at least be better. My eyeTV shows are about half in 720/60p, so the detelecine doesn't work for it at 24fps, so I am stuck at 540p at 30fps. The other half, in 1080i, can be worked into handbrake with detelecine on and keep it at 720/24p with the correct pulldown.

Shows like American Idol uses all 60 fps of 720p. 30fps only gives you have of the motion of the source. I use eyeTV on mac-mini hooked up to HDTV, so I could enjoy the whole experience or watch it on WDTV Live. I could only imagine how much time is wasted on re-encoding. You should really like it to put up with it. Is it really worse it?

 

[jaw04005]

There is no question we all would want a hardware refresh ... I think its fair to say thats a given. However, I prefer to hope for the most likely outcome, which is a software upgrade to push the existing hardware further.

Very true.

I read an interesting article the other day about how Sony managed to size down their PS3 OS’s RAM usage from something like 130MB to 70MB. Maybe Apple could do the same with the Apple TV?

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=17775

At last year’s WWDC didn’t Bertrand Serlet mention one of the reasons they decided to ship Snow Leopard was to unify OS development across platforms?

But I guess if they were going to do that it would have happened with the 3.0 update.