Price drop on 160GB AppleTV... 40GB model discontinued

[blybug]

I would much prefer Apple hold AT&T's feet to the fire and get them to deliver a robust and reliable phone network than waste time turning a cellphone into a home theater appliance.

I don't really see how those two are interconnected or mutually exclusive. Writing an TV app for the iPhone would take all of about 10 minutes of modifying the iPhone->External Display function that has existed since v1.0 for Steve's keynote demonstrations.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

All of this talk about DVR and CableCARD makes no sense. Apple is in the business of selling you content from the iTunes store. Why would they make a device to let you get your content from someone else? There is absolutely no way they would consider adding a DVR/CableCARD. Furthermore, why would they add a Blu-Ray player? So you can buy your Blu-Ray discs from Walmart instead of buying/renting from iTunes?

It cracks me up to see this kind of thinking. When ipod came out, did Apple lock us into just music purchased from iTunes? No, we could take advantage of content we already had. Do you think ipod would have been nearly as big if we would have had to pay (again) for songs we already had in our CD collections because Apple wanted to lock us into content only from iTunes?

I would think just about everyone who owns an TV or would be interested in owning one, probably has a cable or satt subscription now. If TV emulated the DVR/VCR (an ability to record such signals), it would immediately gain a very popular feature many BUYERS want to see added to it. Yes, if we are given the ability to record a TV show or movie, we probably would not buy that movie from iTunes, just like if we could record (import) a CD we already had into iTunes, we'd be unlikely to buy that same music (again) from iTunes. Still, if we could get some of our content for "free" (cable/satt subscription costs are costs we probably pay anyway), TV for television programming becomes a lot more like iPod for music "programming"- POPULAR.

Apple would sell more TVs if they had features that people want. Trying to withhold desirable features won't move the world to an iTunes content model for video distribution unless Apple sells a whole lot more TV units. Waiting on the world to see the (Apple just buy everything from iTunes) light is going to be a very LONG wait.

Would a DVR kill all sales/rentals from iTunes. NO! Just like the ability to import any music that we can lay our hands on hasn't killed iTunes music sales, leveraged desirable technology into a next-gen TV so that Apple can sell a whole lot more of them will simply lead to more people being enticed to rent a movie on TV, or subscribe to the commercial-free season of their favorite shows, instead of putting up with the commercial-loaded versions recorded on the DVR.

As to BD discs, I also wouldn't be that excited about them building in a BD player, but I would like an TV that can match BD video output specs (meaning full bandwith 1080p). However, again, a lot of people finally getting around to buying an HDTV are probably buying one that is "true HD" at 1080p. Since iTunes HD is handicapped 720p, they can't really show off their new toy to the fullest unless they BUY something else that lets them show 1080p.

Unless they're satisfied with what they can get from cable/satt HD, that means they're going to buy a BD player. A BTO option TV with built-in BD drive means Apple could get that money instead of some other company. So, while I personally wouldn't be interested in a BD option, I can easily understand the idea of wishing they would build one into the next-gen TV.

 

[Cliff3]

I don't really see how those two are interconnected or mutually exclusive. Writing an TV app for the iPhone would take all of about 10 minutes of modifying the iPhone->External Display function that has existed since v1.0 for Steve's keynote demonstrations.

My point was that product management/development resources are finite and have to be allocated wisely. The iPhone still has considerable room for improvement as a communication device. My Apple TV, on the other hand, pretty much does everything I envisioned for it when I purchased it.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The only problem I would have then is I don't have a cable box upstairs where the office/computer is. I know I could just get another one, but that is more $ per month that I don't want to spend ($144 per year now that I check). Is there another solution that might address that scenario? I haven't researched this yet, but now I want to look into it in light of this new information. Thanks!

Cheapest would be a cable run from your downstairs cable box up to where you have your computer. If your walls are hollow, you could possibly do this drop yourself pretty easily from upstairs to downstairs. I've also seen some wireless video sender technologies (a wireless cable drop), but I've generally doubted the quality (so if you try something like that, I would definitely keep the receipt).

The big thing though is remembering that DVR functionality is most fluid when you can simply use automation. Using a programming schedule in Elgato's solution makes it a lot easier to record shows vs. trying to insure that the cablebox downstairs in on the right channel when you are ready to record. For automated recording to work well, you want to pull your cable feed right into the Elgato device so that your Mac is- essentially- working like a cable box (selecting the channel you want to record when you've set it up to record it).

If you still have a lot of unencrypted channels in your cable feed, there will be plenty of programming that can be recorded for "free" with Elgato (and if you have the will & patience, Elgatos software makes it pretty easy to chop out the commercials before you render the Apple TV version). If your cable company has switched every channel to encrypted digital (you can't get any channels by just plugging your cable straight into your TV), you'll probably only be able to get your local networks at best, though you can probably get an even better signal from local channels with an antenna- even rabbit ears- and thus no cable run required.

 

[hitekalex]

Sure, it may add to the base price, but to save $X dollars per month on a cable bill, it'd be well worth it. As in your situation, you had to buy a whole other Mac to act as a server and DVR. That's really not cheap.

My Mini "server" is my main home desktop, I didn't buy it for the specific purpose of a DVR. Surely Apple TV is not the only/primary computer in your household

I've been following the AppleTV for a long time and I've never seen the statement to which you refer.

It's been widely reported: Apple CFO Oppenheimer says not to expect Apple TV with DVR, cable box functionality

While some have wondered whether Apple might ultimately try to integrate traditional cable set-top box (decoding) functionality into its Apple TV product, Mr. Oppenheimer pretty much killed that concept and said that it just doesn't fit Apple's business,' the report said

 

[happydude]

I'm waiting for them to simply move the AppleTV's A.V. functionality on to the mac mini.

+1 and throw in a blu-ray player and i'll make the leap!!

 

[hitekalex]

Tablet aside, Apple could "make an App for that" that would allow any docked-to-the-TV iPhone/Touch to function exactly like an TV, playing content from the device's internal drive or streaming content from any computer on the local network.

It may be theoretically possible, although I am not sure iPhone/Touch's ARM processors have the chops to output 720p video/digital audio..

But even then, this would be fine for a casual one-off use (while traveling etc), but it would not replace a low-cost stationary appliance, which is Apple TV.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It's been widely reported: Apple CFO Oppenheimer says not to expect Apple TV with DVR, cable box functionality

Apple does have a reputation of putting something down until they launch their implementation of it, and then it is the greatest thing ever.

Remember how inferior Apple implied the intel platforms were before Apple switched to Intel.

Remember how Steve Jobs put down video in an iPod, until releasing iPods with video, which were then super cool.

Etc.

Apple has spent some money to secure DVR concept patents. BUYERS want such functionality. Apple apparently wants to sell lots of hardware. By giving buyers what they want...

 

[Arran]

Hmm. Maybe the next ATV will degenerate into a simple, cheap, UI-less box that simply provides a streaming-video-output destination to iTunes (much like an airport express provides a UI-less streaming audio destination).

Then you'll use your iphone/Touch/tablet like an iTunes remote control to direct video from iTunes to one of these streaming video destinations (one for every TV in your house)?

No heat, no disk drive, no pain-in-the-neck-UI driven by a tiny remote control with a fixed number of unconfigurable hardware buttons.

Who knows?

 

[kiranmk2]

As someone who is involved in filing patents occasionally, the first rule is never believe anything you read in them. Some are red herrings designed to throw off competitors and some act as spoilers to stop competitors using an idea.

I personally think a hardware refresh is coming with an arm chip. There are reports of the 3gs chip being capable of playing back 1080p video when iTunes is bypassed and remember, that chip is underclocked. A computer setup of CPU, northbridge, southbridge and gpu doesn't make sense (especially) given how intel price the atom.

In the past I've suggested the atv could have airport express functionality (ie itcoul act as a wifi bridge), buthowabout if it goes the other way... Apple release a home server that holds all the media and the atv is simply a next-gen airport express with an hdmi socket and a low power arm chip? It'd be discreet, could be controlled by iPod/iPhone or a Bluetooth remote (no line of site required) and a couple of gigs of flash for the firmware. Rename AirTunes to airmedia (or add airvideo), price it right (server and two client bundles) and you tie people into your hardware ecosystem. The cuurent hard disk version could be sold alongside for people who didn't want the server or who wanted to sync content.

 

[xIGmanIx]

not sure what the appeal is when you can buy NAS for a little more or less in some cases and have all the functionality and more. To me, the ATV doesn't interest me because of Apple's close system model. I would love a box that i could hook up to my Directv and store all my shows on and access using my home network and be able to stream not only my stored shows, but netflix, video and audio, plus have some WHS elements. That would be something i would buy even at a $700 price point. A lot of close but not enough efforts out there. 1 box, all media, the home hub. To me there is no out of the box solution for this right now for all consumers.

 

[Tilpots]

My Mini "server" is my main home desktop, I didn't buy it for the specific purpose of a DVR. Surely Apple TV is not the only/primary computer in your household

My main computer is a MBP. We have two laptops in the house. It wouldn't make sense to use either with Elgato's products. We'd have to buy a mini for the purpose and it lacks a tuner and an HDMI output. Then I'd have to upgrade or buy a separate HDD.

It's been widely reported: Apple CFO Oppenheimer says not to expect Apple TV with DVR, cable box functionality

Yes I saw this report but give it zero credibility, but I do believe Oppenheimer answered honestly.

From the report:

"'While some have wondered whether Apple might ultimately try to integrate traditional cable set-top box (decoding) functionality into its Apple TV product, Mr. Oppenheimer pretty much killed that concept and said that it just doesn't fit Apple's business,' the report said," Hughes reports.

This analyst rolleyes asked the wrong questions. The AppleTV should not get along with cable boxes, it should replace them. Cable companies already make DVR's so there's really no sense to play that game. This analyst should stick to numbers, and not reporting.

 

[TheAshMan]

Right, but the proper DRV/tuner is going to cost money to implement. So you're going to pay that money, whether it's to Apple or Elgato. I personally like the idea of DVR running on my Mac server, rather than ATV. This way I can store all the DVR recordings centrally and distribute them to multiple ATV's around my house.

The point I raise is that not everyone wants to spend money on an entire computer to put in their living room --especially a Mac which is more. The other problem I have with that approach is that if I have to rent another set top box every month to decode content to a media server, that is more money. What I would like is an Apple TV that gives me iTunes content and interface and also replaces my HD-DVR from Verizon FIOS. I already make enough of an investment every month (2 STBs) on television and movies. If I could just get those features in an Apple TV so I can drop the other stuff that is what I want and would buy.


Apple already stated that DVR goes against their iTunes business model. So whatever extra costs they will charge for DVR will be offset by loss in iTunes content revenues (or so they think). The fact that they have patented some DVR interface components means absolutely nothing - Apple (as other companies) file for hundreds and thousands of patents for different concepts. Only a few ever become products that see the light of day.[/QUOTE]

 

[weaponofgod]

It seems like what a lot of you here is wanting is a Tivo Series 3. It has DVR functionality, it has Netflix streaming, it plays audio and video files and you can download web content. I personally would like to see Apple acquire Tivo, now that would be something.

 

[hitekalex]

Yes I saw this report but give it zero credibility, but I do believe Oppenheimer answered honestly.

This analyst rolleyes asked the wrong questions. The AppleTV should not get along with cable boxes, it should replace them.

OK, first it's "you've never seen anyone from Apple making the statement that DVR doesn't fit their business model". Then "you had seen the report but gave it zero credibility". And yet you believe what Oppenheimer said, but the analyst "asked the wrong questions".. You lost me.

At any rate, believe what you want to believe. Best of luck waiting for Apple to include a DVR into ATV. My bet is you will be waiting for a very long time

 

[Stenar]

I wish Apple would upgrade the processor speed so TV can properly play HD video, which it struggles with currently.

 

[jeremy.king]

I personally would like to see Apple acquire Tivo, now that would be something.

I agree - makes sense in my head.

 

[Tilpots]

OK, first it's "you've never seen anyone from Apple making the statement that DVR doesn't fit their business model". Then "you had seen the report but gave it zero credibility". And yet you believe what Oppenheimer said, but the analyst "asked the wrong questions".. You lost me.

As I said, he was talking about a cable integrated DVR, not an OTA DVR. MAJOR difference. With me now? Cable, no. OTA, yes. Very simple.

At any rate, believe what you want to believe. Best of luck waiting for Apple to include a DVR into ATV. My bet is you will be waiting for a very long time

I won't be waiting too long, I'll spend my money elsewhere.

 

[TJRiver]

It seems to me that a lot of the ATV wish lists incorporate some ability to deal with non-iTunes video files. Not gonna happen folks. All "user ripped" video content exists in violation of the DMCA (unlike the gigs of ripped audio CDs, which Apple actively and legally encourages).

Due to Apple's position as software & hardware manufacturer, as well as conduit for film & TV studio products, it is not going to do anything to jeopardize that relationship by encouraging use of home ripped video created in violation of the DMCA on ATV. (How Handbrake has survived to date is a mystery)

DEATH TO THE DMCA. Write your congressman and lets get this stupid law changd.

 

[Chicagomac08]

Why get rid of it?

Seems like that would be a bad move to me.

As a current TV owner I can easily say that I spend more money through Itunes with TV than if I didn't.

I love to watch old tv shows/movies and apple TV makes it very user friendly.

I think integrating it somehow into an all purpose media center that could do things like update you on new e-mails, more involvement with sites like twitter or facebook and doing more with news/sports information would make this a great product.

I would love a page with Widgets that I could leave on when I am doing things around the house but don't need the distraction of tv or music.

Bottom line is that the little box increases itunes sales so it's here to stay.

Why not team up with Vizio or make their own TV's that integrate this technology why they are at it?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

They should have dropped the price a whole heck of a lot more than that for that old aging hardware. A hobby? Find uses for it? How about 1080P support and enough oomph to actually run real applications smoothly? It's ridiculous that I have to limit HD material to around 4500kbps or suffer glitches. You cannot currently attach DTS to M4V files so I have to run XBMC to watch my DTS movies, but XBMC runs even slower than Apple's own software so forget about any 720P MKV files. Games are pretty popular on the iPod Touch and AppleTV could EASILY be made to run iPhone/Touch games on your big screen while using your actual iPhone or Touch as a joystick (or better yet, include a wireless USB joystick with the thing). Apple cannot figure out what to do with Apple TV, yet anyone else on the planet CAN. Go figure.

 

[VirtualRain]

It cracks me up to see this kind of thinking. When ipod came out, did Apple lock us into just music purchased from iTunes? No, we could take advantage of content we already had. Do you think ipod would have been nearly as big if we would have had to pay (again) for songs we already had in our CD collections because Apple wanted to lock us into content only from iTunes?

I would think just about everyone who owns an TV or would be interested in owning one, probably has a cable or satt subscription now. If TV emulated the DVR/VCR (an ability to record such signals), it would immediately gain a very popular feature many BUYERS want to see added to it. Yes, if we are given the ability to record a TV show or movie, we probably would not buy that movie from iTunes, just like if we could record (import) a CD we already had into iTunes, we'd be unlikely to buy that same music (again) from iTunes. Still, if we could get some of our content for "free" (cable/satt subscription costs are costs we probably pay anyway), TV for television programming becomes a lot more like iPod for music "programming"- POPULAR.

Apple would sell more TVs if they had features that people want. Trying to withhold desirable features won't move the world to an iTunes content model for video distribution unless Apple sells a whole lot more TV units. Waiting on the world to see the (Apple just buy everything from iTunes) light is going to be a very LONG wait.

Would a DVR kill all sales/rentals from iTunes. NO! <snip>

Here's an alternative view...

To use your own analogy, adding a DVR to the AppleTV would have been like Apple adding an FM Radio recorder to the iPod so that all those people who loved listening to FM radio at the time could just record their favourite songs and listen to them anytime they want. Sure that feature might have helped a few luddites give up their pocket radios and walkman's for an iPod but Apple was already way beyond that.

Apple has never been about supporting legacy models of content distribution, or they would have made a cassette tape walkman equivalent back in the day when they were all the rage.

Apple is all about defining new models of distribution.

The Tivo is today's equivalent of the mixed tape of a couple of decades ago. Let it go. The idea of recording content that's blasting down a pipe at a time chosen by the source is so archaic, I can't believe Apple enthusiasts are actually in favour of such a distribution model.

Give me on-demand, top-quality content at reasonable prices so I get exactly what I want, when I want it, where I want it, on the device I want to view it on, and that's the future. That's where Apple is right now with music and that's where I hope Apple is going with video next!

 

[Lukeyboy01]

When ? Never. It doesn't fit in their business model.

And besides, this product would be US-specific, because classic TV is so much different in each country. Apple makes worldwide products, just look at the iPhone : the same hardware everywhere.

Not in china tho

 

[OllyW]

They have updated the UK Apple Store, the 160GB AppleTV is now £219.

They must have an even more special exchange rate than usual for the Apple TV as the US price is $229. Just to compare similar items, the iPod classic costs $249 in the US and £189 in the UK store.

 

[Evangelion]

Home Sharing only support automatic transfer for purchased content. You can still manually copy unpurchased content through the Home Server mechanism. There's a setting to view uncopied content only so you can see what hasn't been copied.

Just to clarify: Home Sharing does work with non-Apple-purchased content (Amazon.com downloads, CD rips, etc), but the automatic synching of purchased content is an iTunes-Store-specific feature.

That is what I mean. While just about all of my music is from ITMS these days, same does not apply to my wife. And we have no movies or tv-shows in ITMS in Finland, so those are all self-ripped. When my Mrs. adds content to her library, should I expect her to log in to the server with Screen Sharing, and manually sync her new content to the server-iTunes?

I really don't understand why this feature only works with ITMS-purchased content. that content is DRM-free, so there really is no difference when compared to self-ripped content. There's no technical reason for it to not work.

IMHO, I don't add content often enough for this to be a really big deal. If I rip a CD on one box then home-share it up to the server, that's good.

While I could do it, I can't really expect the Mrs. to do it as well.

Oh well, I think that I will still go ahead with it, and just sync manually. Home Sharing is A LOT better than what we had with previous iTunes'es, but it's not perfect solution.