Why iPad can be good for ATV

[GSX]

I think he was referring to the iTMS going 1080p, not the iTunes software. The point being that Apple doesn't really care about people putting their own content onto the ATV. They think of it as a delivery vehicle for the iTMS offerings. And until they decide to offer 1080p content, there is no reason for the ATV to need to handle it.

I think what Hobe is trying to say that until we have a box that can do 1080p, how can we have content on iTunes that is in 1080p?

I agree with Hobe. The hardware has to come first.

I am waiting for a new Apple TV, but I'm not going to wait much longer. There are plenty of better options out there than the current Apple TV, and if Apple doesn't realize this then I guess they are giving up on the living room.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I think what Hobe is trying to say that until we have a box that can do 1080p, how can we have content on iTunes that is in 1080p?

I agree with Hobe. The hardware has to come first.

I am waiting for a new Apple TV, but I'm not going to wait much longer. There are plenty of better options out there than the current Apple TV, and if Apple doesn't realize this then I guess they are giving up on the living room.

That's right GSX.

Suppose that I'm a forward-thinking Studio Exec (I know, I know: is there such a thing? Let's assume I'm one just for fun) noticing that this digital download business offers some potential to make money. Apple's cut of those movies is a lot less than Walmart's cut to sell it for my Studio on a plastic disc, plus we have to pay for creating the disc, the packaging, the shipping, and so on. So, let's give this digital distribution a real try.

Doesn't Apple have an TV? Let's test BD-like resolution & quality for that device and see if we can make some money.

"Um, TV can't play back 1080p".

So I can't even find out if people will buy 1080p TV content via iTunes. It's IMPOSSIBLE to test the market for it.

Similarly, it's IMPOSSIBLE to gauge the impact of 1080p downloads on the existing broadband infrastructure, because I can't test the impact of even ONE 1080p digital download to TV owners in the wild.

So I, as the Studio Exec, give up on the concept of even trying with Apple. I wonder if Netflix's box could let me test? I wonder if various others will let me test. I wonder if the networked TVs can let me test? I'm interested in making money from other sources, and I'd like to see what I can do with BD-like quality via digital distribution.

And the living room slowly slides to the other players who already have such capabilities (some for quite a long time now). I (the consumer now) want Apple to win the living room. They're still winning with this little box in terms of UI. I think the TV I already own is fantastic. But it would take so little to knock out its ONE most glaring weak spot.

And those who believe it is solely about selling iTunes content- not about my own content- seem to be ignoring the iPhoto connection, Podcasts & Vodcasts, radio, (my ripped) CD music, (my Elgato'd) TV Shows, (my) DVD movies converted, YouTube, etc. I've had it- and loved it- for about 3+ years now and maybe spent $25 on iTunes content, yet used it almost every day. It's a whole lot more than an iTunes store front end right out of the box. As such, it should finish the job it started and step up with the hardware platform enhancement that would make it great for probably a decade or two to come (1080p will likely be the standard for at least 10+ years).

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I think he was referring to the iTMS going 1080p, not the iTunes software. The point being that Apple doesn't really care about people putting their own content onto the ATV. They think of it as a delivery vehicle for the iTMS offerings. And until they decide to offer 1080p content, there is no reason for the ATV to need to handle it.

That logic just makes me crazy. So until AT&T is fully ready to support Tethering and MMS, was there no need to advance the iPhone with those features?

Until all the software was recoded for multiple cores, grand central, etc, was there no need to advance computers with those features?

Until music in the iTunes store stepped up above 128Kbps AAC, was there no reason to build iPods that could play higher quality music?

Nothing else in Apple's development history supports this idea of until OTHERS advance their part, there's no reason to advance ours. But somehow that makes perfect sense with the TV.

While I've seen that "they think of it as an iTunes store delivery vehicle" comment many times before, what I've actually heard Apple say about it was that it was an iPod for your TV. And as recently as the last software upgrade, they added a feature- internet radio- which does nothing in support of selling ANYTHING from the iTunes store.

Apple has virtually no control over when the Studios will let them test 1080i or 1080p digital downloads. They have NO control over the various owners of broadband pipes expanding their capacity for bigger files to flow through those pipes. But they have TOTAL control over the hardware they can build. And with that, they should LEAD... just like they do with all the other hardware platforms that they build... that then depend on others to write better software, enhance features of their 3G network, etc.

 

[idunn]

Such promise

"Apple TV is a bit of an anomaly, but with no major hardware refreshes and a few small-minded software updates, you can hardly accuse Apple of throwing good money after bad." [1]
- Gizmodo


It's an interesting article, which leads me to think the iPad may have more of a future than I initially thought. On the other hand, what can one say for a device that is still 60 days from sale, and so many would already like to see revised?

As for ATV, I don't intend to buy one without 1080p capability. Too bad, because it otherwise shows such promise. According to 'Gizmodo' in this article ATV exists in a niche market Apple didn't appreciate would be so small. Thus their lack of interest. I disagree. And for much the same reason as why the iPad might exceed my expectations. Namely, because both offer a simple and elegant interface. Ease in doing the simple task will probably win out. But both are also underpowered, and could use some upgrading.

Perhaps Mr. Jobs will take more interest in his "hobby" of the ATV when he realizes that the nascent home theater market which at first was the domain of the audiophile and purist is quickly becoming mainstream. Add to that an ever expanding internet, and business models of even 10 years ago are obsolete. Video, audio, communications, where is the line anymore? ATV will be an important portal for Apple into the modern home, particularly if they want iTunes to flourish. Either that, or they'll be doing this through someone else and have to contend with those middlemen. Save perhaps they adapt the iPad for it?


1) http://gizmodo.com/5458531/the-ipad-is-the-gadget-we-never-knew-we-needed?skyline=true&s=i

 

[Galley]

The iPad is a portable tv with a built-in display that almost displays 720p video, but only outputs 480p. If both would've supported native 720p, it would've been something.

 

[ceraz]

• Apple gives us the tool (iMovie) to convert 1080p video from the camcorder and render a 1080p MP4 from it
• Apple gives us the library tool (iTunes) which can database that render and even play it back- no problem at all

So the weakest link in this chain is what: 1080p camcorder : iMovie : iTunes: TV : 1080p HDTV?

For me, that's why the next-gen should be 1080p.

It's so frustrating to see how much quality is lost when 1080p camcorder footage is displayed on a 1080p HDTV after the iMovie/iTunes/ATV workflow. I gave up editing recent footage and just connect the camcorder directly to HDTV, the image quality is so much better !

The whole bonus of iLife is to bring more people to the mac because it is easy to use, integrated and makes "life" better. ATV has to be part of that ecosystem and not just act as another money-making machine for Apple.

I love my (patched) ATV but I agree ATV URGENTLY needs 1080p to stay in the game.

 

[CalMin]

Here's the thing. Apple positioned itself as a mobile device company during yesterdays keynote. Apple TV is anything but mobile. It doesn't fit into their strategy and it won't generate the kind of revenue that would warrant any significant attention to take it to the next level.

This device is too esoteric for mass consumption. I don't know anyone else that has or wants one. While I've convinced several people to buy Macs, iPods and iPhones, none have been converted to get Apple TV, despite some of the cool stuff it does.

Don't get me wrong. I love my AppleTV. I use it more than my cable box these days and would actually cancel cable service if my wife wasn't addicted to E! But this device is not going to see much love. More likely, in time, there will be a iPad TV dock with remote that outputs 1080p and wireless sync - rev C. is my guess.

 

[GSX]

This device is too esoteric for mass consumption. I don't know anyone else that has or wants one. While I've convinced several people to buy Macs, iPods and iPhones, none have been converted to get Apple TV, despite some of the cool stuff it does.

I would think it would be quite popular if it was updated with better hardware and software to support 1080p and more video codecs.

The movie/TV industry is constantly crying about people downloading movies and TV shows to their computers. Also there is Hulu and Netfilx. Where are all these people watching all of these downloads? Sitting at their computers in uncomfortable chairs? I would think these people would much rather watch stuff on their TVs relaxing on their sofas or beds.

Legalities aside, I would think people would be clamouring for a box that would effortlessly stream video from their computers to their TVs. I am sure the market is there, it's just not being tapped into yet.

I think this will be one of the fastest growing computer/home theater segments in the next few years. This market is ripe for the picking! Apple needs to jump on this now, or someone else will.

Apple can't just rely on iTunes either. They need to open their box up to other provides like Hulu, Netflix, etc. I doubt Apple will be able to get away with video like they did with music. Content providers don't want to lose control to Apple. I am fine with this though. Let the market decide prices for the different providers. I am sure prices will settle in time.

Hopefully a new Apple TV will be similar to the iPhone/iPad and allow downloadable apps/plug-ins. Like Hulu, Netflix, or whatever content providers are available in different contries(I'm in Canada and don't have Netflix or Hulu by the way).

Apple don't leave us waiting too much longer...

 

[tdmac]

Here's the thing. Apple positioned itself as a mobile device company during yesterdays keynote. Apple TV is anything but mobile. It doesn't fit into their strategy and it won't generate the kind of revenue that would warrant any significant attention to take it to the next level.

That doesn't men that they don't/won't make devices that support the mobile experience. How then do imac's, mac mini's or Macpro, etc fit into the equation? These devices support the mobile experience. You still need a Mac or PC to sync the devices to iTunes that resides on a computer. You still need the Mac to design and create Apps, websites, etc for the mobile experience. The bread and butter comes from the mobile platform and the revenue earned from downloads. The more devices Apple can put in the home that can be utilized with the mobile devices to create a cohesive environment the more hardware they sell.

 

[Donar]

This device is too esoteric for mass consumption. I don't know anyone else that has or wants one. While I've convinced several people to buy Macs, iPods and iPhones, none have been converted to get Apple TV, despite some of the cool stuff it does.

I know no one who has an ATV. But many of my colleagues have a HTPC, Popcornhour or HDX box. Most (but not all) of them are younger than me, so i have the impression that it is a market that is going to take off in the next years.

Personally i would consider a AppleTV for my living room if it could do 1080p out of the box.

 

[idunn]

In this day and age?

No 'NetFlix' or 'Hulu' in Canada? I suppose that leaves China out as well, with how many potential customers? What are these guys thinking? It surprised me on learning iTunes wasn't widely available, at least not at first, and I suppose even now, if that includes the entire world.

If I can understand the exigencies of copyright protection, how lawyers are, turf wars, etc., I cannot particularly fathom the insistence on maintaining a 20th century business model in the 21st. Not when there is money to be made. Not when there is a world of some 6 billion customers. Some of them are presumably in Canada, and in Vancouver just as much as their brethren in Seattle, willing to sit through the commercials and presumably buy the products. What gives?

In a technological age anyone might expect to have what they want when they want on the screen, like now. Anyone not getting that, if hindering the delivery of same, is simply in the way.