Apple iTV Impressions and Details [Archive]

MacRumors

Sep 20, 2006, 01:28 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Besides announcing the number of movies that Disney has sold, iPod Observer notes (http://www.ipodobserver.com/story/28489) that CEO Bob Iger also provided some impressions of Apple's pre-announced iTV device which is due in the first quarter of 2007.

Iger describes the device's functionality:

It's wireless. It detects the presence of computers in your home; in a very simple way you designate the computer you want to feed it and it wirelessly feeds whatever you downloaded on iTunes which include videos, TV, music videos, movies or your entire iTunes music library to your television set.

And also explains that it is very easy to control and the appeal to content developers is to provide them a way to sell content to the DVR/TVR audience.

...if they've forgotten to set their TiVo device or their TVR or they just have no plan to do it but they want to watch an episode that they missed, they can go to iTunes, buy it for $1.99, [send it] to the set-top box source wirelessly and watch it on the television."

Iger also indicates that the device does indeed contain a hard drive... a fact that was not entirely clear from the preview.

MacCentral has posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/itvfaq/index.php) a question/answer article for iTV which gives an overview of the device, in case you missed the original preview (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060912161621.shtml).

Long term Apple fans will remember that Apple almost launched an Apple Set Top Box (http://guides.macrumors.com/Apple_Set_Top_Box) years ago but it was never officially released. Interestingly, the system was described as "Apple's ITV system" (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2000/04/20000426204518.shtml) in a press-release, indicating that Apple has recycled this codename (iTV). The final name for the upcoming system has not yet been decided.

spicyapple

Sep 20, 2006, 01:31 AM

Woohoo a hard drive! :D

I wasn't planning on buying CenterStage, but the DVR functionality(?) would make it very appealing.

mdntcallr

Sep 20, 2006, 01:36 AM

rcm3

Sep 20, 2006, 01:40 AM

Woohoo a hard drive! :D

I wasn't planning on buying CenterStage, but the DVR functionality(?) would make it very appealing.

I hope that I can replace my Tivo with this. I'm sick of paying monthly fees for an outdated, overburdened, restrictive, and paternal computer.

I hope that the functionality of what spawns from iTV will allow for full use of data, ie. the ability to make high quality recordings and then manipulate them using a computer.

My Tivo has a DVD-burner. Its great but all I can do is copy the shows onto a disc. There is no ability to edit, remove commercials, change the file size... anything. I know that if I really wanted to mess with stuff I could get a dedicated media PC, but this iTV business has the potential to be as user-friendly as Tivo, but as functional as a computer and as cheap as a DVR.

EricNau

Sep 20, 2006, 01:40 AM

coal

Sep 20, 2006, 01:42 AM

So this can play any video file in iTunes then? Great, that's what I was waiting to hear. For some reason I convinved myself that Apple would only permit videos tagged as originating from their store. I know it sounds ridiculous, but as media companies keep pushing for control over content, it seemed inevitable that such restrictions would be enforced (particularly since Tivo Series 3 is such a closed system).

Also, hard drive? Wow.

spicyapple

Sep 20, 2006, 01:46 AM

The hard drive (if not used as DVR) will likely be used as temporary storage buffer. So if you buy a movie off iTS, it automatically streams to iTV and saved to the hard drive until you consume it.

Bibulous

Sep 20, 2006, 01:48 AM

I hope it will work with all Front Row files, not just iTunes content.

arn

Sep 20, 2006, 01:50 AM

randyharris

Sep 20, 2006, 01:52 AM

What most bothers me about the iTV is that it is a workaround to a PVR instead of embrassing it.

I'm looking for an integtated system for music, movies and TV, not just downloading a show as needed, but with the inclusion of a full blown PVR.

I don't think this is too much to ask for.

Peace

Sep 20, 2006, 01:56 AM

I always thought it would have a hard drive.Even though MacCentral says it doesn't I don't think Bob Iger is so dumb to not know it does.

Watch for EyeTV and Apple coming together over the next 3 months!!

This WILL be a killer box.

hondaboy945

Sep 20, 2006, 01:57 AM

I really hope that someone from Apple reads these forums, I am sure it gets back to Apple, anyway I hope they do it right. Or there will be alot of disappointed people and money lost.

darwen

Sep 20, 2006, 02:02 AM

Did I read Hard Dive? Yay for apple putting a DVR in it!

Oh..... you mean they didnt say there was also a DVR program.... well then. It is time to upgrade that Hard Drive and rewrite the OS so it can run EyeTV (haha - EYETV on iTV... That is funny).

mahonmeister

Sep 20, 2006, 02:06 AM

I am looking forward to this device but it seems I need a new TV.:)

I really hope they add more buttons to the remote. There needs to be a better balance between simplicity & elegance vs functionality & practicality.

Kalmia

Sep 20, 2006, 02:06 AM

TV show recording would be REALLY nice, but it's probably wishful thinking, considering it could potentially cut into profits from iTunes. Still, one can dream...

In addition, I would really love a movie rental option, though that's probably even more farfetched. It would save us a TON of money on late fees, though.

My main concern is how big of a hole this is going to leave in my wallet. I guess it's still pretty early to be speculating, given that we don't know much about it. So I should probably try not to get my hopes up in the meantime. :p

~Kalmia

MacMyDay

Sep 20, 2006, 02:06 AM

I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.

EricNau

Sep 20, 2006, 02:07 AM

Kingsly

Sep 20, 2006, 02:13 AM

I didn't notice any TV inputs on the prototype, so unless Apple changes the design significantly and adds major features not discussed at the event, DVR is not a possibility (as far as this device is concerned).

...I suppose there is a small chance Apple could do this, but I'm tired of getting my hopes up only to be disappointed by Apple (again).
I don't think it would make sense to make a totally great™ device and then cripple it by excluding DVR functionality (IMO they already crippled it by excluding DVD player)

dduff617

Sep 20, 2006, 02:31 AM

given what i know of the device, including it's form factor, i am skeptical about the report the it contains a hard drive.

cartwagon

Sep 20, 2006, 02:32 AM

I hate to be the first to post a negative but here it is. I don't think this will be overly expensive, but I also think we will be underwhelmed with it's features. Wireless is not that important to me. There are many wires back there already. It sounds like it will not have HDMI or TiVo features, and it will play movies out of iTunes, which screams to me that it will only play .mp4 and .m4v files much like my 5G iPod. If it cannot browse my my mac or firedrive, cannot stream from them, cannot play .avi, .wmw, .rm or VCD, then it will not replace my 4 year old xbox. Which itself has a 120Gig drive and a remote. Unless we are all sorely mistaken about what iTV will end up being, and it ends up adding these features (as someone above me noted, hoping Apple would read this forum) I will wait. Honestly, I am far more excited over the prospect of the MacBook Pros hopefully switching to Core 2 Duos before year end. Then I will have a much more powerful machine slung to my firedrive, router, xbox and tv. :)

Edit:
@Ino: Yes, you are correct, I wrote this yesterday before seeing that diagram. However, it has an HDMI output, but the iTunes store only puts out normal TV quality(currently). In essence, unless you are using Handbrake to make your own rips above 640x480, you can use your HDMI output and it does not matter. Since Job's whole plan here is to make us buy iTV and then only be able to buy from iTunes, this is very relevant. I know this release is months away and things may change before then. Whom do you think apple will bed with, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray?

@ Project: Quicktime can do .wmv with Flip4Mac, but cannot play .avi. (or .bin or .rm) . The 3ivx codec patch only works for some avi files. There is a convoluted way to use DivX doctor to make .mov files, but there is no reason to bother. MPlayer and VLC take care of everything. My point is that I don't think I need to pay $299US for something that does only a third of what my xbox already does, and I also don't need to pay this exorbitant amount for the privilege of boxing myself into a corner where I can only buy movies from the iTunes store. Even if I wasn't using my xbox to stream and play everything, I'd still save my money and press play on MPlayer and then sit down. Know what I mean? We all have a way of playing media on our TVs already, even if it's a total welfare solution like $6 worth of RCA cable. I am usually pretty pro-apple, but I need to be more impressed to drop that kind of money on something like this.
Much love for you all,
cartwagon

Project

Sep 20, 2006, 02:55 AM

Ino

Sep 20, 2006, 02:57 AM

It sounds like it will not have HDMI or TiVo features, and it will play movies out of iTunes, which screams to me that it will only play .mp4 and .m4v files much like my 5G iPod.

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/4561/picture1jq2.png

But it sure looks better than it sounds...;)

Bonte

Sep 20, 2006, 03:00 AM

mcarnes

Sep 20, 2006, 03:02 AM

But it sure looks better than it sounds...;)

:p Good one.

liketom

Sep 20, 2006, 03:09 AM

to make this work better and for apple to take the number 1 slot of internet download movies - they need an TV ad like the mac/pc ones

movie trailer then apple text - jack Sparrow+ Apple - download from $12.99 - iTunes store. simple infact i just made one as a looksy

Apple might also do well in selling the DVD + download for $19.99 - 24.99 as an option.

they have proved this concept works with the 125k downloads in 1 week now they need to feed people with movies for there iTV device

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFwhVsSDr_4

kugino

Sep 20, 2006, 03:18 AM

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 03:38 AM

iTV is basically a limited Mini with better remote control software, if i can use an Elgato eyeTV on it to record i'm buying for sure. Ideally would be an eyeTV with a USB 2 connection to add a big HD.

It's not a cut down mini. Think of it more like a wireless iPod for your TV.

The iPod is a device for getting music etc in your iTunes lib into your ears. The iTV is a device for getting video content wirelessly from your iTunes lib to your TV. (The model is that you stock your iTunes lib with your existing CDs, likelwise you replace your DVD player by stocking your iTunes lib with films from your DVD collection. From then on buying both audio and films from iTunes store).

I suspect the hard drive is just for caching.

I'm guessing the problem Apple face here is that people want PVR functionality but that digital tuner standards are different all over the world (aren't they? EDIT: From wikipedia, "The technology used is ATSC in North America, ISDB-T in Japan, and DVB-T in Europe and Australia; the rest of the world remaining mostly undecided. ISDB-T is very similar to DVB-T and can share front-end receiver and demodulator components." Seems the US has chosen a different system to the rest of the world.).

You can readily get PVRs in the UK with a 80G hard drive and two digital (freeview) tuners from 120 quid.

rikers_mailbox

Sep 20, 2006, 04:03 AM

Stridder44

Sep 20, 2006, 04:33 AM

Look at your hard drive usage, Music takes up a significant amount of it. Why does it need to be kept on your local machine if iTV provides a network?

Thats an interesting point. I dont know though, something makes me cringe about not having my prized music library on my own computer (fear of losing it I guess?)

dobbin

Sep 20, 2006, 04:45 AM

I don't want to have to put yet another box on the shelf under my TV and have yet another remote control kicking around my living room.

I already have a DVD, a VCR, and a Sky+ box (DVR). I know that in theory I should choose just one or two of these, but that doesn't work in practice. What happens when my mum records something on a video for me - I still need a VCR, and until Sky bring out a Sky+ box with a *much* larger hard disk then I'll need a DVD for keeping things long term.

If Apple could include at least a DVD burner and ideally a DVR hard disk as well, then I could actually start replacing the other machines I have rather than just adding to them and cluttering up my living room.

Its probably a moot point anyway as I doubt iTV will be launched in the UK for a long while anyway.

sunfast

Sep 20, 2006, 04:46 AM

illegalprelude

Sep 20, 2006, 05:06 AM

This indeed makes a nice add on to the Soon Blue-Ray player and the home theater setup but this will never replace a tivo. The amount of things I can do with my Tivo, the fact that im always wirelessly streaming media from it to my computer and the fact that my Tivo can have slide shows and play my music like the iTV says alot. Again, it will be a nice add on if it dosent limit you to just iTunes downloads but never will it replace my trusty Tivo

toodeep

Sep 20, 2006, 05:07 AM

Paraphrasing @emotion: "it's an mpeg-2 world".

Potential iTV customers will have expectations of being able to watch DVD-content and recorded digital TV programmes, and Apple would be wise to not dissapoint them I think. Similarly for the true video iPod. And if the iTV engine can render MPEG-2 on the fly (and why not: my pocket drive can do this and at the same time up-convert to 1080i) them maybe adding a USB tuner will be an option. (That said I'm very satified with my Mac-friendly Toppy PVR.)

MacBoobsPro

Sep 20, 2006, 05:09 AM

Marx55

Sep 20, 2006, 05:12 AM

What iTV needs is the option to boot Mac OS X to be used as a wireless computerless presentation remote tool. Just plug the flash disk with the Keynote or PowerPoint presentation made on a Mac or PC-Windows and use the remote control to give the presentation. Great for corporations, education and domestic markets. With a huge halo effect. Apple will sell millions.

tiramisu

Sep 20, 2006, 05:30 AM

how about 'mac ibox' or 'apple ibox'? :)

itv - well for sure - is a more like a genre name.

dernhelm

Sep 20, 2006, 05:39 AM

I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.

Maybe they'll call it the Revolution. :D

Jo-Kun

Sep 20, 2006, 05:52 AM

Iger also indicates that the device does indeed contain a hard drive... a fact that was not entirely clear from the preview.

actually... he doesn't indicate a HD... why? well the iTV (sorry, not really impressed with this name) streams media from your mac/pc trough wifi or ethernet... so if you buy an episode on iTunes... it will be stored in your iTunes library on the content-hosting mac/pc in your house and thus be available for iTV to play on your TV...

since it has a USB port I guess it will be possible to attach a USB HD... and store files locally instead of on a remote mac/pc...

macintel4me

Sep 20, 2006, 06:31 AM

I think the HD is using just for caching the streamed content. My prediction is that Apple will come out with a SAN with iTV/FrontRow streaming smarts in it. This way we don't have to run into our office to turn on our computer so we can watch TV in our living room.

Fotek2001

Sep 20, 2006, 06:54 AM

actually... he doesn't indicate a HD... why? well the iTV (sorry, not really impressed with this name) streams...

You don't need to be impressed with the name 'iTV' because it's a code name... There are at least three companies in this space using similar names already so Apple wouldn't be able to use it even if they wanted to.

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 06:55 AM

I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.
<UK>Indeed. EyeTV and ITV was confusing enough, but now we have iTV too. And I don't think I'll be watching Coronation street on iTV if Apple are going to charge £1.99 an episode. Think again Steve.</UK>

<Everyone Else>ITV is the name of the UK's biggest terrestrial commercial TV network</Everyone Else>

aegisdesign

Sep 20, 2006, 06:57 AM

If Apple could include at least a DVD burner and ideally a DVR hard disk as well, then I could actually start replacing the other machines I have rather than just adding to them and cluttering up my living room.

Er, that's what your Mac is for.

All these calls for adding tuners, hard drives and burners are missing the point. Those functions belong in the host computer. iTV is just a method of getting the content from your Mac/PC to your stereo or TV.

In Microsoft terms, it's a media center extender, nothing more, albeit a pretty one.

If it's got a hard disk in it that's used for anything more than caching your iTunes Library file and thumbnails, I'd be very surprised.

Machead III

Sep 20, 2006, 07:05 AM

<Everyone Else>ITV is the name of the UK's biggest terrestrial commercial TV network</Everyone Else>

It's also far and away the worst. It's the televisual equivalent of drilling a hole in your skull and pouring pure ethanol into your brain.

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:09 AM

Watch for EyeTV and Apple coming together over the next 3 months!!

Oh please, yes. For me, iTV will only truly be the final piece of the jigsaw if I can also watch my recorded (and possibly live) EyeTV content through it.

A hook-up between Apple and Elgato sounds the most natural thing. Elgato should continue to make hardware for all the various TV standards (terrestrial / cable / sat / digital / etc etc), but perhaps use some Apple desigers to make their boxes a bit more "Apple-looking". Then, Apple can take the EyeTV 2.x software and integrate it with iTunes.

To those that say that Apple won't allow this because it would hit their own TV show revenues from the iTunes store... I disagree. They'll have to give in sooner or later, because EyeTV isn't going to go away. Would iTunes/iPod have been such a success if they'd have made us purchase all our music from iTunes, even the stuff we alread had on CD?

I'm not going to pay £3 (or whatever) for an Episode of Lost if I could have recorded on EyeTV last night... especially when C4 repeat each episode about 6 times per week anyway.

Regds
SL

jasper77

Sep 20, 2006, 07:09 AM

Maybe in the future, Apple teams up with Marantz, Onkyo, Rotel and other AV surround reciever manufacturers to built ITV inside their recievers? (like some of them already have ipod dock connectors)

That way you don't need an optical and HDMI cable from ITV to your receiver. you just need 1 HDMI cable to connect your receiver to your HDTV. The ITV is built inside the AV receiver. And you can use the remote from your receiver the control the new front row.

that would be cool :cool:

dobbin

Sep 20, 2006, 07:09 AM

Er, that's what your Mac is for.

All these calls for adding tuners, hard drives and burners are missing the point. Those functions belong in the host computer. iTV is just a method of getting the content from your Mac/PC to your stereo or TV.

Yeah Ok, thats fine, but then I also need a machine to get content from my TV/tuner/satelite to my Mac.

As I understand it, iTV is only for wireless streaming in one direction. If I need a cable to get broadcast programmes into my Mac, then I may as well use that cable to get the content back onto my TV!

MacsRgr8

Sep 20, 2006, 07:10 AM

Maybe the HD has a slimmed down version of Mac OS X installed on it, making it necessary to be in there, and it's very likely for caching purposes too.
Wish it did have a DVD-player in it, so that it could replace any ol' DVD player hooked up to the TV aswell. With the iTV you still need one.

That's pretty much what I did with my Mac mini Core Duo.... I have a LCD TV hooked up to the mini via DVI. I use Front Row to watch all my favorite movies I have downladed, and VLC for some HD content. And I use the mini's DVD player for wathcing these. It's great!

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:11 AM

It's also far and away the worst. It's the televisual equivalent of drilling a hole in your skull and pouring pure ethanol into your brain.

Not quite. Having a hole in your skull and a brain full of ethanol is actually a pre-requisite for enjoying ITV.

odedia

Sep 20, 2006, 07:11 AM

For 300$, it'll only have a tiny hard drive for caching large h.264 videos on the iTV itself instead of continuesly streaming it over the Wi-Fi.

I am pretty darn sure that iTV will be able to play ANY quicktime video. Meaning - in order to playback other formats, like DivX, just download the quicktime Codec.

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:14 AM

All these calls for adding tuners, hard drives and burners are missing the point. Those functions belong in the host computer. iTV is just a method of getting the content from your Mac/PC to your stereo or TV.
Agreed. If you want a Mac Mini on the shelf under your TV, then, er, buy a Mac Mini!
If it's got a hard disk in it that's used for anything more than caching your iTunes Library file and thumbnails, I'd be very surprised.
Agreed again. If the HD was to be used for anything more than this, Steve would have made a bigger deal of it at the presentation.

Cheers!
SL

kresh

Sep 20, 2006, 07:14 AM

Oh please, yes. For me, iTV will only truly be the final piece of the jigsaw if I can also watch my recorded (and possibly live) EyeTV content through it.

A hook-up between Apple and Elgato sounds the most natural thing. Elgato should continue to make hardware for all the various TV standards (terrestrial / cable / sat / digital / etc etc), but perhaps use some Apple desigers to make their boxes a bit more "Apple-looking". Then, Apple can take the EyeTV 2.x software and integrate it with iTunes.

To those that say that Apple won't allow this because it would hit their own TV show revenues from the iTunes store... I disagree. They'll have to give in sooner or later, because EyeTV isn't going to go away. Would iTunes/iPod have been such a success if they'd have made us purchase all our music from iTunes, even the stuff we alread had on CD?

I'm not going to pay £3 (or whatever) for an Episode of Lost if I could have recorded on EyeTV last night... especially when C4 repeat each episode about 6 times per week anyway.

Regds
SL

I was hoping that's the purpose of the USB port. I know many are thinking it's for the iPod, but I'm hoping you can plug a tuner in :)

edit: in addition to the plug-in tuner, I hope it streams backwards to the computer harddrive.

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:20 AM

Yeah Ok, thats fine, but then I also need a machine to get content from my TV/tuner/satelite to my Mac.
www.elgato.com (http://www.elgato.com/)

Of course, the downside of this is if your "den" or wherever you keep your Mac doesn't have a cable/ariel/satellite socket in the wall. I actually run my EyeTV 410 off a cheap indoor antenna for this reason. Looks ugly but works fine.

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:24 AM

I was hoping that's the purpose of the USB port. I know many are thinking it's for the iPod, but I'm hoping you can plug a tuner in :)

edit: in addition to the plug-in tuner, I hope it streams backwards to the computer harddrive.

I was thinking the EyeTV would plug into the USB port on the Mac (as it does today), but the iTV will let you watch it and control it from your living room.

But actually, I am starting to see your (and dobbin's) point. In some ways it might be more convenient if the EyeTV actually plugged into the iTV, and gave you the option of streaming back to you Mac... at least then your EyeTV Tuner would be near where your Sat/Cable/Ariel socket is. But now it's starting to sound expensive and more like a Mac Mini...

SL

granex

Sep 20, 2006, 07:35 AM

If Iger is correct and iTV has a hard drive.. then I beleive iTV could serve as an external iTunes Library server/device. Authorized computers can access and manage it using iTunes (running as a client). iTS downloads, podcasts, imported physical CDs, etc would all be stored on iTV.

I think the opposite. iTV is just another "pod" using a single computer as a separate node. The Apple paradigm here would be to release iTV and then to have a separate cable-in device (EyeTV essentially) at your computer that would serve as the DVR to load and control shows on your central computer, which could then be wirelessly distributed to iTVs throughout the house. Just buy one giant hard drive rather than having a bunch all over the place.

Apple has repeatedly said that they don't think people want a computer in their living room (to surf the net, etc). There does have to be a computer someplace, however, in this case acting as an entertainment server for iTV, iPods, etc.

aegisdesign

Sep 20, 2006, 07:56 AM

Yeah Ok, thats fine, but then I also need a machine to get content from my TV/tuner/satelite to my Mac.

Nope. That's what ElGato's EyeTV does. If Apple and ElGato can come together and add EyeTV support into iTV and Front Row over the next few months then you can chuck away your TV tuner, Freeview and stick your sat box hidden away next to your computer.

Then all you need under your TV is an iTV.

As I understand it, iTV is only for wireless streaming in one direction. If I need a cable to get broadcast programmes into my Mac, then I may as well use that cable to get the content back onto my TV!

Bingo. And that's why iTV doesn't include a TV tuner - you've already got one.

P-Worm

Sep 20, 2006, 08:13 AM

Is it possible that the cable ports on the back can be used for both input AND output? I don't see why not.

P-Worm

iMikeT

Sep 20, 2006, 08:18 AM

I'm looking forward to iTV. [Wishful thinking] Too bad it doesn't run Mac OS X...

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 08:18 AM

Is it possible that the cable ports on the back can be used for both input AND output? I don't see why not.

Well, the shape of the USB port suggests that it is for attaching another device to the iTV, and not for attaching the iTV to your Mac.

If the iTV doubles-up as an Airport Express, then maybe the USB port is for attaching a printer.

SL

CallmeKenneth

Sep 20, 2006, 08:20 AM

This is just one of those things where we have no idea if it'll catch on until people start buying it (or not, as the case may be!). With anything else Apple have brought out (e.g. iPod) the need has been fairly obvious and you could tell that it was going to be a minor hit at least. I don't feel the same way about iTV. To me it just feels like *yet another* silver/grey box to stick under my TV, adding one more cable to the countless ones already there...

________________________
Alternative Mac History
Mactimewarp (http://www.mactimewarp.com)

P-Worm

Sep 20, 2006, 08:22 AM

Well, the shape of the USB port suggests that it is for attaching another device to the iTV, and not for attaching the iTV to your Mac.

If the iTV doubles-up as an Airport Express, then maybe the USB port is for attaching a printer.

SL

Sorry, I was too vague. I meant that there is a lot of talk about how this thing can't be a DVR because there are only output jacks. I don't see why those component and audio jacks can't be both input and output.

P-Worm

Squire

Sep 20, 2006, 08:45 AM

To those that say that Apple won't allow this because it would hit their own TV show revenues from the iTunes store... I disagree. They'll have to give in sooner or later, because EyeTV isn't going to go away. Would iTunes/iPod have been such a success if they'd have made us purchase all our music from iTunes, even the stuff we alread had on CD?

I'm not going to pay £3 (or whatever) for an Episode of Lost if I could have recorded on EyeTV last night... especially when C4 repeat each episode about 6 times per week anyway.

I see your point but maybe you're not seeing the big picture-- the future as Apple, perhaps, sees it. (And you are paying for that "Lost" episode whether you watch it or not, aren't you?)

A few minutes ago, I was thinking, Gee...if Apple got enough content on iTunes, a guy could just buy all the stuff he wanted to see and to hell with the rest. I see this as replacing cable TV in the not-too-distant future. Customized, commercial-free TV delivered to your computer and then sent to your iTV box. Why pay for that afternoon soap opera that you never watch?

This model probably would not make financial sense for people who watch a lot of TV but, for those who only watch a select few shows, it might be a good alternative to cable TV.

-Squire

chabig

Sep 20, 2006, 09:00 AM

I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.
Pay attention. That's NOT the name. That's just what we're calling it today.

p0intblank

Sep 20, 2006, 09:01 AM

So it does include a hard drive? Very nice! I was already planning on purchasing an "iTV", but this just makes it sound that much cooler. :D

milo

Sep 20, 2006, 09:16 AM

For some reason I convinved myself that Apple would only permit videos tagged as originating from their store.

No way. That would mean that users couldn't even watch their own home movies. Apple would NEVER do that, it would be a huge conflict with their other selling points.

I hope it will work with all Front Row files, not just iTunes content.

What would they leave out? Didn't they already say it does photo slideshows?

What most bothers me about the iTV is that it is a workaround to a PVR instead of embrassing it.

I'm looking for an integtated system for music, movies and TV, not just downloading a show as needed, but with the inclusion of a full blown PVR.

I don't think this is too much to ask for.

Problem is, doing a PVR would be extremely expensive. Other than things like Tivo that have monthly fees, PVR's haven't really caught on, and the price is the biggest reason.

I really hope that someone from Apple reads these forums, I am sure it gets back to Apple, anyway I hope they do it right. Or there will be alot of disappointed people and money lost.

That would be the worst idea ever. People on these forums are ALWAYS disappointed, even with products that turn out to be huge sellers for apple. People whine and whine...and then they buy the product anyway.

I know of at least one company (http://www.itv.com/) in the UK who won't be too happy if they keep that name.

IT IS NOT THE FINAL NAME. It's only a codename, it will ship with a different name.

I don't think it would make sense to make a totally great™ device and then cripple it by excluding DVR functionality (IMO they already crippled it by excluding DVD player)

I already have a DVD player. Why the hell would I want to see the price go up even more just to give me redundant technology? Do you complain that your printer doesn't scan documents?

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 09:27 AM

Problem is, doing a PVR would be extremely expensive. Other than things like Tivo that have monthly fees, PVR's haven't really caught on, and the price is the biggest reason.

This must be a US-centric view. Here (UK) PVRs with twin Freeview (DTT) tuners and 80GB HDs are everywhere. And they are very cheap now (120 quid upwards).

I'm thinking of ditching my cable provider (NTL, I only get it for Sky One, which is just Simpsons repeats) and going with something like this:

http://www.topfield.co.uk/terrestrialequipment.htm

Apparently you can DL what you record to your Mac (USB). I suspect you'll then be able to play that on iTV.

justflie

Sep 20, 2006, 09:28 AM

I guess it wouldn't necessarily even need a hard drive. what about the option of including some video inputs on the back and streaming the video it sees on the screen BACK to your computer? It already has the bandwidth to stream from your computer, so why wouldn't it be able to do the opposite (given it has video inputs)? While this might not be ideal for some people who don't have a lot of HDD space, it would allow for editing out commercials, compression to ipods, etc, much like my eyetv 250. I think it would probably be better this way since it would be cheaper buying an external HDD for your computer than havnig a big HDD in ur ITV.

mi5moav

Sep 20, 2006, 09:29 AM

I have a feeling that Apple and Disney are going to partner up on this ITV and somehow integrate MovieBeam into it. I am sure there are already plans in the work. Disney has cut the price on this great technology and this is one piece of technology I wouldn't give up. So, much better then running to the store and the definition of the movies are great. For $52 bucks you get you own video Store. Decent prices on rentals. A lot better then $299 no way will I get iTV but for $199 with moviebeam built in it's possible.

Bonte

Sep 20, 2006, 09:30 AM

It's not a cut down mini. Think of it more like a wireless iPod for your TV.

It looks like a Mini and and i can do exactly the same with the current Mini. Hook up a Mini to a TV and add it to a home network, let it be cabled or wireless. With the frontrow software you can now listen and watch all the content from the other computers in the network with iTunes streaming.

The only differences between a Mini and iTV are the connections on the back, better wireless speed and no DVD. Its pure the price and software that makes it a media device and not a computer.

lazyrighteye

Sep 20, 2006, 09:31 AM

Sounds like a very cool device.

lets hope for a 60" Apple tv/monitor is coming for release soon. this would power a home theater and be usable for much more

If this were the case (which would be cool), why not just cram an iTV into the monitor (which would be cooler)?
"Look ma, no... iTV box thingy (?)!"

Sabenth

Sep 20, 2006, 09:35 AM

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 09:36 AM

It looks like a Mini and and i can do exactly the same with the current Mini. Hook up a Mini to a TV and add it to a home network, let it be cabled or wireless. With the frontrow software you can now listen and watch all the content from the other computers in the network with iTunes streaming.

The only differences between a Mini and iTV are the connections on the back, better wireless speed and no DVD. Its pure the price and software that makes it a media device and not a computer.

I can do what an iPod does with my Powerbook too. Doesn't mean I want to use that to play music when I'm walking around.

Likewise, I want a computer at close distance hooked up to a computer monitor, it's less than ideal sat under my TV displaying on a relatively low res screen with a keyboard and mouse teetering on my lap. I know Apple think this too.

With the iTV as I see it you get to have that Mini being a real computer somewhere else in your house.

That said, I could be wrong and it could be a really cut down Mac Mini. I guess we'll see.

askthedust

Sep 20, 2006, 09:39 AM

...but in order for me to buy this box I want it to work without connecting to a computer. Just an easy (read Front Row interface) that would let me buy and watch or listen to my purchased content. Wireless would be perfect. plug this in hook it up to my tv and stereo and all my movies and music are on it. I can buy content and save it there. The only time I would want to connect to a computer would be to back up files and to make room for new content or find old content to stream into the box. I could then take this box with me to a friend's house to watch my movies there.

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 09:40 AM

Come to think of it it is possible that the iTV is in fact an iPod underneath. Might explain some of those persistent wireless ipod rumours and that rumour about an iPod with a 'non-touch' interface.

Just idle thoughts... :)

hush

Sep 20, 2006, 09:41 AM

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 09:44 AM

Well, actually I cannot understand why Apple has rejected original nano's design and has made a return to ipod mini style... IMO Ipod Nano was one of the best designs in Apple's recent history, so I am looking for a second hand one :)

Wrong thread?

Good luck getting a non-scratched second hand Nano. Every one I've seen is covered in them. Hence the redesign.

Back to iTV....

tyr2

Sep 20, 2006, 09:45 AM

superleccy

Sep 20, 2006, 09:48 AM

I see your point but maybe you're not seeing the big picture-- the future as Apple, perhaps, sees it. (And you are paying for that "Lost" episode whether you watch it or not, aren't you?)

A few minutes ago, I was thinking, Gee...if Apple got enough content on iTunes, a guy could just buy all the stuff he wanted to see and to hell with the rest. I see this as replacing cable TV in the not-too-distant future.

This may the furture as Apple sees it, but I really hope not. If it were, it wouldn't work in the UK. No way.

No, I am not already paying for the that episode of Lost. In the UK, it is broadcast on C4 & E4, which are commercial, free (non-subscription) and stations. And jolly good they are too. The compulsary TV licence fee we pay all goes to the BBC (bless them). I don't have a cable or a satellite dish. Don't want them, don't need them, never will do.

The day that Apple replaces my need for EyeTV will be the day that every single TV programme is available on iTunes (from Lost to Coronation Street, from Live Snooker to Local News) for free. And not even Apple can make that happen. I don't think they are idealistic or stupid enough.

SL

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 09:50 AM

I have one of these devices, it's excellent. Especially with the user community at http://toppy.org.uk/.

There's some good info on using one with a Mac here http://www.mtop.co.uk/intro.html

The stock EPG on the unit is a bit crufty but it's deffinetly improving. I'd recommend one to anyone looking for a decent PVR.

I'm glad I piped up about this now, thanks for that info tyr2.

devman

Sep 20, 2006, 09:52 AM

Squire

Sep 20, 2006, 09:56 AM

This may the furture as Apple sees it, but I really hope not. If it were, it wouldn't work in the UK. No way.

No, I am not already paying for the that episode of Lost. In the UK, it is broadcast on C4 & E4, which are commercial, free (non-subscription) and stations. And jolly good they are too. The compulsary TV licence fee we pay all goes to the BBC (bless them).

The day that Apple replaces my need for EyeTV will be the day that every single TV programme is available on iTunes (from Lost to Coronation Street, from Dr Who to Local News) for free. And not even Apple can make that happen. I don't think they are idealistic or stupid enough.

SL

It's too bad I couldn't have included a rising intonation arrow in my question ending in "...aren't you?" because I wasn't sure. Now I know and thanks for clearing that up. Of course, it's a moot point if Apple continues to offer TV shows to a US-only audience.

-Squire

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 10:05 AM

Slightly OT but bear with me.

The Topfield TF5800 (see above) isn't fully HD capable but it's technically possible that it can record HD streams for use on your computer.

In this instance the iTV would be very useful (back on topic now :) ).

iMeowbot

Sep 20, 2006, 10:05 AM

I'm liking the sound of this disk feature. Perhaps this will be the stationary iPod I was hoping the Hifi would be.

aaronsullivan

Sep 20, 2006, 10:15 AM

No tv inputs on the iTV. No DVR capability. Please stop "wishing", "hoping", "suggesting."

Perhaps, a SECOND device could perform this, but it's not what the $300 no service fee device is for. It's for conveniently streaming content from the computer to a TV that can be watched from the couch. It fills the desire of many people, but not all. (Nor should it try to be everything to everyone. That's part of what makes it an Apple product, like it or not.)

Personally, I'm tired of unhooking and re-hooking our laptop to do this and a $300 device to keep things casual and instant looks great to me.

thejadedmonkey

Sep 20, 2006, 10:25 AM

If I have a mini, couldn't I use it as an iTV with frontrow? Why would I get an iTV when I can get a refirb mini for $200 more, when it can do more?

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 10:36 AM

If I have a mini, couldn't I use it as an iTV with frontrow? Why would I get an iTV when I can get a refirb mini for $200 more, when it can do more?

Because that ties the computer to your TV (see my post about teetering keyboards above). This way you can have the computer and still display stuff conveniently on the TV, wirelessly.

twoodcc

Sep 20, 2006, 10:36 AM

well i'm very glad that you can hook up or put in a hard drive. maybe it will be worth me buying after all

ready2switch

Sep 20, 2006, 10:38 AM

sbarton

Sep 20, 2006, 10:40 AM

Someone help me out here. Why do some of you insist on "tuners" in this type of device. What good are they for Cable and Satelite users? I mean, at best you could tune in the analog signals on a basic cable subscription, but most cable companies are all digital now and you can't tune in *hit without one of thier set-top cable boxes. Same goes for satelite.

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 10:44 AM

roland.g

Sep 20, 2006, 10:45 AM

NO, it won't have a DVR. Get over it.

chromos

Sep 20, 2006, 10:46 AM

Well, a HDD for caching purposes should put to rest the speculation that the iTV is delayed until Q1 2007 in order for the 802.11n spec to "firm up". At least the a/g flavors should be sufficient to keep the unit fed.

Porchland

Sep 20, 2006, 10:46 AM

Oh please, yes. For me, iTV will only truly be the final piece of the jigsaw if I can also watch my recorded (and possibly live) EyeTV content through it.

A hook-up between Apple and Elgato sounds the most natural thing. Elgato should continue to make hardware for all the various TV standards (terrestrial / cable / sat / digital / etc etc), but perhaps use some Apple desigers to make their boxes a bit more "Apple-looking". Then, Apple can take the EyeTV 2.x software and integrate it with iTunes.

To those that say that Apple won't allow this because it would hit their own TV show revenues from the iTunes store... I disagree. They'll have to give in sooner or later, because EyeTV isn't going to go away. Would iTunes/iPod have been such a success if they'd have made us purchase all our music from iTunes, even the stuff we alread had on CD?

I'm not going to pay £3 (or whatever) for an Episode of Lost if I could have recorded on EyeTV last night... especially when C4 repeat each episode about 6 times per week anyway.

Regds
SL

A lot of these questions come down to whether Apple is going to market iTV as a satellite/cable killer.

Scenario A: iTV is a way to watch movies and shows in your iTunes library and (for $1.99) watch an episode of a show you forgot to DVR or that you just really like and want to own.

Scenario B: Apple morphs its season pass feature for TV shows into a subscription service that is priced competitive to cable. Movies are available in HD for $3.99 for 24 hours.

Scenario A doesn't really give me anything I don't already have, and I'm not going to pay $299 for the privilege of buying movies for $10 that I can PPV for $4. But Scenario B gives me a way to drop my cable package altogether; it's similar to the way mobile phones allowed people to drop local phone service.

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 10:47 AM

I'm wondering why they couldn't/wouldn't just combine the mini and the iTV into a single unit. The mini's size could allow for a DVD slot/player/burner and maybe even allow for the Mac OS in the box, so you don't need another computer to stream your media from. In fact, I assumed that was what the Mini was ultimately destined for anyway.

Thoughts?

What do you thnk the iTV offers that a Mini doesn't? I'm not sure it offers anything other than freeing the Mini so it can be used as a computer in front of a computer monitor somewhere else (which is apparently Jobs' view of where a computer should be).

I might have the wrong end of the stick though.

Dr.Gargoyle

Sep 20, 2006, 10:47 AM

Since iTV most likely wont be a DVR device, I coughed up $700 today for a Sony DVR instead.
I am sure Apple has a brilliant plan for the iTV, but I fail to see it.

roland.g

Sep 20, 2006, 10:51 AM

A lot of these questions come down to whether Apple is going to market iTV as a satellite/cable killer.

Scenario A: iTV is a way to watch movies and shows in your iTunes library and (for $1.99) watch an episode of a show you forgot to DVR or that you just really like and want to own.

Scenario B: Apple morphs its season pass feature for TV shows into a subscription service that is priced competitive to cable. Movies are available in HD for $3.99 for 24 hours.

Scenario A doesn't really give me anything I don't already have, and I'm not going to pay $299 for the privilege of buying movies for $10 that I can PPV for $4. But Scenario B gives me a way to drop my cable package altogether; it's similar to the way mobile phones allowed people to drop local phone service.

because everything on cable is available at itunes. your analogy is wrong.

but what I really wish is for people would stop demanding what they want it to do so they'll buy it and focus on what it will do and how it will do that. I guess that's too much to ask.

on another note, I don't understand what the big fuss. when do most users stop gaming long enough to watch a movie.

roland.g

Sep 20, 2006, 10:56 AM

Since iTV most likely wont be a DVR device, I coughed up $700 today for a Sony DVR instead.
I am sure Apple has a brilliant plan for the iTV, but I fail to see it.

iTV is a great product. If you want a DVR, buy a DVR, if you want the next level of streaming, iTV is it. I already use Airtunes alot. It is hooked up to my stereo. Anytime I'm out in the yard or having a BBQ, I just plug in the Express and some speakers out back and stream music there.

I personally don't buy tv shows and movies, but I like the idea of being able to code anything video into iTunes and view it on my tv along with slideshows, music, trailers.

jholzner

Sep 20, 2006, 10:58 AM

Woohoo a hard drive! :D

I wasn't planning on buying CenterStage, but the DVR functionality(?) would make it very appealing.

Not sure how it would have DVR capabilities since there is no coax input but who knows. If it could do DVR I'd buy in a second and replace my Tivo. However, it seems Apple wants to sell you shows not let you record them for free so I don't see them adding it. Here's hoping!

peharri

Sep 20, 2006, 10:59 AM

This is good news. When they announced it, I was pretty convinced they weren't talking about a box that required an additional computer, although USB storage or a dedicated server box seemed likely based upon the absense of evidence for an in-built hard disk.

So it's actually confirmed it can be used standalone. The missing piece is complete. This is iTunes for the rest of us. For those who don't want cable, who want to be able to subscribe to (and fund) specific TV shows and order movies on demand, this is for you. No computer required. Go home, flop on the couch, and watch what you want. Want something more powerful? Well, it'll integrate with your computers and presumably if someone wants to create devices that export iTunes libraries, like some sort of networked DVR, then it'll work with that too.

Wonderful. This deserves to be a success.

chabig

Sep 20, 2006, 10:59 AM

I'm wondering why they couldn't/wouldn't just combine the mini and the iTV into a single unit.They could, but it would cost a lot more.

iMeowbot

Sep 20, 2006, 11:03 AM

DVR capabilities, i really doubt. I wouldn't be at all surprised, however, if the box had access to all the regular iTunes stuff (store, podcasts, radio).

Dr.Gargoyle

Sep 20, 2006, 11:05 AM

iTV is a great product. If you want a DVR, buy a DVR, if you want the next level of streaming, iTV is it. I already use Airtunes alot. It is hooked up to my stereo. Anytime I'm out in the yard or having a BBQ, I just plug in the Express and some speakers out back and stream music there.

I personally don't buy tv shows and movies, but I like the idea of being able to code anything video into iTunes and view it on my tv along with slideshows, music, trailers.
I might buy the iTV when it finally arrives. It really depends on what I can do with it. Right now it feels slightly anemic to me. It is more or less just a beefed-up Airport Extreme.
The iTV would be much more appealing to me if Apple offered a TV-tuner in it (BTO or third party). If not, well...

PDubNYC

Sep 20, 2006, 11:05 AM

actually... he doesn't indicate a HD... why? well the iTV (sorry, not really impressed with this name) streams media from your mac/pc trough wifi or ethernet... so if you buy an episode on iTunes... it will be stored in your iTunes library on the content-hosting mac/pc in your house and thus be available for iTV to play on your TV...

since it has a USB port I guess it will be possible to attach a USB HD... and store files locally instead of on a remote mac/pc...

From the linked article:
"He said: "It can also stream it live through the box to the TV or it has a small hard drive on it so they can download what you put on the device on your computer, on your iTunes, through the television set."

Sounds to me like he is very much indeed indicating that it has a hard drive. And iTV is a temporary name. Damn, you've got all of those computers, yet you are still so misinformed.

roland.g

Sep 20, 2006, 11:10 AM

ready2switch

Sep 20, 2006, 11:15 AM

What do you thnk the iTV offers that a Mini doesn't? I'm not sure it offers anything other than freeing the Mini so it can be used as a computer in front of a computer monitor somewhere else (which is apparently Jobs' view of where a computer should be).

I might have the wrong end of the stick though.

That's pretty much my question too. The iTV is a mini without DVD, storage, OS, or advanced interface? I guess I just don't see a market for this at $300. Waste of time, unless I'm missing something.

evilgEEk

Sep 20, 2006, 11:21 AM

Peace

Sep 20, 2006, 11:21 AM

Recently TIVO sued Dishnetwork and others for patent infringements on the way TV is recorded via PVR and won.Dishnetwork got an injunction to stop it temporarily while it is being appealed.

Thats point one..

MPEG-2 is now mainly being used on DVD's.Dishnetwork,DirectTV and some cable companies have gone to MPEG-4/H264 for content delivery.Especially high def content.

Thats point 2..

iTV Britain isn't the only broadcaster using that name.Dishnetwork also has a channel.100 I believe.The interactive channel that has games,news and a store called iTV..It's a Zoom Network entity.Same company that brings most High Definition to Dishnetwork.

It is my contention that the purpose of the USB/Ethernet ports on back serve multiple purposes including future connectivity for Dishnetwork through the MacMedia Center.

And I still find it very hard believing Bob Iger had no idea about whats in* this box.It means literally millions of dollars to him.I'm quit sure Steve Jobs demonstrated it to him in his house.Informing him about the hard drive.

fixyourthinking

Sep 20, 2006, 11:22 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Long term Apple fans will remember that Apple almost launched an Apple Set Top Box (http://guides.macrumors.com/Apple_Set_Top_Box) years ago but it was never officially released. Interestingly, the system was described as "Apple's ITV system" (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2000/04/20000426204518.shtml) in a press-release, indicating that Apple has recycled this codename (iTV). The final name for the upcoming system has not yet been decided.

Ironically the set top box was "field tested" at Disneyland in California. It was going to be a movie/cableTV and shopping kiosk in your hotel room via your TV.

I own several of these boxes and the hard drives contained videos of Disneyland and shopping.

Mike Teezie

Sep 20, 2006, 11:26 AM

I'm buying this thing the day it drops.

Being able to stream iPhoto slideshows wirelessly to a big TV for clients is going to be wonderful.

roland.g

Sep 20, 2006, 11:28 AM

I'm quit sure Steve Jobs demonstrated it to him in his house.Informing him about the hard drive.

I want to get invited to Steve's house for a BBQ. I'll bring the beer if he supplies the Apples. ;)

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 11:30 AM

That's pretty much my question too. The iTV is a mini without DVD, storage, OS, or advanced interface? I guess I just don't see a market for this at $300.

I do, it's like an ipod for video. Or more like maybe airtunes. Anyway. Read the whole thread I think some people get it.

I think I understand what Apple is getting at here. Not sure I'll buy one but they might be on to something

wkhahn

Sep 20, 2006, 11:34 AM

The obvious uses for a HDD to be included in the iTV have been discussed fairly extensivly. I'll try not to rehash anything, and all appologies if I do without giving credit. On to the point.

Apple is in the hardware business. They make software and provided services to generate sales and lock you into thier hardware. They make like $.01 per song; maybe $.50 a movie. So why do it? So we'll buy a new iPod/computer every few years. The same holds true for iTV. Its hardware. Apple will include anything if it makes the hardware purchase more compelling. So why the HDD in iTV? For ALL the obvious reasons. Maybe they partition an 80GB iPod drive; say 10, 10 and 60. 10GB for a "rental" service downloaded straignt to the new box. They are locked to the box and once its full you can't rent anything else without returning something. 10GB for a streaming cache from your computer. And 60GB for PRV use. Why not?

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 11:40 AM

The obvious uses for a HDD to be included in the iTV have been discussed fairly extensivly. I'll try not to rehash anything, and all appologies if I do without giving credit. On to the point.

Apple is in the hardware business. They make software and provided services to generate sales and lock you into thier hardware. They make like $.01 per song; maybe $.50 a movie. So why do it? So we'll be a new iPod/computer/iTV every few years. The same holds true for iTV. Its hardware. Apple will include anything if it makes the hardware purchase more compelling. So why the HDD in iTV? For ALL the obvious reasons. Maybe they partition an 80GB iPod drive; say 10, 10 and 60. 10GB for a "rental" service downloaded straignt to the new box. 10GB for a streaming cache from your computer. And 60GB for PRV use. Why not?

You might have a point here but at that price point I suspect a 30GB HD and no PVR use. The HD could be used for caching and PPV/rental movies though.

Bonte

Sep 20, 2006, 11:47 AM

Because that ties the computer to your TV (see my post about teetering keyboards above). This way you can have the computer and still display stuff conveniently on the TV, wirelessly.

With FrontRow on the Mini it can act as a hub for the other computers in the network and play the movies via iTunes streaming.

Blackcat

Sep 20, 2006, 11:49 AM

No tv inputs on the iTV. No DVR capability. Please stop "wishing", "hoping", "suggesting."

Perhaps, a SECOND device could perform this, but it's not what the $300 no service fee device is for. It's for conveniently streaming content from the computer to a TV that can be watched from the couch. It fills the desire of many people, but not all. (Nor should it try to be everything to everyone. That's part of what makes it an Apple product, like it or not.)

But EyeHome, Neuston MC500 and lots of others already do this. My EyeHome happily squirts anything on my Macs on to my TV or Hifi and lets me browse the web too.

Why is iTV special?

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 11:52 AM

With FrontRow on the Mini it can act as a hub for the other computers in the network and play the movies via iTunes streaming.

Yeah but a Mini costs £400 (and up to £600 when properly equipped) and this will cost £200 or less.

bommai

Sep 20, 2006, 11:56 AM

Mac Mini vs iTV as a pure home theatre component

Mac Mini advantages:

1) DVD drive to play movies
2) ATSC/NTSC tuner capability through eyeTV Hybrid - DVR solution. Can pause live TV, schedule recording using remote in living room
3) Onboard storage / External HD support through USB/Firewire
4) Front Row alternatives such as Media Central - Google video, You Tube, IPTV support
5) Leopard update should bring Front Row feature parity with iTV (guess!). Front Row already supports Bonjour - so you can still have a media server from which you stream data from
6) Enough horsepower to play 1080P H.264 as well as MPEG2 TS.
7) Could hookup an iSight for video chat in the living room. Could enhance frontrow so it pauses media if somebody is calling with iChat.

Mac Mini Disadvantages

1) No component video output. I have a HDTV (5 year old) that has only component video input. No HDMI/DVI.
2) DVI output may not support HDCP and might prevent future HDTV files from not displaying properly in 1080P (guess!)
3) Might run into trouble connecting DVI output to DVI/HDMI input on TV in certain cases. Not all TV models work properly with respect to scan rate, etc.
4) Is still a computer and might need keyboard and mouse to make it work for things like software update, etc. Can you VNC or ARD from another compute.r
5) Price - more expensive than iTV. But the extra features could justify it.

iTV advantages

1) Meant for a home theatre/living room. No need for keyboard/mouse
2) Component/HDMI guarantees modern TV connectivity.
3) Price. Most people already have a DVD player, so why duplicate that?
4) Stability. Stripped down functionality means less clunky feel.

iTV disadvantages

1) No TV tuner support (eyeTV hybrid no go on iTV). eyeTV on another computer defeats the purpose of pausing live TV.
2) Not clear if you can buy media through iTV.
3) Other front row like programs such as Media Central won't be supported.

iTV suggestions.

I think Apple should make a home theatre edition of Mac Mini. Let it look just like the Mac Mini but make it have all the advantages of the iTV as well as the Mac Mini. Sell it for the same price as Mac Mini. The traditional Mac Mini can be used as a general purpose computer while the Mac Mini Home Theatre edition can have the following:

1) HDMI/Component output
2) Support for eyeTV Hybrid inside Front Row. Recorded shows can have a mini store - Apple can try to sell you TV episodes that you missed or episodes just like it.
3) Front Row equivalent to iTV
4) Stripped Down OS X - cannot use as general purpose computer
5) Enough HD space for internal eyeTV storage - expandable with external USB HD. Firewire could be left out if it saves money
6) iSight support built into Frontrow.
7) Bonjour support just like today.
8) YouTube, Google video and the likes.

A good media center on the PC side costs $1500 and up (a generic tower PC does not make a media centre). $600 is not bad for the Mac Mini Media Centre edition even though you might have to spend more money adding HD, eyeTV hybrid, etc.

bommai

Sep 20, 2006, 11:58 AM

But EyeHome, Neuston MC500 and lots of others already do this. My EyeHome happily squirts anything on my Macs on to my TV or Hifi and lets me browse the web too.

Why is iTV special?

eyeHome does not support HD and it never will. I got this in an email directly from Elgato. That is the biggest difference. Also, the general consensus is that eyeHome is not in the same league of robustness/intuitiveness as other elgato products or Apple products. eyeHome cannot even play back eyeTV 500 , eyeTV Hybrid recordings.

wkhahn

Sep 20, 2006, 12:01 PM

You might have a point here but at that price point I suspect a 30GB HD and no PVR use. The HD could be used for caching and PPV/rental movies though.

I was going to ask why not a PRV, but realized it myself. While apple does not prevent you from loading music you have aquired through other means onto your iPod, they don't help you either. They don't help you buy CD's because its too broad an experience to simplfy. Same with the PVR. How a customer aquires content from a provider varies too much for apple to engineer an simple solution. But they can provide their own simple content delivery solution.

Next, they need to provide an NAS for all your media either from the store, ripped from disc or created yourself. Move the media off the computer.

Peace

Sep 20, 2006, 12:05 PM

Blackcat

Sep 20, 2006, 12:09 PM

eyeHome does not support HD and it never will. I got this in an email directly from Elgato. That is the biggest difference. Also, the general consensus is that eyeHome is not in the same league of robustness/intuitiveness as other elgato products or Apple products. eyeHome cannot even play back eyeTV 500 , eyeTV Hybrid recordings.

But nobody will be downloading HD for iTV, so that's a moot point. From what I've seen so far it actually does less than other media streamers.

milo

Sep 20, 2006, 12:21 PM

This must be a US-centric view. Here (UK) PVRs with twin Freeview (DTT) tuners and 80GB HDs are everywhere. And they are very cheap now (120 quid upwards).

I'm thinking of ditching my cable provider (NTL, I only get it for Sky One, which is just Simpsons repeats) and going with something like this:

http://www.topfield.co.uk/terrestrialequipment.htm

Apparently you can DL what you record to your Mac (USB). I suspect you'll then be able to play that on iTV.

Looks like a cool box, but still pretty expensive, $525 USD. And I assume not available in the USA. Anyone know what the cheapest PVR you can buy in the states is?

The only differences between a Mini and iTV are the connections on the back, better wireless speed and no DVD. Its pure the price and software that makes it a media device and not a computer.

And the fact that you can't use the iTV as a computer! The iPod can play audio and video like a mini can, does that make the iPod "a cut down mini" too?

If I have a mini, couldn't I use it as an iTV with frontrow? Why would I get an iTV when I can get a refirb mini for $200 more, when it can do more?

Because it's $200 more. And this is just the initial pricing, as time goes on the iTV will get cheaper faster than computers do.

I'm wondering why they couldn't/wouldn't just combine the mini and the iTV into a single unit. The mini's size could allow for a DVD slot/player/burner and maybe even allow for the Mac OS in the box, so you don't need another computer to stream your media from. In fact, I assumed that was what the Mini was ultimately destined for anyway.

Because it would be way more expensive than $200, with little chance of prices dropping much.

Since iTV most likely wont be a DVR device, I coughed up $700 today for a Sony DVR instead.
I am sure Apple has a brilliant plan for the iTV, but I fail to see it.

Well, the first step of the plan is to cost less than $700. :eek: At that price, the technology will never be anything more than a niche.

because everything on cable is available at itunes. your analogy is wrong.

He was talking about the future of iTunes/iTV. Who's to say that someday everything on cable won't be on iTunes?

bretm

Sep 20, 2006, 12:23 PM

I was going to ask why not a PRV, but realized it myself. While apple does not prevent you from loading music you have aquired through other means onto your iPod, they don't help you either. They don't help you buy CD's because its too broad an experience to simplfy. Same with the PVR. How a customer aquires content from a provider varies too much for apple to engineer an simple solution. But they can provide their own simple content delivery solution.

Next, they need to provide an NAS for all your media either from the store, ripped from disc or created yourself. Move the media off the computer.

?? TiVo will provide you a PVR that burns DVDs, has a tuner and hard drive, and wirelessly connects to your macintosh and plays your photo library and itunes for $300 plus you have to buy a usb network reciever for like $25.

So it's basically the same thing except for the videos which of course didn't exist when tivo adopted the technology, and since they'll play your photos they'll probalby adopt the videos too. I think I'll just hold out for my TiVo to do the same thing PLUS be a PVR and DVD burner.

milo

Sep 20, 2006, 12:39 PM

With FrontRow on the Mini it can act as a hub for the other computers in the network and play the movies via iTunes streaming.

Sure. And you're spending more to have two computers instead of one computer and one cheaper, simpler box.

1) No TV tuner support (eyeTV hybrid no go on iTV). eyeTV on another computer defeats the purpose of pausing live TV.

If they can make it work, I don't see any reason why eyeTV live TV couldn't be paused via the iTV remote. There's no technical reason it wouldn't be possible, they'd just have to implement it. Same with buying iTunes content direct from iTV, they could certainly add the feature if they wanted to.

But nobody will be downloading HD for iTV, so that's a moot point. From what I've seen so far it actually does less than other media streamers.

That's an assumption on your part. How do you know that iTunes won't include HD content in the future? How do you know that people won't be able to stream HD content from other sources?

?? TiVo will provide you a PVR that burns DVDs, has a tuner and hard drive, and wirelessly connects to your macintosh and plays your photo library and itunes for $300 plus you have to buy a usb network reciever for like $25.

So it's basically the same thing except for the videos which of course didn't exist when tivo adopted the technology, and since they'll play your photos they'll probalby adopt the videos too. I think I'll just hold out for my TiVo to do the same thing PLUS be a PVR and DVD burner.

Link? And is the $300 buying the box, or is that a montly fee for some amount of time? Where is the mac support, the tivo site says they don't support it?

jwdsail

Sep 20, 2006, 12:42 PM

Apple iPod Video Express... (I'm hoping to kill the 'Chicken Little' iTV name will get Apple sued stuff)

A hard drive? Hard to believe, I'd think some flash memory as a buffer, maybe 4GB? Perhaps you can add a HD via the USB 2 port? Too small to have a 3.5" drive.. May be too small for a laptop drive.. A 1.8" drive would add too much to the cost, wouldn't it?

I think w/ the HDMI output, and the price, what we're staring at is really a wireless upscaler... Take any content from your Mac, and wirelessly upscale to the native res of your TV (up to 1080p)...

If this is the case, I may just buy one in place of the Mac mini (w/ something other than Intel Integrated *SPIT* Graphics BTO, that will more than likely never happen...) that I've wanted to add to my TV...

Shrug.

Just my $0.02US

jwd

jabi

Sep 20, 2006, 12:50 PM

iTV is basically a limited Mini with better remote control software, if i can use an Elgato eyeTV on it to record i'm buying for sure. Ideally would be an eyeTV with a USB 2 connection to add a big HD.

Given the form factor, I believe this is designed to sit on top of a Mac mini to gain recording functionality. Apple has no interest in taking away the computer from the equation. They see the Mac as the hub of your digital lifestyle. So, I predict we will see a "Media Center" version of Mac OS X that is designed to go with a specialized version of a Mac mini suited for recording TV, iTunes integration etc. that sits under the iTV.

quigleybc

Sep 20, 2006, 12:50 PM

it will not replace my 4 year old xbox. Which itself has a 120Gig drive and a remote.

What do you do with your Xbox that would been relevant to watching videos on your TV?

Can you load Vids onto the Xbox HD and play them??

heyisa

Sep 20, 2006, 12:53 PM

I'd rather wait for a mac mini w/iTV combo,
that would allow you to stream Bonjour content as well.
(could you imagine that in a dorm network!).
I think the second generation of this will be awesome, if apple does it screw it up.

I hope you could also use it as a seperate monitor for a computer.
Would make it really easy to hook up a computer to a projector that way.

adamfilip

Sep 20, 2006, 12:54 PM

The hard drive is just to store files while it outputs them to the tv

much easier to cache on the hard drive then play. rather then stream constantly. it also makes it more reliable and less prone to interference

Since there are no inputs on this thing it wont be a PVR

peharri

Sep 20, 2006, 12:58 PM

That's pretty much my question too. The iTV is a mini without DVD, storage, OS, or advanced interface? I guess I just don't see a market for this at $300. Waste of time, unless I'm missing something.

Well, it isn't "without storage", it has storage.

It's fairly simple: it's a Set Top Box. It's another one, to add to your DVD player, cable box, and DVR. Well, I say "add to", but actually, you'll probably not need them. What is does is show whatever Quicktime will show that's accessable via iTunes.

- That means anything on the iTunes Store
- It means anything in your .Mac storage.
- It means anything on your network, if you have one, that's exported via an iTunes Library.

You'll go home after work, pick up the remote, and maybe you'll:

- Buy a movie and watch it.
- (Rent a movie and watch it, assuming Apple eventually supports the idea, or someone else finds a way to interface to it)
- Watch a new episode of a TV show you subscribe to
- Watch a free pilot of a show you're interested in.
- Listen to a streamed radio station
- Watch a subscribed-to video blog or browse other blogs, and watch them
- Watch that highly amusing rip from "America's Funniest Videos" that your friend told you to watch, from Google Video, or other Google video clips.

What will be available? Anything you want. As this becomes more and more popular, more and more content will become available. Expect CNN news to be just as available as episodes from ABC mini-serieses.

How will you get it? Over your $25/month broadband connection. Which you'd have anyway for web and email.

That's how you use it. For many people, cable, as a "just put on background noise and forget it" medium, will still rule. For others, such as myself, the prospect of TV built for me, rather than advertisers, is more compelling.

I think it's awesome.

blackstarliner

Sep 20, 2006, 01:00 PM

It will be perfect for me. I need a video airport express type machine to connect to a big old projector in a cupboard that I want to feed dvd to wirelessly from the mini.

The big question in my view is whether you can indeed browse the store directly through the box itself, or whether my mini has to do that. Personally, I don't mind the mini doing it, because that's what I primarily want this functionality for.

But I reckon they would shift many, many units if they sold it as a standalone unit. Movies from your couch at any time more or less instantly, iTunes interface, no computer necessary at all. As simple as plugging in your cable box. You pay for what you want to watch, full stop. Even people without any idea about computers love movies. They would sell x*n units to the older generations, like a grey-haired 'vPod'. If they opened up the movie store worldwide with this online vPod for your fat tv, it would be very big.

The people begging for pirating capabilities are way off base. As someone mentioned earlier, Apple's interests, and the market differentiation they seek, lie in having people pay a fair price for a pleasing entertainment experience. They sell more hardware, the artists are paid for their trouble. How would they 'sell' this device to media companies that own content if it wasn't as 100% above board as buying a cinema ticket? Recording tv and burning dvds isn't what this device should be about. It should be about killing off cinemas for good, denting Blockbuster and DVD sales and appealing to a MASS market, not just hardware freaks and technology fetishists.

edit: can't spell

babyj

Sep 20, 2006, 01:11 PM

What do you do with your Xbox that would been relevant to watching videos on your TV?

Can you load Vids onto the Xbox HD and play them??

If you fit a mod chip to an Xbox it allows you to do lots of cool things, including upgrading the hard drive and run non certified software (eg homebrew, open source).

Probaby the most popular is Xbox Media Centre, which is what it says and does it pretty well. So for about £150 you end up with a decent media centre which isn't bad, plus its a game console as well.

TEG

Sep 20, 2006, 01:19 PM

ya, seems unlikely the hard drive is for DVR functionality [as someone pointed out, there are no video inputs ont the device]... but the hard drive could prove useful in other ways.

It brings an interesting thoughts though how it complements the DVR. Wonder if Apple has thought about licensing the streaming componenet of it to Tivo, for example. It seems like it might be nice if Tivo could play protected itunes content on your home network.

Or on the flip side, Apple could license Tivo in a box of their own.

arn

That is an awesome Idea. Hopefully the iTV will be able to be integrated with the TiVo. Maybe being an external HD if needed. I just don't want Apple to go into the DVR business, because TiVo already did it right, and I don't think anyone could improve on it. I would like to see a software update for the TiVo that changes the encoding from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 so when they launch TiVo to Go for Mac, you are 90% closer to being able to use the video in other places, plus it could improve video quality with smaller file sizes.

TEG

ShavenYak

Sep 20, 2006, 01:27 PM

Scenario B: Apple morphs its season pass feature for TV shows into a subscription service that is priced competitive to cable. Movies are available in HD for $3.99 for 24 hours.

... Scenario B gives me a way to drop my cable package altogether; it's similar to the way mobile phones allowed people to drop local phone service.

Perhaps what Apple should do is have two types of TV "season passes" - one at the current price point (or perhaps slightly cheaper) that gives you the episodes permanently, and one that's substantially cheaper ($4.99 per season or thereabouts?) where the shows expire after a period of time, or a certain number of viewings.

They'd also need to have the shows available to start streaming as soon as they are broadcast - a lot of people aren't interested in buying them after the fact because they want to be able to talk about the show areound the water cooler at work the next day.

A setup like that, and I'd think about dropping cable like a bad habit. The only catch is live sporting events. Unless Apple could capture those broadcasts and begin streaming them to subscribers in real time.... imagine a season pass for your favorite team. The pro leagues would be tough negotiators, but colleges would probably jump at the prospect of having all their football games available on iTunes and getting a cut of the action.

theBB

Sep 20, 2006, 01:32 PM

Here is my wishlist:

1) Basestation or range extender for 802.11 b/g and maybe "a" or "n".
(Airport Express has both of these features, so I'd say likely.)

2) Using the ethernet connection instead of wireless network to stream music, photo slideshows and videos.
(I don't see why not)

3) Hooking up a USB harddrive with my music, photos and videos to avoid any wireless connection hiccups.
4) It would be great if I could also use that same harddrive as a sort of media server that I can reach from other computers at home.
(3 and 4 could happen, but I would not be surprised if they leave them out.)

5) Using it as a print server by connecting a USB printer, like the current Airport Express. (Well, if iTV is in the living room, this feature will not be really necessary. Still, a few years down the road there will be a newer and better version. Then, I could use the old one for more mundane network tasks.)

rtdunham

Sep 20, 2006, 01:34 PM

Maybe in the future, Apple teams up with Marantz...and other AV surround reciever manufacturers to build ITV inside their receivers? (like some of them already have ipod dock connectors)...The ITV is built inside the AV receiver. And you can use the remote from your receiver the control the new front row.

Nice idea. and car makers could have the iTV built in, so kids or passengers in the back seat could stream video to the car's built-in video system (the link could just as easily be wired, but none of today's iPod-ready cars provide for this video-to-dvd player useability, do they?

theBB

Sep 20, 2006, 01:38 PM

Its Front Row. Which can play whatever Quicktime can play. Which means it can play avi, wmv etc. Just install the codecs.
I doubt that. The decoding will take place in iTV. How are you going to install codecs on it? If it does not support it out of the box, it probably will not be possible.

Yvan256

Sep 20, 2006, 02:00 PM

I doubt that. The decoding will take place in iTV. How are you going to install codecs on it? If it does not support it out of the box, it probably will not be possible.

That's why I'm ripping my DVDs in H.264/AAC instead of the ever-popular DivX/Xvid or any other AVI/Quicktime nightmare. Too many CODECs.

Dr.Gargoyle

Sep 20, 2006, 02:10 PM

That's why I'm ripping my DVDs in H.264/AAC instead of the ever-popular DivX/Xvid or any other AVI/Quicktime nightmare. Too many CODECs.
Hmmm, that makes me wonder if iTunes in a later version will be able to rip DVD's as well as Cd's.

slate1

Sep 20, 2006, 02:13 PM

My thoughts on the hard-drive are very similar to "adamflip's" and "chromos's" in that it's simply a way to get around the video streaming limitations of the 802.11g protocol.

If you've got a movie sitting on your iMac in one room and it can simply transfer the iTunes video file to the iTV in the living room then the iTV could begin playback in a fairly short period of time while it caches the remainder of the movie to the iTV HD during playback. Voila - streaming problem solved.

I'm presuming that all the functionality to stream music (i.e. - airport express like...) will be incorportaed into the device and that no data other than that which is cached to it will be stored on the hard-drive. In other words, you won't store movies, music, etc. on the iTV - you'd continue to do that via your desktop Mac and manage them in iTunes.

I, personally, could care less about any DVR functionality as my HD cable-box already provides me with this functionality.

What I would love to see is DVD playback so that this box could essentially replace my existing DVD player in my home theater system.

Westside guy

Sep 20, 2006, 02:15 PM

It seems like a lot of people don't really grok what the advantages of having a network really are. You don't need a full-blown computer dedicated to the television - e.g. yet another Media Center PC or Myth-TV box. That "solution" is too expensive, way too overpowered, and too energy-hungry for what it needs to do. I suspect the hard drive inside the iTV is somewhat equivalent of "network attached storage" - the computational heavy lifting, such as it is, will occur on your actual computer; but it'll be using the iTV's drive rather than its own drive for storing the shows etc. I imagine you can plop a DVD into your computer and watch it on your TV, too - if you're watching a movie, you're probably not using your computer's DVD drive at the same time anyway.

Heck, this is the sort of thing I always wished Tivo would come up with. I have two Tivos - but really all I need is one Tivo plus a wireless receiver that'd let me watch shows on a second television. Doubly so now that Tivo is selling their own two-tuner units.

This whole iTV thing will be rather interesting. Depending on how it plays out, I can see myself dumping Tivo and buying an EyeTV (the El Gato (?) product). This Apple iTV doesn't need to be a PVR per se, but for flexibility's sake if EyeTV can hook into this whole system - for the people that want to still have over-the-air/cable television - it could be pretty sweet.

ShavenYak

Sep 20, 2006, 02:19 PM

?? TiVo will provide you a PVR that burns DVDs, has a tuner and hard drive, and wirelessly connects to your macintosh and plays your photo library and itunes for $300 plus you have to buy a usb network reciever for like $25.

So it's basically the same thing except for the videos which of course didn't exist when tivo adopted the technology, and since they'll play your photos they'll probalby adopt the videos too. I think I'll just hold out for my TiVo to do the same thing PLUS be a PVR and DVD burner.

TiVo will also charge you $12.95 every month (or $299 every two years) for the rest of your life for the privilege of using their box. Look at that - you can buy the newest, latest-n-greatest iTV every two years (if Apple adds functionality that often) for the price of TiVo's service fees. And then probably sell the old one on eBay for enough money to buy the next version of OS X. Besides, if you want HDTV, the TiVo solution is $800. Plus fees. Plus a USB wireless receiver. And you still can't play music or video from the iTunes Store.

Don't get me wrong, I think TiVo's technology is great... but, I'm already paying $ every month to my cable company who sends me TV listings, and numerous sites on the Internet have free TV listings; at least some basic level of TiVo functionality should be free as well (yes, I know about the TiVo Basic or whatever they called it in some of the DVD-burning TiVos - that wasn't good enough). I'd much rather have TiVo than this crappy Scientific Atlanta DVR that Charter provides. But it costs less to rent than the TiVo service fee, and I'd still need to pay Charter to rent two CableCards if I replaced it with a TiVo. Which would suck, since I'd have just emptied my checking account to buy the TiVo in the first place.

My dream is for Apple to buy TiVo. Last I checked, Apple's cash on hand was more than TiVo's market cap.

lipinski77

Sep 20, 2006, 02:36 PM

slate1

Sep 20, 2006, 02:37 PM

I'd much rather have TiVo than this crappy Scientific Atlanta DVR that Charter provides. But it costs less to rent than the TiVo service fee, and I'd still need to pay Charter to rent two CableCards if I replaced it with a TiVo.

I guess I'm lucky in that my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD-DVR works flawlessly and is well worth the $6.95/month my cable provider charges me. Having that DVR functionality included in the box that's got dual-cable-HD-tuners and its own show listing/management software just makes sense as a cable subscriber.

This is why the DVR functionality is meaningless to me with regards to the iTV. Plus, it's pretty meaningless funtionality in the US unless you're pulling SD or HD content over the air. Apple knows this and it will most likely mean that DVR functionality will never be a part of the iTV with regards to the US market.

I'll consider buying the iTV as it stands soon after it's released if it proves functional. If it had even a progressive-scan DVD player included it would be a no-brainer in my opinon and I'd be first in line the day it's released.

gugy

Sep 20, 2006, 02:38 PM

The iTV makes the elgato eyetv hybrid even more appealing. :)

http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna

Use it to record your shows and then stream it to the iTV.

-bye bye comcast DVR.

what about calling it the iStream (ha)

yeah, that looks cool.
I am seriously considering buying one. Plus get an external antena and get HDTV. sweet.:D
But I would still keeping my dishnetwork DVR. I think it will take time to completely get rid off any cable/dvr package.
The fact that the computer has to be on everytime I want to watch or record a show is somewhat a hassle.

robotx21

Sep 20, 2006, 02:38 PM

I think iTV is a waste of time and money for apple. In essence, the mac mini can do ALL OF THAT, plus more, minus the ability to go out via HDMI. If apple just upgraded FRONT ROW to the quality of the iTV user interface, you have an iTV right there on the mac mini! Just add some more ports, including HDMI, cable in for DVR recording, a massive hard drive, and you have a MAC MEDIA CENTER PC! What about connecting to other machines to share content? YOU CAN ALREADY DO THAT!!! In iTunes you say "share my media on my network" and any computer with iTunes can read that information! Come on apple...this iTV thing is a WASTE. It's a dumb down mac mini...apple will make way more money selling mac mini's with TIGER/LEOPARD on it, so not only would you get a DVR, STREAMING MOVIES, DOWNLOADABLE MOVIES TO PLAY ON YOUR TV, but you get WEB TV!!! Or edit a MOVIE ON YOUR BIG ASS TV! Sorry for the rant...I just don't know why apple doesn't merge both technologies together in one system to compete with media center pc, and convert MORE mac sales.

weitzner

Sep 20, 2006, 02:42 PM

I think it's pretty obvious that iTV will NOT have DVR functionality- The iTunes store is a competitor to DVR. This thing is a means of connecting your computer (iTunes) to your TV- not about connecting your TV to your computer. It's a completely different take on watch-your-show-whenever-you-feel-like-it mentality.

gauriemma

Sep 20, 2006, 02:48 PM

peharri

Sep 20, 2006, 02:51 PM

greenstork

Sep 20, 2006, 03:00 PM

The hard drive (if not used as DVR) will likely be used as temporary storage buffer. So if you buy a movie off iTS, it automatically streams to iTV and saved to the hard drive until you consume it.

And this is how the device will be able to do high definition. Since it's pretty difficult to stream 720p (or higher) content in real time, the iTV will buffer the stream and start playing when it is able.

This opens up tons of new possibilities and affirms for me at least, the ability to.

The real question is, is the HDD upgradeable?

TimUSCA

Sep 20, 2006, 03:01 PM

TiVo will also charge you $12.95 every month (or $299 every two years) for the rest of your life for the privilege of using their box.

It used to be $300 for a lifetime subscription on TiVo... they took it away though.

sparkleytone

Sep 20, 2006, 03:49 PM

I haven't read this entire thread, so this might have been said already...I just wanted to point out that "hard drive" is an extremely generic term when it comes to layman's terms regarding computers. The corporate environment is full of less than technical users who don't know the difference between USB and Firewire, let alone what exactly a hard drive is. I have users that refer to the entire COMPUTER as the "hard drive". There is a very good chance that Iger knows very little about computers and could simply be miscommunicating what he means.

Thanatoast

Sep 20, 2006, 04:16 PM

Why in the world are so many people complaining about the lack of a DVR and DVD?

In the case of the DVR, what the heck are you people watching? The last time I saw cable (Dish Network) there were over two hundred channels, and not one thing I wanted to see. I'd much rather pay for a season pass for the one or two shows worth watching than around $60 for cable + Tivo every month.

Yes, I know, that puts me outside the norm. But I can use the time to read a book, cook a good meal, or go running/work out. All better uses of time than sitting in front of entertainment programing that is 1/3 ads and 2/3 not worth watching.

As for the DVD player issue, Apple wants you to buy your movies from them. They neither need nor want a DVD player on this device. If you already own a movie on DVD, rip it for goodness' sake. Large collections of DVD's look impressive, but really all they do is take up space.

My conclusion: drop the cable + Tivo - save money, time and brain cells. Only watch the content you're willing to pay for rather than letting Hollywood/Madison Ave shove whatever they wish down your throat while you slowly vegetate.

/soapbox

rjfiske

Sep 20, 2006, 04:25 PM

In the case of the DVR, what the heck are you people watching? The last time I saw cable (Dish Network) there were over two hundred channels, and not one thing I wanted to see. I'd much rather pay for a season pass for the one or two shows worth watching than around $60 for cable + Tivo every month.

Yes, I know, that puts me outside the norm. But I can use the time to read a book, cook a good meal, or go running/work out. All better uses of time than sitting in front entertainment programing that is 1/3 ads and 2/3 not worth watching.

/soapbox

I'm not sure I understand your question/comment. You say that a DVR isn't worth it because there are too many channels, and then you say that you don't want to watch advertisements. You seem to be against TV in general, which is fine. However...

The purpose of a DVR answers both of your initial concerns. That is, we have a DVR BECAUSE there's so many channels and BECAUSE there is so many ads. We can watch a 1hr program in 40 minutes, whenever we want, however we want. (don't even get me started on Football games). This (not surprisingly) frees up a tremendous amount of time where we can read, cook, work out, etc. Not once in our 2.5yrs of having TIVO have we had to say, "Sorry we can't do that because 'Survivor' is starting in 5 minutes". There's where the real value of a DVR comes into play. Just my opinion. :)

mostman

Sep 20, 2006, 04:42 PM

The iTV makes the elgato eyetv hybrid even more appealing. :)

http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna

Use it to record your shows and then stream it to the iTV.

-bye bye comcast DVR.

what about calling it the iStream (ha)

Well.... not quite.

You see the ElGato stuff does not decode digital channels. Not only that, they can't even control your Comcast cable box to tell it to change the channel. So any channel that is digital (>125) you are going to have to manually change before recording.

Sound appealing? No, of course not.

This is the reason solutions like ElGato have not really caught on yet. Add a cable card system and its game over.

-Mike

nsjoker

Sep 20, 2006, 04:45 PM

it won't have any dvr functionality... it'll just be frontrow on your tv, and nothing else. woopdee freaking doo

mostman

Sep 20, 2006, 05:06 PM

it won't have any dvr functionality... it'll just be frontrow on your tv, and nothing else. woopdee freaking doo

Its an Airport Express for Video. Simple as that.

And I think you are significantly misunderstanding how much impact on the market a device like this will have. This is the way to marry the television to your digital content. People don't want a PC in the living room - but they do want to see their photos, watch their videos and listen to their music on their couch - using their television as a display.

These things will sell like crazy. Without DVR functionality. Remember, the DVR market is still small. Small enough to call 'fledgling'. Apple is nothing if not smart about taking proven market verticals and cleaning them up for the consumer. Small steps.

-Mike

Bonte

Sep 20, 2006, 05:32 PM

p0intblank

Sep 20, 2006, 05:38 PM

I'm really hoping this is the iPod all over again. In other words, I hope all the naysayers here get proved wrong and the iTV becomes the new toy everyone has to have in their house.

Apple needs to market this, by the way. Guaranteed there are tons of households willing to purchase this just to play photo slideshows on their TVs. I hope Apple can get the message across. I want as many people possible to recognize what a great product this is going to be.

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 06:22 PM

I just wanted to point out that "hard drive" is an extremely generic term when it comes to layman's terms regarding computers. [...] I have users that refer to the entire COMPUTER as the "hard drive". There is a very good chance that Iger knows very little about computers and could simply be miscommunicating what he means.

I whole-heartedly agree.

I find it higly unlikely that there's a physical Hard Drive in the box that amounts to anything more than the UI and/or chache/buffer.

There's absolutely no need and would complicate the equation indefinitely, especially concerning digital rights.

Let's assume Iger is right, though, that there IS a HDD in the TelePort (or as you infidels call it, iTV), and that it can act as a stand-alone media access point. The question remains, how would you be able to get media onto it? Either 1) it comes with some sort of operating system which allowed you to connect it to iTS for content, or 2) it could be detected by a Mac or PC as a computer/HD over the network in order to drag-n-drop media.

Option 1, I think, is too far-fetched and risky. There would be substantial reliability issues using HDs that small to run an OS. We've all heard many nightmare-ish stories about people trying to bring their home computer to work, booting via iPod. Nonetheless, this seems like the most likely option for the use of a HDD.

Option 2, if this is the case, you already have a full-sized (i.e. reliable) HDD in your computer, which is connected to the internet, (i.e. iTS) for content. Why would you even need a HD in the box? Basically, Apple would be spending money on MicroDrives which don't have a reliable life-span and take up valuable space inside the box and for what? So that you can have an identical copy of a 1GB movie on both your Mac and your iTV box? As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need!

PLUS, with iTunes DRM, you are limited to the number of copies you can make on devices you own. So an HD in the iTV would eat up one of those copies for any of the media you would choose to load onto it.

I do think, however, it would be likely to allow it to connect to .Mac, although streaming from the net is slower than from within an internal network... and on top of that, I don't know many people who store full-length, full-quality movies in their .Mac storage. In fact, I don't know any.

So, that's why I think there will be no HDD in the TelePort.

-Clive

Peace

Sep 20, 2006, 06:29 PM

I whole-heartedly agree.

I find it higly unlikely that there's a physical Hard Drive in the box that amounts to anything more than the UI and/or chache/buffer.

There's absolutely no need and would complicate the equation indefinitely, especially concerning digital rights.

Let's assume Iger is right, though, that there IS a HDD in the TelePort (or as you infidels call it, iTV), and that it can act as a stand-alone media access point. The question remains, how would you be able to get media onto it? Either 1) it comes with some sort of operating system which allowed you to connect it to iTS for content, or 2) it could be detected by a Mac or PC as a computer/HD over the network in order to drag-n-drop media.

Option 1, I think, is too far-fetched and risky. There would be substantial reliability issues using HDs that small to run an OS. We've all heard many nightmare-ish stories about people trying to bring their home computer to work, booting via iPod. Nonetheless, this seems like the most likely option for the use of a HDD.

Option 2, if this is the case, you already have a full-sized (i.e. reliable) HDD in your computer, which is connected to the internet, (i.e. iTS) for content. Why would you even need a HD in the box? Basically, Apple would be spending money on MicroDrives which don't have a reliable life-span and take up valuable space inside the box and for what? So that you can have an identical copy of a 1GB movie on both your Mac and your iTV box? As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need. As long as streaming works, there's no need!

PLUS, with iTunes DRM, you are limited to the number of copies you can make on devices you own. So an HD in the iTV would eat up one of those copies for any of the media you would choose to load onto it.

I do think, however, it would be likely to allow it to connect to .Mac, although streaming from the net is slower than from within an internal network... and on top of that, I don't know many people who store full-length, full-quality movies in their .Mac storage. In fact, I don't know any.

So, that's why I think there will be no HDD in the TelePort.

-Clive

That makes no sense at all..

In order to even view and/or listen to any media from another computer it needs a front row interface.That interface must be on the component itself.So in order for front row to run it must have some kind of O/S built into it.

greenstork

Sep 20, 2006, 06:49 PM

Just thought I'd add some tidbits to the DVR discussion. As a few others have pointed out, El Gato and others don't do digital cable content. Digital cable is encoded and the only way to decode it currently is with a cable company set-top box or a CableCARD.

Any device that is capable of accepting a CableCARD must be certified by CableLabs, which is setup and run by all of the cable companies.

CableLabs certified CableCARD devices go through a rigorous certification process. There are a handful of televisions certified and only one DVR, the TiVo Series 3. Windows Media Centers have been waiting for CableCARDs for years but CableLabs won't certify Media Center PCs until Vista comes out, with it's much stronger DRM. Because OS X's/Quicktime's DRM just isn't that difficult to hack, it's going to be a long time before we see a CableCARD capable device working in or alongside a Mac. In other words, Macs won't be recording a digital TV stream for a couple of years at least.

Sure, you could hook up a set-top box to your Mac but then the signal has been converted from digital to analog, back to digital again. Also, you have no control over the channel unless you implement some IR blaster device or something. And that solution is far from easy to use, I'll stick with my TiVo for high definition dual channel recording.

greenstork

Sep 20, 2006, 06:53 PM

its more than just Airport Express for Video, its a TV tunes via the internet and the home network.

Media distribution will be reinvented and specifically tailored to the iTV and its internet capability's. WebTV streamed to the iTV, podcasts will get better quality because its more then the iPod now. I think the preview that Steve gave us was necessary to get content with the launch of the product and maybe even hardware solutions that work with iTV.

Maybe Apple is negotiating with the digital TV providers to offer iTV as an option to there customers, bigger HD and protected content can make this work.

Digital TV providers have absolutely no incentive to use an Apple branded box. They make a lot of revenue on rental of their own set-top boxes that have the ability to play their pay-per-view content. Apple is the competition and they still hold all of the cards (TV content monopoly).

milo

Sep 20, 2006, 06:58 PM

In essence, the mac mini can do ALL OF THAT, plus more, minus the ability to go out via HDMI. If apple just upgraded FRONT ROW to the quality of the iTV user interface, you have an iTV right there on the mac mini!

And it will cost twice what the iTV costs.

People aren't willing to pay that much for a settop box. Game over. Product dead.

it won't have any dvr functionality... it'll just be frontrow on your tv, and nothing else.

And that's exactly what I want. I don't want to pay for extra crap that I don't need.

sparkleytone

Sep 20, 2006, 06:58 PM

Digital TV providers have absolutely no incentive to use an Apple branded box. They make a lot of revenue on rental of their own set-top boxes that have the ability to play their pay-per-view content. Apple is the competition and they still hold all of the cards (TV content monopoly).

I think you underestimate Apple's amazing sales pitch:

"Hey look! Free money!"

emotion

Sep 20, 2006, 07:02 PM

In other words, Macs won't be recording a digital TV stream for a couple of years at least.

Unless you're in Europe and you can get Digital Terrestrial TV (DTT). In the UK this is known as Freeview.

The fact that regions differ will mean it's unlikely Apple will go that route.

joemama

Sep 20, 2006, 07:04 PM

it won't have any dvr functionality... it'll just be frontrow on your tv, and nothing else. woopdee freaking doo

Well said. This product will NOT sell (after the initial "craze") if there is no DVR functionality. People (general mass of people not macrumors folk) are not ready to pay for individual TV shows. People love DVRs because they can record, watch later and skip commercials.

In the future when Apple has such a stronghold on the cable industry that companies are forced to move to a pay-per-channel (a-la-carte) system, then sure, but not right now.

DVR is where it is at for the moment. Apple is going to miss the boat. Apple having an iTV does not make me want to buy TV shows. It simply makes me not want to buy an iTV.

Peace

Sep 20, 2006, 07:09 PM

Well said. This product will NOT sell (after the initial "craze") if there is no DVR functionality. People (general mass of people not macrumors folk) are not ready to pay for individual TV shows. People love DVRs because they can record, watch later and skip commercials.

In the future when Apple has such a stronghold on the cable industry that companies are forced to move to a pay-per-channel (a-la-carte) system, then sure, but not right now.

DVR is where it is at for the moment. Apple is going to miss the boat. Apple having an iTV does not make me want to buy TV shows. It simply makes me not want to buy an iTV.

And I guess this is why Disney sold 125,000 movies the first week and Apple has sold millions of TV shows right?*

gugy

Sep 20, 2006, 07:22 PM

I think the ITV just needs to be able to stream video (HDTV and standard), Photos and music.
My Mac is the hub, a place where I can record my TV shows using elgato and then stream it to ITV. Use itunes to buy movies, tv shows and music and then stream it to my ITV.

Simplicity is the key. I don't need ITV to have a superdrive or DVD. I have that on my Mac. Plus everybody nowadays have their own DVD player on the entertainment room. I have Laserdisc player, CD player, VHS, dishnetwork DVR and a receiver. I am not planning to get rid of anything.

ITV will be a nice addition to my entertainment system to do a single specific thing: Talk to my Mac on the other room wirelessly or by Ethernet. That's all folks.

nsjoker

Sep 20, 2006, 07:51 PM

either i'm missing the point of this iTV thing or people in america have ridiculous amounts of money to throw away and are willing to pay for tv shows which are free so they can stream them to their iTV box and watch them that way. it's a super efficient way to burn money, but not to watch tv shows. dvr please.

i mean.. i do understand people want frontrow on their tv's, but it seems like an inital craze thing. i'm not going to completely knock this product though, because if anything it's a starting point for apple to infiltrate your living room, and then releasing dvr functionality in the future. we'll see.

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 08:06 PM

That makes no sense at all..

In order to even view and/or listen to any media from another computer it needs a front row interface.That interface must be on the component itself.So in order for front row to run it must have some kind of O/S built into it.

That's why I said this:

I find it higly unlikely that there's a physical Hard Drive in the box that amounts to anything more than the UI and/or chache/buffer.

Read more carefully.

-Clive

joemama

Sep 20, 2006, 08:18 PM

And I guess this is why Disney sold 125,000 movies the first week and Apple has sold millions of TV shows right?*

Please read more carefully next time. I was talking about TV and cable companies - not movies. Two completely different mediums.

And I prefaced my message with "after the initial buying rush." Of course they sold a lot of movies in the first week.

TomSmithMacEd

Sep 20, 2006, 08:22 PM

I read most of the comments and I cannot believe anyone else talked about the wonderful little program known as handbrake.

Take your dvd's (or ones you rent... I know it's illegal) rip them.. put them on iTunes

Have a server full of dozens/hundreds of dvd's that you can access at anytime through your iTV.

I know it's not the most practicle way of doing this, but it is what I'll be doing if I purchase an iTV.

Electro Funk

Sep 20, 2006, 08:26 PM

I don't think it would make sense to make a totally great™ device and then cripple it by excluding DVR functionality (IMO they already crippled it by excluding DVD player)

i am glad there is not a dvd player included... now if it was bluray or HD DVD (even an upconverting player that scaled to 720p or 1080I) that would be a whole nother story... but, if it was just your run of the mill 480p dvd then i dont want to pay extra for it... i already have 3 dvd players and a samsung upconverting dvd player...

EricNau

Sep 20, 2006, 08:30 PM

Steve Jobs claimed the iTV "completed the picture," but it does nothing of the sort (based on already revealed features). In reality there is still a hole large enough to fly a 747 through.

We need a way to record our own TV shows from our cable subscription. If Apple expects us to drop our cable/dish and buy everything from the iTS, they are sadly mistaken...

In fact, the average american could not afford to cancel their cable subscription and buy their shows from the iTS. Consider this: the average cable bill is approximately $55 in the US for unlimited TV. This means for the same price you could buy about 25 episodes every month from the iTS. Let's say you watch The Daily Show, that is all you could watch.

The average bill for a family of four would well exceed $150 a month if everything was bought from iTunes.

Apple needs a wake up call.

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 08:44 PM

We need a way to record our own TV shows from our cable subscription.

Is that legal? If it's not - even if it's blurry - Apple won't do it.

Secondly, if Apple allows you to do that, then you wouldn't buy content from the iTS. That's not what Apple wants.

-Clive

balamw

Sep 20, 2006, 08:51 PM

The average bill for a family of four would well exceed $150 a month if everything was bought from iTunes.
Where's that number coming from?

For simplicity let's make it an even $160 and assume 4 week/month. That's $40/week of TV Shows = 20 unique shows per week = ~3 episodes/day. This assumes no season/series discounts.

Don't forget that for cable/satellite, you still pay for it regardless if the show you want to watch is a rerun, so perhaps a better way to look at it is seasons of shows. The typical weekly show has 13-26 episodes/season and thus would be available at iTMS for $25-$50/year. Assuming the typical $55 cable bill you cite, this could easily add up to 12-24 seasons of shows per year (depending on # of episodes & discounts).

At $150/month you'd be able to buy 36-72 different seasons of shows from iTunes throughout the year. That's a boatload of TV.

B

EricNau

Sep 20, 2006, 09:28 PM

Where's that number coming from?

For simplicity let's make it an even $160 and assume 4 week/month. That's $40/week of TV Shows = 20 unique shows per week = ~3 episodes/day. This assumes no season/series discounts.

Don't forget that for cable/satellite, you still pay for it regardless if the show you want to watch is a rerun, so perhaps a better way to look at it is seasons of shows. The typical weekly show has 13-26 episodes/season and thus would be available at iTMS for $25-$50/year. Assuming the typical $55 cable bill you cite, this could easily add up to 12-24 seasons of shows per year (depending on # of episodes & discounts).

At $150/month you'd be able to buy 36-72 different seasons of shows from iTunes throughout the year. That's a boatload of TV.

B
I was assuming this "family of four" included younger kids (possibly one age 4 and one age 9). ...They do watch a boatload of TV. Between the two of them they could easily watch 8 different series.

Now for the parents...
I would assume they each have one or two daily show(s) that they like to watch (which is where I was counting most of the monthly cost). For example, "The Daily Show" is $20 a month multiplied by 3 different shows, equals $60/month. Plus, it would also be expected that they should watch a few series (probably at least 5 between the two).

Perhaps it was a exaggeration, but I think I proved my original point that buying your TV shows from iTunes could easily exceed your monthly cable bill (maybe not for a single person, but once you get a whole family watching TV, it isn't that hard).

...Plus, how do you get your local/national news and sports shows? ...and no, news & sports "highlights" from iTunes don't count.

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 09:49 PM

I was assuming this "family of four" included younger kids (possibly one age 4 and one age 9). ...They do watch a boatload of TV. Between the two of them they could easily watch 8 different series.

Now for the parents...
I would assume they each have one or two daily show(s) that they like to watch (which is where I was counting most of the monthly cost). For example, "The Daily Show" is $20 a month multiplied by 3 different shows, equals $60/month. Plus, it would also be expected that they should watch a few series (probably at least 5 between the two).

Perhaps it was a exaggeration, but I think I proved my original point that buying your TV shows from iTunes could easily exceed your monthly cable bill (maybe not for a single person, but once you get a whole family watching TV, it isn't that hard).

...Plus, how do you get your local/national news and sports shows? ...and no, news & sports "highlights" from iTunes don't count.

Dude. If this is your family, you need to be watching less TV and getting outside more. Or at least stay inside and play board-games with the kids. It's much more fun than vegging out on the couch.

geeze. Yeah, if I watched that much TV, I'd be complaining about the iTS too!

-Clive

joemama

Sep 20, 2006, 10:21 PM

Is that legal? If it's not - even if it's blurry - Apple won't do it.

-Clive

Umm, it's called a VCR. Do you remember when that was considered illegal when it first came out? Or the cassette tape?

Secondly, if Apple allows you to do that, then you wouldn't buy content from the iTS. That's not what Apple wants.

-Clive

We all know that is Apple's business model right now. What everyone is saying is it is not going to work for the average Joe-American family.
Think about who pays the bills right now and imagine this scenario:

Child:"Hey, dad, can I buy that last 3 episodes of Lost on Itunes?"

Dad:"You mean the same ones that were on the last 3 weeks?..for free?!?"

Child:"Yes, I want to put them on my iPod."

Dad:"The same ones that are already on our DVR that I pay $10 extra a month to have? I think not, my child."

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 11:08 PM

Umm, it's called a VCR. Do you remember when that was considered illegal when it first came out? Or the cassette tape?

OMG, you have a VCR still?! What's it like?

teehee.

Only kidding.

Still, I don't think it's legal to videotape TV broadcasts of any form. That's why you have to pay for it on iTunes. If you want to watch it at your liesure, you have to pay for that liesure. Whether that means finding (and putting up with) a VCR and taping it (illegally) or footing the $6 for the last 3 episodes of Lost it's the price someone has to pay.

-Clive

AppleinJapan

Sep 20, 2006, 11:26 PM

Sounds like a very cool device.

But to be honest, I am hoping this is just one device of many TV integrated services for apple.

ie,
1- more dvr hdtv functionality
2- hdmi output in 1080p for television of computer and hdtv content
3- blu-ray drive for movies and for data use
4- Apple Televisions/monitors (yes tv's with speakers and hdmi inputs in addition to computer inputs)
5- Itunes movie shop with HDTV Rentals, not have to purchase everything, but instead be able to rent with unlimited views for 1 week. and viewing window can start when user initiates, ie, download lots of movies for a trip, then go view

well i can always hope. :-)

lets hope for a 60" Apple tv/monitor is coming for release soon. this would power a home theater and be usable for much more

All fine and well if YOU LIVE IN AMERICA but what about the other 99% of the world ???????? Apple must first provide the same content on all their stores.....I know its not Apples fault but this iTV device is going in the wrong direction if it is only going to play itunes movies etc etc.....The rest of the world is STILL waiting to buy tv shows....

Clive At Five

Sep 20, 2006, 11:37 PM

All fine and well if YOU LIVE IN AMERICA but what about the other 99% of the world ????????

Not to be a total ass... but it's more like 95.071% ;)

Anyway, Apple doesn't *HAVE* to do anything about the rest of the world. I mean I don't doubt they'd like to, but conent overseas is different and so are some of the lables. It's not as easy and Apple flipping a switch and, viola, there's the content for the UK and the rest of the world. There are some severe negotiations that need to take place first and that takes a lot of time.

-Clive

sisyphus

Sep 21, 2006, 12:01 AM

First things first, I presume that the HD is there to put a great deal of stuff easily in reach. When SJ did the demo, the unit had all the album art/DVD covers on there as well as a synopsis etc... That could all be easily stored on the "iTV" reducing the need to access it all the time.

Obviously it will also act as a temporary cache for downloaded movies/online trailers. I suspect the biggest use of the HD will be the ability to buy/rent movies directly from the unit.

A bit of a "far out" idea is maybe to use the unit as a pseudo PVR in the future. If you were to say, pay $5 to watch the "insert big sporting event final here" online. You could pause it and use the HD to store data while you had to go use the facilities because you really shouldn't have finished off that Super Big Gulp before the game even started.

An even better use would be a rental download that would stay on the iTV for a week prior to being "blipped".

Apple doesn't want a PVR they want better than PVR. Instant demand to anything! However Apple isn't big enough for that. Instead all of the media companies will do it for them. Why? Greed, pure and simple greed. The thought of making money for no additional work is too lucrative for them. Why bother punchine out DVDs when you can send the master to Apple. Let them encode it and handle all the distribution problems. Look as Disney. They made $1,000,000 in one week for doing NOTHING. Why do you thing WalMart is scared (when was the last time you heard that?) Walmart succeeds because they force the best price from manufacturers. Someone has figured out the ultimate price reduction on the product - no physical media period! There is no way to undercut that.

Studios aren't dumb either. This is actually a way for them to increase profits! As the price of purchase goes down, more people will buy. However they were able to reduce the price without reducing profits! (This is my assumption that the profit on each download is = to the DVD profit). Now guess what. The studio can actually increase their profits. Lets say for the real movie buffs they could release a $2 "Extras" download that would contain most the of stuff on DVDs that most people never actually watch. The hard core people would jump on it. The average people would just be happy with their basic movie.

The next step is HD. Who is really going to care about HD-DVD vs. Blue-Ray if you could just download it in HD and store it on your umm... HD. :D Apple's near term goal is to replace your DVD player. However the longer term goal is to make the Mac your entire content delivery system.

That being said in the near term the iTV is perfect for me IF Apple allows movie rentals. I think the reason that they didn't debut the movie rentals is the lack of a shipping iTV. I can just hear SJ at MWSF saying that the "most demanded feature for the movie downloads and iTV is rentals." Unfortunately living in Canada means I'll be waiting until it they are playing ice hockey in hell for this service to make it north.

At home we have several TVs. If each TV were to (eventually) have an iTV it would mean access to all my media anywhere in the house. Should somebody like Elgato or TiVo be really smart and find an extremely simple way of meshing their products with the iTV I could access all of my data from anywhere in the house anytime. I'm just waiting to see where all of the pieces will be by January. I suspect they'll be far more cohesive than most people here expect.

balamw

Sep 21, 2006, 01:27 AM

I was assuming this "family of four" included younger kids (possibly one age 4 and one age 9). ...They do watch a boatload of TV. Between the two of them they could easily watch 8 different series.
In my experience, video on demand is exactly what younger kids want. My boys (3 and 5, so not that far off your model family) watch more than their share of TV, but they tend to be quite "clumpy" in what they watch since they've grown up with PVRs all their life, they tend to watch lots of the same show, and rewatch things over and over. For instance tonight we were treated to 3 back-to-back episodes of "The Batman" from a recently released DVD and one episode of "Teen Titans" from the TiVo. I don't have to keep buying those shows, since once purchased or recorded, I have them. Tomorrow will be the younger one's choice, so my guess is we get to watch the Wiggles on DVD for the umpteenth time.

I do buy some shows on DVD of from iTunes just to get them off the PVR, to reward the content provider for things we enjoy, and create some space for new stuff to be recorded. For instance I bought two seasons worth of Dora The Explorer (49 shows) for $60.This works out to an average cost per episode of $1.22. On DVD they sell 4 episodes for $10-$16 which means a minimum cost per episode of $2.50, and up to $4. I no longer have to TiVo these and have them at my fingertips.

I would assume they each have one or two daily show(s) that they like to watch (which is where I was counting most of the monthly cost). For example, "The Daily Show" is $20 a month multiplied by 3 different shows, equals $60/month. Plus, it would also be expected that they should watch a few series (probably at least 5 between the two).

You're also still way off on your prices. The "multi-pass" for The Daily Show or Colbert is $9.99 for 16 shows (i.e. 4 weeks Monday-Thursday). You don't pay $2/show for them unless you're a masochist. Note also that you don't pay anything for half of the year since they are in reruns about half the time, so it works out to ~$60/year per show. (BTW What's the third TDS show? I guess I haven't been watching lately. :o)

News and sports are a completely different matter though.

B

babyj

Sep 21, 2006, 04:17 AM

There is going to be a lot of changes to how we watch and pay for tv shows over the next few years, its still early days at the moment. The main change will be watching everything on demand rather than at the time it is broadcast.

The bottom line is that the tv companies (producers and broadcasters) have to make money from the shows. That money can come from advertising, cable / satellite subscriptions, paying for downloads or for on demand type services.

Everyone is treading very carefully at present as they don't want to upset the balance. For example, brands won't pay for advertising if no one is watching the ads as viewers are all buying downloads and until the downloads are paying the bills the tv companies don't want to do anything too drastic.

Here in the UK the next big thing is likely to be the BBC going all out with downloads and streaming of their content. Which in theory won't cost anyone in the UK much (maybe just paying for the traffic) as we already pay through the tv license.

If Apple want to get a good market share in the UK they need to forget about tv shows and do a deal for content from the BBC and the Premiership, as the exclusive live rights to the latter is what made Sky so big and popular.

bingo1234

Sep 21, 2006, 04:26 AM

blackstarliner

Sep 21, 2006, 04:44 AM

airport express and airtunes allowed streaming content to a stereo. this just adds video function. that's it. if there is a hd it's for buffer and basic OS/ navigation.

still a very cool solution to sending content

yes, but it also may have the functionality to browse and download content directly... maybe

dcranston

Sep 21, 2006, 05:30 AM

I'm glad to see at least a few people get it. Obviously iTV isn't for everyone. But let's take a look at the 6 most common complaints on this board:

1. I can already do this with a Mac Mini!

This may be true, but remember those are the same arguments against the iPod when it was released in 2001. You could already use a Creative MP3 player. Last I checked, the Mac Mini was still $300 more expensive, and is way overkill for a TV setup, not to mention the fact that you have to maintain a machine designed for mouse & keyboard use. Software Update comes up? Looks like you need to plug in that keyboard and mouse. Sure you can get most (if not all) of the functionality of the iTV on a Mac Mini, but who wants to spend $300 extra, lose some nice features like HDMI, and have to system adminster their living room!?

2. I don't need another box cluttering everything up.

First of all, perhaps you missed the size part of the presentation. This thing looks like a small hot plate. Second, if you don't have a need to get content from your computer to your TV, don't buy this. If you have a need, you're going to be forced to plug *something* in...

3. It doesn't have DVR functionality. I'm so mad.

I own a TiVO and I love it. And for the forseeable future, will continue to use it. But the point that needs to be reinforced over and over on these forums is that a TiVO fills a need because content is not delivered how customers want it. As this model adapts, TiVO will become irrelevant. It seems silly to try to enter this market late in the game with a product that would be comparable at best. Remember, iTunes sells content, and this market is just beginning to come out.

4. Apple wants to lock you in to their proprietary iTunes world.

While I'm sure Apple would be more than happy if you bought all your content on iTunes, I don't think anyone realistically expects that to be the case. Does anyone here think that iTV would only play iTunes content? I'll eat my left shoe if that's the case. You will still be able to subscribe to rocketboom and rip your dvds and make your own iMovies... I'm sure they'll play on iTV.

5. There's no hole that needs to be filled with this product.

Perhaps your habits are strikingly different than mine. I have an entire hard drive full of content: photos, movies, music, podcasts, and every free tv show iTunes has ever given me. But didn't I just spend $800 on my new TV in my living room? I did! I want to share this content with my friends, my family, and just have a better viewing/listening experience myself. The living room is designed for sharing and passively intaking content. The computer is designed for actively managing, organizing, and receiving. This product marries the two concepts.

6. iTunes downloads aren't economically sound vs. TV

Obviously this statement depends greatly on the user. For myself, I watch only a few TV shows. I love the Daily Show, I enjoy Monk, I recently got into 30 Days, and I enjoy the occasional mythbusters. Daily Show is $10 for 16 episodes, or about a month. TDS is often in re-runs, which I don't have to pay for. It comes out to around $70 / year. Monk has only 4-6 shows per season, and 2 seasons / year, or about $20 / year. I've watched maybe 5 episodes of 30 Days at $2 each or $10 (in the last 4 months), and I've purchased 7 mythbusters this year, or $14. So if I continue at the same rate, I'll spend $140 this year on TV shows through iTunes. My basic cable bill with Comcast was $60 / month or $720 / year. (And I know many friends who pay over $100 / month for cable, including HBO or Disney) Whoa! I cancelled Comcast and feel very liberated to only spend money on shows I find interesting. The free shows allow me to check out and be engaged by new series as well. I'm sure many of you watch much more TV than I do, but I have to say, you'll be surprised at how much crap you're paying for, and how nice it is to choose what you want only. Again, if you watch 4-6 hours of television / day (excluding old rerun shows or just turning on broadcast television), perhaps this model is not for you. Even still, multi-pass like Daily show/ colbert at $10 /month (or less) could give you 3 hours a day for $60 / month. Sweet. Time well spent :)

So is this the be-all-and-end-all of devices? No. But if I can walk into Best Buy, and walk out with a $300 no-hassle device that lets me play all of my content passively and easily in the living room, that lets me manage and choose content in an interface designed to do that very efficiently (iTunes), and without the need for any other support hardware, installations, hours of configurations, or monthly subscription, I'll be pretty happy.

devman

Sep 21, 2006, 06:01 AM

eyeHome does not support HD and it never will. I got this in an email directly from Elgato. That is the biggest difference. Also, the general consensus is that eyeHome is not in the same league of robustness/intuitiveness as other elgato products or Apple products. eyeHome cannot even play back eyeTV 500 , eyeTV Hybrid recordings.

the iTV doesn't do HD either. Quoting Bob iger, Disney CEO:

He also hinted that, sometime down the line, Apple may improve its iTV and digital media offerings to include HD content.

It features "DVD quality, not HD quality at this point," he said.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2066

technicolor

Sep 21, 2006, 06:52 AM

it won't have any dvr functionality... it'll just be frontrow on your tv, and nothing else. woopdee freaking doo
Basically.

I have no plans on purchasing this, unless its magically has DVR ability

emotion

Sep 21, 2006, 07:05 AM

I have no plans on purchasing this, unless its magically has DVR ability

Apple's point is that your computer more or less has that capability (ok with an Elgato dongle), and in any case they don't want to follow that business model. I guess you're not the target audience.

Only time will tell if anyone buys this.

peharri

Sep 21, 2006, 07:32 AM

I think those suggesting spends of $150/mo or higher should possibly back off until the unit's been in service for a year or so.

As others have pointed out, with season passes and acknowledging the number of repeats, access to even conventional TV shows shouldn't be that expensive. But I also believe there will be a significant amount of free and/or low cost content which isn't obvious right now because we're looking at the whole thing being exclusively iTS based.

Apple has already said it's going to team up with Google Video to provide content. TV shows are going to want to promote themselves by providing free pilots. Video blogs should be available. One major studio is teaming up with MyTube to provide free music videos, and I suspect that will become available in time somehow to iTV users.

In short, there's no reason to believe that it'll be necessary to pay for all the content, and certainly the content you do pay for will vary in price even given Steve's wish to keep pricing simple.

The majority of families in the US spend around $50-90 per month on a generally poor cable TV service. It's not hard to see how an average iTV using family would spend around the same amount, receiving a significantly better product in return.

balamw

Sep 21, 2006, 09:22 AM

the iTV doesn't do HD either. Quoting Bob iger, Disney CEO:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2066
IMHO Iger's comments are referring to the content at the store, not the capabilities of the iTV. The iTV is so clearly designed to complement an HDTV with its outputs, if they crippled it to have only 480p output they would have failed. Plus, Steve already demonstrated playing an HD Trailer.

We shall see...

B

rahrens

Sep 21, 2006, 09:33 AM

the iTV doesn't do HD either. Quoting Bob iger, Disney CEO:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2066

Actually, Steve noted that the iTV WILL do HD. It does have an HDMI port out, doesn't it? The issue now is that the ITS doesn't have that content yet. But if YOU have something you've managed to record on your Mac or PC that IS HD, then, by all means, buy the iTV (or whatever they'll call it) and watch your stuff...

peharri

Sep 21, 2006, 09:34 AM

Apple's point is that your computer more or less has that capability (ok with an Elgato dongle), and in any case they don't want to follow that business model. I guess you're not the target audience.

Only time will tell if anyone buys this.

I think the focus should be on the business model than the "you can always use a computer". Apple is reinventing TV. If you assume that an iTV user will be downloading pretty much everything they watch, then a DVR just becomes redundant.

Indeed, I think the lack of a DVR tells us a lot about Apple's thinking. It would certainly help shift boxes in the short term if they made a DVR an option, but in the long term it would essentially mean Apple would be shouting "We're co-existing with cable."

Of course, at this stage, it's too early to tell. For all we know, iTV will be launched in January (1G iPod 5Gb), and then in April we'll see it replaced with three variants (2G iPods - iPod 10Gb, iPod 15Gb, iPod 20Gb), one with more disk space, one with a DVR, and one that integrates with CableCards. I don't see them doing that, but I'm less certain of that than I am of them not releasing an iPhone.

SiliconAddict

Sep 21, 2006, 09:48 AM

The more I hear about iTV the lest interested I am in it. I don't need something that integ. with my desktop computer and clogs up my home network. I want a stand alone solution. So it looks like I'm back to building a HTPC sometime next spring. Pitty too. It looks like a slick device. Just not what I'm looking to put under my TV. :(

MonkeyClaw

Sep 21, 2006, 09:49 AM

I think this thing is perfect, especially for a person like myself who does not watch a ton of TV. In the end it will be cheaper for me just running one of these on my TV and subscribing to a couple of shows as opposed to spending money on cable or satellite. The built in HDD is an interesting development, I'm curious to see what that might bring about. But as it stands, I'm sold, lol.

Tommyg117

Sep 21, 2006, 09:50 AM

I'm really excited for this. I can't wait to get it in my hands and experiment.

AidenShaw

Sep 21, 2006, 10:03 AM

So it looks like I'm back to building a HTPC sometime next spring. Pitty too. It looks like a slick device. Just not what I'm looking to put under my TV. :(
By next spring, Apple will have the rest of the Media Center - one of the "super-secret" bits of Leopard is a full clone of Microsoft's Media Center Edition, built upon a greatly enhanced Front Row. (And accompanied by a full-featured AV remote.)

The iTV is just Apple's copy of Microsoft's "Media Center Extender" and/or "Media Center Connect" (see Media Center Extender or Windows Media Connect. Which Do You Need? (http://www.mediacenterpcworld.com/news/218)) or Intel's wireless extender that will be part of the Viiv platform.

Leopard has the other piece - the real multiple tuner support and PVR system.

Couple that with a dual-core Conroe in a TiVo-sized box, and you'll have the option of a dedicated Apple Media Center in the living room, or the "iTV" feeding from the Apple Media Center in the office.

Windows Media Center Edition supports up to five extenders. Apple certainly will do the same, so whether you choose the Conroe HTPC pizza-box, or a bigger Mac in the office - TVs throughout the house can access the single copy of the media library with "iTV" boxes.

emotion

Sep 21, 2006, 10:11 AM

Ha ha how's that for conjecture? :)

I guess we'll see. I'll be surprised but it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

devman

Sep 21, 2006, 10:25 AM

Actually, Steve noted that the iTV WILL do HD. It does have an HDMI port out, doesn't it? The issue now is that the ITS doesn't have that content yet. But if YOU have something you've managed to record on your Mac or PC that IS HD, then, by all means, buy the iTV (or whatever they'll call it) and watch your stuff...

Excellent. Thanks for clarifying. I misinterpreted Iger's comments.

greenstork

Sep 21, 2006, 10:55 AM

By next spring, Apple will have the rest of the Media Center - one of the "super-secret" bits of Leopard is a full clone of Microsoft's Media Center Edition, built upon a greatly enhanced Front Row. (And accompanied by a full-featured AV remote.)

The iTV is just Apple's copy of Microsoft's "Media Center Extender" and/or "Media Center Connect" (see Media Center Extender or Windows Media Connect. Which Do You Need? (http://www.mediacenterpcworld.com/news/218)) or Intel's wireless extender that will be part of the Viiv platform.

Leopard has the other piece - the real multiple tuner support and PVR system.

Couple that with a dual-core Conroe in a TiVo-sized box, and you'll have the option of a dedicated Apple Media Center in the living room, or the "iTV" feeding from the Apple Media Center in the office.

Windows Media Center Edition supports up to five extenders. Apple certainly will do the same, so whether you choose the Conroe HTPC pizza-box, or a bigger Mac in the office - TVs throughout the house can access the single copy of the media library with "iTV" boxes.

Except the big difference between Microsoft's Media Center and Apple's, is that Microsoft's new Vista version will be able to record encrypted digital and HD television via a CableCARD, and Apple has no plans for that at the moment. And it's not the type of functionality that will just show up, Microsoft has been working on getting a CableCARD device certified for years.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 11:23 AM

Contrary to what many people are saying here, I don't think PVR is Apple's stratedgy. PVR woud have to be based on a subscription model, and Apple has shown us for years now that it won't have it that way.

First of all, with subscription models, Apple doesn't have a constant income vs content distributed ratio. They'll lose money on those who use it a lot and only *maybe* gain on those who don't. This is as opposed to the current model where Apple earns a lot of money on those who use it a lot, not as much on those who don't, but are least it's the same rate, no matter who you are. Non-subscription models offer more freedom.

I'm pretty sure that if you want to watch a show, Apple wants you to buy it from them at full price. That way they don't have to deal with whoever might be watching a ton of shows vs those who aren't. They ensure their profitability this way.

...and when it comes to iTunes Music, their profit margins are slim to begin with.

-Clive

AidenShaw

Sep 21, 2006, 11:34 AM

Contrary to what many people are saying here, I don't think PVR is Apple's stratedgy. PVR woud have to be based on a subscription model, and Apple has shown us for years now that it won't have it that way.
Windows Media Center does not have a subscription model - the channel guide is free.

All you have to do is enter your zip code and cable provider when you set it up.

jwdsail

Sep 21, 2006, 11:34 AM

It has HDMI output.. One way or another, it'll output HD (720p?1080p???)

Now, as to what the source quality will be...

I'd be happy as a pig in... to see true 480p/DVD w/ slightly higher bitrates from the iTS... (Ability to burn to DVD is what I'm holding out for) I think the network requirements to stream HD (hard drive or not) will rule out HD source for the short term/1.0.

Looking at the device, and the price.. I think it will behave much more like a wireless OPPO upconverting/upscaling DVD player...

http://www.oppodigital.com/opdv971h.html

$199 for the highest rated up-converting DVD player...

My gut says that the Apple iPod Video Express will either have the same DCDi by Faroudja chip, or the closest ATI/NVidia/Intel equal inside.

If this device will cleanly up-convert/up-scale any video content on my Mac(s) to the native res of my TV (480, 720p, 1080p, etc) as well as the OPPO, I think it will be well worth the price Apple is talking about.

Just my $0.02US.

jwd

asphalt-proof

Sep 21, 2006, 11:40 AM

I think the opposite. iTV is just another "pod" using a single computer as a separate node. The Apple paradigm here would be to release iTV and then to have a separate cable-in device (EyeTV essentially) at your computer that would serve as the DVR to load and control shows on your central computer, which could then be wirelessly distributed to iTVs throughout the house. Just buy one giant hard drive rather than having a bunch all over the place.

Apple has repeatedly said that they don't think people want a computer in their living room (to surf the net, etc). There does have to be a computer someplace, however, in this case acting as an entertainment server for iTV, iPods, etc.

This explanation makes so much sense to me. I was thinking about this today. I am not a A/V person at all. I can barely hook up my DVD player to my TV. But I am pretty good with my iMac, getting content on it and off it to my iPod. THe model that makes sense to me is I get the content from my computer and watch it on my TV. (note: I don't have cable so I don't worry aobut getting content from my TV to my computer. But the elgato system seems pretty easy to use.) I wonder if I would be able to use the elgato Hybrid TV to hook my xbox up to my computer but still play it on my TV though the iTV system? The reason I ask is it would cut down on clutter in the living room.

Drewnrupe

Sep 21, 2006, 11:43 AM

I havent gone through and taken numbers but it appears that a large number of the people demanding that this device should provide DVR functionalty already have a Tivo - how many posts decrying the lack of DVR end up " I'll keep my Tivo " ?

Isnt that the point - you have a Tivo - you have made the decision to keep your recorded TV media in its traditional place - the living room / den.

The iTV concept starts from the premis that this is an outdated concept.
In these days of multiple TV households , viewing on computer screens and ipods it only makes sense to centralize your media. This way we can say good bye to the "3 receiver satalite deals" and "sycronized Tivos" that result in multiple boxes in every room.

Once you get past the concept that your TV media source should originate in the place where you historically viewed TV all the pieces fall into place.

Before all this iTV talk came about I had already put an airport in the bedroom to listen to internet radio via airTunes. When considering Tivo i discovered that lifetime licenses were not an option any more and did not want to take on another "small monthly fee". I now have an EyeTv 200 linked to my Mac in the office and plug an eyehome into the airport express sitting in the bedroom - it works great for me and was selected as a direct alternative to Tivo - it just seemed right to have this located by the computer and hot add more electronics to the bedroom.

Yes there are limitations - the greatest at the moment being that i cannot use the eyehome to watch iTunes pyrchased Movies ( hence the need for the iTV/Teleport).
Yes I cannot schedule recording from the Tv , but I can from the office which is usually where I am when i think to record something, and also if I am out of the house i can schedule recording via the internet which is great.

Digital channels are missing but generally the channels up above the 100 mark are not interesting to me and HD would be nice for the few programs I watch that provide it, but these are limitations of the solution that I am using - NOT THE CONCEPT.

The computer provides the central storage point for your media. It gets to the TV via iTV or some equivalent Distribution system. The media itself can come from your DVDs , a DVR linked to the computer, downloaded from the internet, or your old Betamax plugged into an encoder digitizing to the computer.
If Eyetv doesnt cut it as your DVR, then there can and I am sure will be other options - hey even Tivo - but again i hold that it should be part of the central media storage , not sitting under the TV - or worse still under several Tvs.

For as long as we continue to try and combine these functions of media source, storage and replay into single boxes we will always have duplicattion of effort and boxes.

People that wtill think they need ANOTHER computer, or Another disk drive or another dvd player next to their TV and that iTV should include all this are just holding on to an historical concept or an entertainment center havign to be centered int the living room.

Where you watch any of this media there should only be a screen , speakers , and as little else as possible - iTV ( or for now eyehome) - is pretty little !!!

I think this realy is the missing link that makes a computer-centric household media solution viable and appealing to the majority of even single computer households. I certainly would not have purchased an eyeTv if eyeHome didnt exist , and this is the same reason I will not purchase a movie until either eyehome can show it on my TV or iTV arrives to do the same.

Drew

Soculese

Sep 21, 2006, 11:58 AM

If it contains a HDD (a fact I am not entirely convinced of), I doubt it would be used for recording TV shows.

Programming such a device with a basic remote like the ones Steve Jobs previewed would be near-to-impossible.

If Apple did introduce the ability to record TV shows (which I also doubt), I believe it would be at the computer, only to be streamed to the iTV later.

OK, the tivo has a remote, but I NEVER use it to pick programs to record. I use the tivo.com website to do this. I would think that since the iTV will connect via wireless to your computer that you could do the same with it.

AidenShaw

Sep 21, 2006, 12:15 PM

...you have a Tivo - you have made the decision to keep your recorded TV media in its traditional place - the living room / den.

The iTV concept starts from the premis that this is an outdated concept.
You have some interesting points, but for some people there are other considerations....

What if someone wants to watch TV while the PC is down, or software updates are being applied? Independent of location, there can be advantages to having a dedicated media center system.
What if you don't have the cable/antenna connections to the office? (I know people who use Airport solely to get the network from the TV room cable drop to the PC in the office - they can't run coax or Cat5 for various reasons)
An HTPC can be power-optimized for its purpose - saving much energy over using a general purpose PC as the media center.
Some people *do* want a PC in the living room (I have a 45" 1080p LCD panel on a WMCE, sometimes it's handy to grab the bluetooth keyboard, switch to the 2 foot UI, and check something)
The Quadro in the WMCE really puts up a superb 1080p picture - not sure that I'd want to compress the signal and send it over wireless...

I'm not claiming either is right or wrong, but people here are simply saying that they want a choice that iTV does not offer.

emotion

Sep 21, 2006, 12:25 PM

The Quadro in the WMCE really puts up a superb 1080p picture - not sure that I'd want to compress the signal and send it over wireless...

Technically you're not compressing the signal. Just the file (which will be cached if the network can't cope). The signal is produced locally.

AidenShaw

Sep 21, 2006, 12:30 PM

Just the file (which will be cached if the network can't cope).
My point is that it's possible that the "network can't cope", exactly.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 12:33 PM

Yes there are limitations - the greatest at the moment being that i cannot use the eyehome to watch iTunes pyrchased Movies ( hence the need for the iTV/Teleport).

Yes... "TelePort."

My ingenious title is catching on... I realize this post is off topic but we're on page 9. how much more relevant conversation can be had on this topic?

Anyway, I think it would be totally sweet if there were a cult folowing of people who wanted to call it TelePort. Then Apple would have no choice but to call it that...

...well I mean they would have a choice...

...and they'd probably choose not to call it that...

...but it'd still be sweet...

...right, guys?

...guys?

-Clive

Drewnrupe

Sep 21, 2006, 01:08 PM

[LIST]
What if someone wants to watch TV while the PC is down, or software updates are being applied? Independent of location, there can be advantages to having a dedicated media center system.

granted - a dedicated computer would have distinct advantages, and is still an option. I would still argue that the best location for this is not sitting beside the television. Even if you do locate the dedicated computer besie one TV you still face all the same issues in watching from elsewhee in the house.

What if you don't have the cable/antenna connections to the office? (I know people who use Airport solely to get the network from the TV room cable drop to the PC in the office - they can't run coax or Cat5 for various reasons)
I am sure this may be a problem for some , but I woudl think for most people it is summountable - my cable company charged $20 to come out and run a new line to the office for me. If this is a problem for some people it shoudl be tackled as a seperate problem - letting this difficulty drive a whole concept is letting the tail wag the dog.

An HTPC can be power-optimized for its purpose - saving much energy over using a general purpose PC as the media center.

Sorry you have lost me now HTPC ?

Some people *do* want a PC in the living room (I have a 45" 1080p LCD panel on a WMCE, sometimes it's handy to grab the bluetooth keyboard, switch to the 2 foot UI, and check something)

And that is great, clearly if you want a PC in the living room then you should have one, and probably the iTV concept is not idela for you - unless of course you also want to be able to view the media stored on the PC in the living room while laying in bed :-)

[*The Quadro in the WMCE really puts up a superb 1080p picture - not sure that I'd want to compress the signal and send it over wireless...

I'm not claiming either is right or wrong, but people here are simply saying that they want a choice that iTV does not offer.

I take all your points, and for some maybe the ideal location for a central storage point of their media IS in the living room , my real point though was that it should be a single point wherever you put it. Then the iTV units are the distribution to any other locations that you want to watch or listen.

It is clear that peolpe may want slightly different configurations for their specific requirements or preferences / priorities, but i would have thought that need is only served BETTER by iTV limiting itself to specific function which you can either add to your system or not dependign on your needs.

If you have decided to locate your full media center in the living room you have really already given up on teh idea of having everythin in one bob anyway - so why through more into the iTV than it needs to do its job - which is distribution.

Drew

Mac Fly (film)

Sep 21, 2006, 01:16 PM

I hope they weren't pulling our leg when they said that movies are going "World-wide" in 2007. Let's hope that means TV shows, and bloody stores too. Cause quite frankly Apple needs to get their act together with this European stuff already!! I thought this was meant to be a global economy? It seems these days, and before these days too, that all Apple cares about market wise, is the UK and the US. I like both of those places myself, and I wish them look with Apple related stuff in the future. I think us Irish, and all other European countires needs a little more than look right now. To be realistic, and personally I can only speak for my country. Ireland needs at least "4" fully fledged FLAGSHIP Apple stores. One in Belfast, one in Dublin, one in Waterford (where I live, the fastest growing city in Ireland), and one in Cork, "HERE" (http://www.landacleary.com/Ireland%20Map.jpg) as of right now with the current economic state of the country and the current populous. They need to start by putting an Apple store in Dublin this year, and roll out the other "3" stores in 2007. The whole situation with Apple and Europe seems at this stage to me to be a joke. It's actually hard to believe that a company on such a rise like Apple seems to be ignoring most European counties...:( It's a disgrace! And is inexcusable IMO. Get your bloody act together Apple. I'm not joking when I say, someone at Apple needs a good kick up the arse!!

babyj

Sep 21, 2006, 01:37 PM

Except the big difference between Microsoft's Media Center and Apple's, is that Microsoft's new Vista version will be able to record encrypted digital and HD television via a CableCARD, and Apple has no plans for that at the moment. And it's not the type of functionality that will just show up, Microsoft has been working on getting a CableCARD device certified for years.

I'm not sure about tv programmes in hd, but bluray/hddvd discs will be protected and you will only be able to watch them if everything in the chain supports the protection - the disc, the drive, the processor, the video card and the tv. Otherwise it falls back to a lower quality output and you're back to square one.

It might be the best quality, but hd is a long way off from becoming mainstream. Its good that Microsoft are supporting it in Vista but I really don't think it will be a show stopper for most people. For most people the Apple media centre functionality will be more than acceptable, when it isn't I'm sure that Apple will come out with something new and improved that is.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 01:43 PM

I think we'd all agree it'd be nice for Apple to have more of a worldwide presence. As for emerging technologies, global efforts require a lot more research and funding than if Apple were to just stay in the U.S. That's why Apple's technologies always start here.

Think about it: Apple started iTunes nationally. It took a little time to get going but eventually it took off and Apple had the confidence that it would work world-wide... so they started expanding.

But imagine instead that Apple unleashed iTunes worldwide from day one. The investment required for something like that would have been MUCH too high for the risk of the project.

The same goes for TV content. TV content on the iTS is still relatively new and now that Apple has seen the success of it in the US, they will start expanding world-wide. In fact, Apple has seen the success of the iTS as a whole and knows that its reputation is favorable. This will allow them to expand their new content globally in a shorter amount of time (since it's less of a risk now).

It's more than just reputation, though. Different places around the world have different licensing requirements, so it's not as simple as flicking a switch and allowing other countries to connect to the iTS. There's a lot of bureaucracy and negotiations involved.

So if you, and everyone else will have a bit of patience, Apple will work their way out to you. Apple is a U.S. company. If you're not in the U.S., you can't expect Apple's merchandise and services immediately upon release. It just doesn't work that way.

-Clive

Mac Fly (film)

Sep 21, 2006, 01:49 PM

So if you, and everyone else will have a bit of patience, Apple will work their way out to you.
What are you a comedian? Give me a break. I expected this sort of reaction. It's very easy to say that when you're not the one being effected by this.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 02:17 PM

What are you a comedian? Give me a break. I expected this sort of reaction. It's very easy to say that when you're not the one being effected by this.

What are you, an adolescent? Did you not read my reasoning?

And of course it's easier to say it since I'm in the U.S. but I've never bought TV content from the iTS. It doesn't mean that much to me. Thus I'm an unbiased source.

-Clive

izzle22

Sep 21, 2006, 02:33 PM

What are you a comedian? Give me a break. I expected this sort of reaction. It's very easy to say that when you're not the one being effected by this.

Hey at least you guys had U2 before we did.:)

emotion

Sep 21, 2006, 02:36 PM

Hey at least you guys had U2 before we did.:)

Jeez, and that's a good thing??!

emotion

Sep 21, 2006, 02:39 PM

My point is that it's possible that the "network can't cope", exactly.

Hence the HD as cache perhaps?

gugy

Sep 21, 2006, 02:47 PM

Jeez, and that's a good thing??!

You bet it is.;)

whooleytoo

Sep 21, 2006, 03:47 PM

I think there's (at least!) two separate debates going on here -

- what is the best home entertainment network design/topology?
- how well does the iTV serve the topology Apple has chosen?

The first question is a doozy. Personally, I think Apple's choice is a bit unwieldy. Have your entertainment network rely on your Mac/PC is fine; except when you need to restart after installing software (could the hard disk in the iTV buffer enough content to keep going until the Mac restarts? Possibly). Another problem is if your home PC is a laptop, which might not be in the home, or will sleep if inadvertently shut.

Also, it is a bit tedious if you have to get up from your sofa to your Mac, start downloading the film/show, then return to the couch and wait for the film/show to start playing. Wouldn't it be far better if you could purchase the film via the iTV, without having to go to your Mac/PC? (If this is possible, feel free to ignore this paragraph. ;) )

Personally, I'd prefer to have a home entertainment storage server, essentially something akin to the iTV but with a large hard disk (or RAID) attached, which stores all my iTunes and other media. Anything I buy on my MacBook - songs, TV shows, movies - are backed up to the server when I plug it into my home network (could the Leopard backup APIs achieve this?) and thus always available regardless of where my Mac is. And, I'd watch far more moves if they were just a menu click away, rather than rooting around the house for a DVD case.

As for the second question, if you accept Apple's argument that the Mac/PC will be the entertainment centre for the home, the iTV is probably the simplest device you could come up with. It's basically an Airport Express with "AirFlicks".

One thing puzzles me though - the iTV is not a complicated piece of kit, hardly any more so than the mini or any other Mac. So, why did Apple pre-announce earlier this month for release early next year, and not release a finished product?

Did they think of it too late to finish it in time for the iTunes Movie store announcement? Unlikely - people have been calling for video streaming for some time; and Apple would have been working behind the scenes on the iTunes movie store for some months. The fact that they appear to have finalised the configuration, aesthetics and price would indicate it's more or less done. More likely - iTV is waiting on some other key piece of technology before it can be released. And the obvious answer would be - Leopard.

iTV isn't being released until the Leopard timeframe, and Leopard has major unannounced features which we won't hear about until Macworld '07. Could it be some Mac media centre functionality as some have suggested?

p.s. as for a name, how about the "Apple Jack"? Rhymes with Apple Mac, and implies "jacking" all your content into your TV? Whaddya think?

Eeek! sorry. This post was far longer than I expected!

balamw

Sep 21, 2006, 03:53 PM

iTV isn't being released until the Leopard timeframe, and Leopard has major unannounced features which we won't hear about until Macworld '07. Could it be some Mac media centre functionality as some have suggested?
We're expecting a bunch of new stuff from Apple in early 07, any of which could be critical for iTV's success. The most obvious of these is QT8, we already know it will support H.264 captions, but what else will it do? Leopard will bring Front Row to all Macs and iLife 07 will be expected around the same time. However the fact that iTV has been announced as supporting both Mac and PC makes me assume that either it will not depend on features in Leopard, or iTunes on Windows will gain some functionality to support sharing of photos.

All sounds very intriguing.

B

peharri

Sep 21, 2006, 03:58 PM

The first question is a doozy. Personally, I think Apple's choice is a bit unwieldy. Have your entertainment network rely on your Mac/PC is fine; except when you need to restart after installing software (could the hard disk in the iTV buffer enough content to keep going until the Mac restarts? Possibly). Another problem is if your home PC is a laptop, which might not be in the home, or will sleep if inadvertently shut.

I'm 99% sure you have it wrong. The point of these most recent statements is that the iTV will be a standalone device. It'll be able to make use of networked iTunes libraries, but it will also work by itself, with no need to own a separate computer. This is one reason why it has a hard disk, for instance.

I agree that it'd be unwieldy if it required use of a computer. Which is one reason why I think, given none of the facts so far suggest use of a computer is necessary, it doesn't need one.

peharri

Sep 21, 2006, 04:04 PM

One thing puzzles me though - the iTV is not a complicated piece of kit, hardly any more so than the mini or any other Mac. So, why did Apple pre-announce earlier this month for release early next year, and not release a finished product?

Well, perhaps it is complicated. I'd imagine the software side in particular will need a lot of work. If, as promised, it supports all of Quicktime, then there has to be an environment capable of running Apple's core QT code. (I'm finding it unlikely there's a full version of Mac OS X in there though would be delighted to be proven wrong.)

I don't think all the pieces were ready. At the same time, I feel Apple needed to promote it as early as possible. It wasn't clear where iTunes was heading and the number of people who want to watch movies on their laptops and iPods is so comparatively small, I think most studios didn't see a point in supporting the system. They had to announce iTV, if only to tell the studios they're serious.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 05:12 PM

p.s. as for a name, how about the "Apple Jack"? Rhymes with Apple Mac, and implies "jacking" all your content into your TV? Whaddya think?

(I've posted this before but since you brought it up, I thought I'd share my theory again...)

There's a MUCH more systematic way that Apple could name this product.

"AirPort" is derrived from "Air" (being the medium through which the device works) and "Port" (gateway/portal to aforementioned medium)

So this iTV box:

The medium through which the device works is Television and the device is a gateway/portal to the Television so add "port" to the end. Thus...

"TelePort."

-Clive

EricNau

Sep 21, 2006, 05:34 PM

Dude. If this is your family, you need to be watching less TV and getting outside more. Or at least stay inside and play board-games with the kids. It's much more fun than vegging out on the couch.

geeze. Yeah, if I watched that much TV, I'd be complaining about the iTS too!

-Clive
It's not.

In my experience, video on demand is exactly what younger kids want. My boys (3 and 5, so not that far off your model family) watch more than their share of TV, but they tend to be quite "clumpy" in what they watch since they've grown up with PVRs all their life, they tend to watch lots of the same show, and rewatch things over and over. For instance tonight we were treated to 3 back-to-back episodes of "The Batman" from a recently released DVD and one episode of "Teen Titans" from the TiVo. I don't have to keep buying those shows, since once purchased or recorded, I have them. Tomorrow will be the younger one's choice, so my guess is we get to watch the Wiggles on DVD for the umpteenth time.

I do buy some shows on DVD of from iTunes just to get them off the PVR, to reward the content provider for things we enjoy, and create some space for new stuff to be recorded. For instance I bought two seasons worth of Dora The Explorer (49 shows) for $60.This works out to an average cost per episode of $1.22. On DVD they sell 4 episodes for $10-$16 which means a minimum cost per episode of $2.50, and up to $4. I no longer have to TiVo these and have them at my fingertips.

You're also still way off on your prices. The "multi-pass" for The Daily Show or Colbert is $9.99 for 16 shows (i.e. 4 weeks Monday-Thursday). You don't pay $2/show for them unless you're a masochist. Note also that you don't pay anything for half of the year since they are in reruns about half the time, so it works out to ~$60/year per show. (BTW What's the third TDS show? I guess I haven't been watching lately. :o)

News and sports are a completely different matter though.

B
You're right, my pricing was way off. When I originally calculated $150/month I was counting hours of TV multiplied by $2. Meaning I forgot to take into account season and multi-passes. Plus, when I was figuring daily shows I forgot to drop the weekends. :o

Either way, I am still willing to bet for a large family, cable is significantly cheaper (especially when you take into account all the TV watched for "background noise" (such as the food network)).

Plus the lack of news and sports and many, many TV shows would be a huge turnoff for a lot of customers.

Clive At Five

Sep 21, 2006, 05:56 PM

EricNau

Sep 21, 2006, 06:00 PM

Hey, I watch the Food Network! Iron Chef rocks and Rachael Ray is a kitchen fox! Are those on the iTS?

-Clive
No. :(

AidenShaw

Sep 21, 2006, 09:03 PM

Sorry you have lost me now HTPC ?
Home Theatre Personal Computer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Htpc

HTPC is an acronym for Home Theater Personal Computer, describing certain personal computer systems designed solely to be connected to a television for entertainment purposes, such as watching TV, playing DVDs, CD music, or viewing digital pictures.

They may also be referred to as media center systems or Media Server units.

The general goal in a HTPC is usually to combine many or all components of a home theater setup into one box.

Bonte

Sep 22, 2006, 08:47 AM

Either way, I am still willing to bet for a large family, cable is significantly cheaper (especially when you take into account all the TV watched for "background noise" (such as the food network)).

Here in Europe we don't have that problem so much but i'm going crazy if i have to watch all the dumb advertising on the US networks, you guys pay much more then just the cable cost. Every 5 minutes there's a commercial brake and the endless repeating of the facts after it. I am willing to pay not to have these annoyances.

wkhahn

Sep 22, 2006, 10:11 AM

Hey, I watch the Food Network! Iron Chef rocks and Rachael Ray is a kitchen fox! Are those on the iTS?

-Clive

Raytard is not a "Kitchen Fox". For that, just watch Giada.

Ludeman

Sep 22, 2006, 12:09 PM

think they've sold it to me! currently got a g4 tower which does'nt play hidef to well and was thinking about either upgrading£££, or getting a mini£££. but now they've announced iTV(£200bargin!!!). soon i will hopefully be able serve my iTV all the media off my terrabyte hd plus the hundreds of dvd's. thanks to the ever useful "toppy"! and play it all when i want on my big hidef lcd tv and great surrond sound hi-fi in the living room thanks to iTV! personally i think apple are on to a winner, why is everbody wanting more?

rtdunham

Sep 22, 2006, 02:56 PM

I agree that it'd be unwieldy if it required use of a computer. Which is one reason why I think, given none of the facts so far suggest use of a computer is necessary, it doesn't need one.

i think you misunderstood the recent reports: the consensus interpretation is that iTV does require a computer, and that the hard drive is just for buffering.

peharri

Sep 22, 2006, 03:33 PM

i think you misunderstood the recent reports: the consensus interpretation is that iTV does require a computer, and that the hard drive is just for buffering.

I'm not seeing any consensus interpretation that suggests anything of the sort. I can also say with some certainty that the hard drive is "not just for buffering". At the kinds of data volumes streaming media generally runs at, you can store a couple of hours of video in a gig of RAM. This is considerably cheaper, lower power, and smaller, than a hard disk drive. Why would you put a hard disk drive in a device solely for "buffering"?

What I'm seeing, according to the reports so far, is a machine that can make use of local iTunes libraries, but can also show media streamed directly from the iTS.

It makes no sense for Apple to sell an STB that requires a computer. They can make a much more limited device for that purpose, and such a device would not bring the concept of streamed media "to the masses". We don't have all the information at this point, but there's absolutely nothing about the iTV that suggests it's some pricy bolt-on for an existing multimedia computer installation. There'd have been no point in pre-announcing it if it was, and it'd be a complete disaster if it were.

caity13cait

Sep 22, 2006, 04:46 PM

Hi maybe this topic has been covered in the last 4 pages, but if the itv has video out won't that mean that you can record off of it, like hook it to a dvd burner or even a vhs? Maybe I am missing something here.

rtdunham

Sep 23, 2006, 12:33 AM

I'm not seeing any consensus interpretation that suggests anything of the sort. I can also say with some certainty that the hard drive is "not just for buffering"...It makes no sense for Apple to sell an STB that requires a computer...there's absolutely nothing about the iTV that suggests it's some pricy bolt-on for an existing multimedia computer installation. There'd have been no point in pre-announcing it if it was, and it'd be a complete disaster if it were.

Perhaps we've just been exposed to different sources of info. I viewed the sept 12 presentation in its entirety, and have read virtually all the reports and comments on macrumors, appleinsider, think secret, engadget, the wall street journal, and maccentral, among others. It was disney chief bob iger who was quoted saying iTV had a hard drive; that was generally interpreted (except by maccentral, which took the statement literally) to mean it had some sort of storage, be it flash or a small HD, and that it would be for buffering/caching to allow streaming of huge files at relatively slow (for the purpose) wireless speeds.

I'm perfectly willing to be wrong. But i don't think i am. Let's continue reading the reports and revisit this subject here in a day or two.

I can understand Job's being vague about whether it'll have 802.11g or n. But wouldn't it be nice if, ten days after the product was "revealed", we at least knew WHAT it was (HD or not? etc.) and HOW it will work (still many questions about that). Talk about an RDF!

mitchec

Sep 23, 2006, 03:14 AM

caity13cait

Sep 23, 2006, 08:31 AM

I've noticed a lot of people going on about the iTV being 802.11n compatible. What I want to know is how is this going to be incorporated into wireless networks that are currently supporting 802.11 a,b & g. If it is going to be 802.11n then we are all going to need new routers to accommodate the higher transfer rate, and what about all those individuals possessing an imac / mac mini with built in wireless with no way to upgrade to the new standard without getting new machines or additional hardware. its going to be an expensive upgrade on top of the $299 price for an iTV
IT is backwards compatable. Unfortunately if the iTv requires it for larger hd files in the future it may be a problem. I am not sure how far along Apple is on 802.11n but it seems to me if they are going to require it they better start putting it in computers soon. I know I would be pissed if I bought a computer and then had the iTv come out a month or two later and I owned an out of date computer already.

peharri

Sep 23, 2006, 11:25 AM

Perhaps we've just been exposed to different sources of info. I viewed the sept 12 presentation in its entirety, and have read virtually all the reports and comments on macrumors, appleinsider, think secret, engadget, the wall street journal, and maccentral, among others. It was disney chief bob iger who was quoted saying iTV had a hard drive; that was generally interpreted (except by maccentral, which took the statement literally) to mean it had some sort of storage, be it flash or a small HD, and that it would be for buffering/caching to allow streaming of huge files at relatively slow (for the purpose) wireless speeds.

I've read absolutely everything I can too and I have to disagree with you still.

It makes absolutely no sense for Bob Iger to have been told there's "some sort of storage" if this isn't storage in any conventional sense. Storage to a layman means somewhere where you store things, not something transitory used by the machine in a way you can't fathom. So, we have two factors here:

First - Bob's been talking about a hard disk. That absolutely doesn't point at a cache, it's too expensive to be a cache.
Second - Even if Bob got the technology wrong, he's been told the machine has "storage". That's not a term you generally use to mean "transitory storage for temporary objects".

The suggestion Bob's talking about a cache is being made, in my view, because people know it'll need some sort of caching to overcome 802.11/etc temporary bandwidth issues (Hmm. Kind of. You guys do know we're talking about way less bandwidth requirements than a DVD right - and that a DVD-formatted MPEG2 will transmit realtime on an 802.11g link? What's more, for 99% of Internet users, their DSL connection has less bandwidth than their wireless link, even if they're on the other side of the house with someone else's WAN in range and on the same channel. Yes, 802.11 suffers drop-outs, but we're talking about needing seconds worth of video effected, not hours) As such, you're trying to find evidence that it'll deal with caching.

YOU DON'T NEED TO. A few megabytes of RAM is enough to ensure smooth playback will happen. This is a non-problem. Everyone who's going this route is putting way too much thought into designing a solution to something that isn't hard to solve.

Nonetheless, because it's an "issue", everything is being interpreted in that light. If there's "storage", it must be because of caching! Well, in my opinion, if there's storage, it's almost certainly to do with storage. You don't need it for caching.

I'm trying to imagine a conversation with Bob Iger where the issue of flash or hard disk space for caching content to avoid 802.11 issues would come up, and where the word "storage" would be used purely in that context. It's hard. I don't see them talking about caches to Iger. It makes no sense. They might just as well talk about DCT transforms or the Quicktime API.

I'm perfectly willing to be wrong. But i don't think i am. Let's continue reading the reports and revisit this subject here in a day or two.

Sure. I'm perfectly willing to be wrong too. I'm certainly less sure of it than I am of the iPhone rumours being bunk.

Regardless of the truth, I have to say the iTV makes little sense unless, regardless of whether it contains a hard disk or not, it can stream content directly from the iTS. Without the possibility of being used as a computer-less media hub, it becomes an overly expensive and complicated solution for what could more easily be done by making a bolt-on similar to that awful TubePort concept.

I'm 99% sure the machine is intended as an independent hub that can use iTunes libraries on the same network but can also go to the iTS directly and view content straight from there (and possibly other sources, such as Google Video.) I can see why Apple would make that. I can see why it would take a $300 machine to do that and make it practical. I see the importance of the iTS and the potential dangers to it as the cellphone displaces the iPod, and Apple's need to shore it up. I can see studio executives "not getting it" with online movies if those movies can only be seen on laptops, PCs, and iPods.

If Apple does force the thing to need a computer, I think they need to come out with an 'iTunes server' box that can fufill the same role, and it has to be cheap.

AidenShaw

Sep 23, 2006, 05:33 PM

I am not sure how far along Apple is on 802.11n but it seems to me if they are going to require it they better start putting it in computers soon.

I know I would be pissed if I bought a computer and then had the iTv come out a month or two later and I owned an out of date computer already.

The long-awaited next-generation Wi-Fi standard has been delayed again and won't likely be ratified until sometime in 2008. (http://news.com.com/New+Wi-Fi+standard+delayed+again/2100-7351_3-6105494.html)

Craig Mathias, an analyst at Farpoint Group, said it's unlikely that these draft 802.11n products will comply with the eventual standard once it's completed.

He doesn't believe that these products will be able to be upgraded to the standard either.

http://news.com.com/Group+to+certify+prestandard+Wi-Fi+gear/2100-7351_3-6110366.html

digitalbiker

Sep 24, 2006, 02:50 AM

I'm 99% sure the machine is intended as an independent hub that can use iTunes libraries on the same network but can also go to the iTS directly and view content straight from there (and possibly other sources, such as Google Video.)

You are going to be sorely disappointed then!.

The iTV most definitely requires a computer. The iTV is a like a suped up Airport extreme for video. It has already been demoed and it requires a computer. The computer streams the iTunes content to the iTV and the iTV receives the stream and translates it into video and audio out via an HDMI or SVGA connection to your TV. The iTV also supports front row and allows remote control of the iTunes source machine.

There maybe more features in the future but those are the reported and demoed features.

emotion

Sep 24, 2006, 04:52 AM

If Apple does force the thing to need a computer, I think they need to come out with an 'iTunes server' box that can fufill the same role, and it has to be cheap.

Mac Mini? I suspect that's exactly what Apple wants to drive sales of.

I know, they need to be cheaper.

peharri

Sep 24, 2006, 06:08 PM

The iTV most definitely requires a computer.

There's no evidence of this. Nothing has been said suggesting anything of the sort.

The iTV is a like a suped up Airport extreme for video.

No, it isn't. It's not remotely like an Airport Extreme.

It has already been demoed and it requires a computer. The computer streams the iTunes content to the iTV and the iTV receives the stream and translates it into video and audio out via an HDMI or SVGA connection to your TV.

This is not the case. There's only been one demonstration so far, and the controlling part was the iTV, not the server.

The iTV also supports front row and allows remote control of the iTunes source machine.

What was demonstrated was a box that can view iTunes libraries on the local network. There's no evidence it "controls" the source machine beyond telling it to send a stream (like any iTunes client.)

There maybe more features in the future but those are the reported and demoed features.
The reported and demo'd features are of a standalone box that can access iTunes libraries. The box is reported to have storage (which is what this entire thread is about!)

It most certainly is not of some souped up Airport Extreme. That was what was widely rumoured before the Showtime presentation, and it turned out to be completely false. Whatever the debate of the precise capabilities of the iTV may be, the device demo'd couldn't be further from being an Airport Extreme if it tried.

peharri

Sep 24, 2006, 06:18 PM

Mac Mini? I suspect that's exactly what Apple wants to drive sales of.

I know, they need to be cheaper.

Well, my view is that the $300 iTV will not work if it needs $600 worth of computer attached to it, especially if the sole role of the computer is as some kind of file server. Even more especially (!) if the $600 computer doesn't come with that much storage anyway, and the even even even more if viewing content on your TV means going into the bedroom to download the program onto the computer, and then walking back into the livingroom to watch it.

Now a $200 server might make some sense, but ultimately I can't help but think anything that adds to the start-up cost of the iTV will sink it.

Ultimately, I'm of the opinion Apple isn't suicidal. It does intend the iTV to be desirable. It plans to use it to ensure the iTS remains relevent. It plans to expand, not retract, its online media business. It doesn't consider the Mac to be so important it needs to be pushed to the detriment of the rest of the business. It is worried about the post-iPod future. It does need to find a way of selling online movie downloads to sceptical studio executives. For all of these reasons and more, I'm finding the notion Apple would release a $300 TV adapter and announce it at a movies download event a little... well, does it make sense to you?

You know who's fault this is? It's Apple's. If they hadn't done that stupid "Fun products" presentation back in February, with those stupid leather iPod cases and the overpriced speaker system, I think people would be a whole lot more positive!

digitalbiker

Sep 24, 2006, 06:38 PM

It most certainly is not of some souped up Airport Extreme. That was what was widely rumoured before the Showtime presentation, and it turned out to be completely false. Whatever the debate of the precise capabilities of the iTV may be, the device demo'd couldn't be further from being an Airport Extreme if it tried.

OK, believe what you want but you must be watching a different ShowTime presentation and reading different reviews than I have been reading. Your discription is just not factual.

Everything I have seen describes the iTV as a souped up airport extreme that uses FrontRow to remote control an iTunes streaming device (i.e. computer) on the network. The product fits nicely in the model SJ has of a computer centric universe or digital hub. The use of the hard drive is most likely for cache to buffer the stream on an unstable 80211 connection.

AidenShaw

Sep 24, 2006, 11:45 PM

The use of the hard drive is most likely for cache to buffer the stream on an unstable 80211 connection.
Considering all the posts to this point, I'm inclined to believe that the "hard drive" might just be some flash memory.

Iger is not a super-geek - he could easily have said "hard drive" to mean some non-volatile memory.

In other words, the iTV is not a media hub - but it is able to do some buffering of the content.

68164

Sep 25, 2006, 01:37 AM

After viewing the ShowTime presentation, it is clear as clear can be that iTV will require either a Mac or PC to function - the whole focus of Steve's talk and demo on iTV was about how to get the stuff from your computer to your TV.

Of course the practicalities of doing that in a seamless interface for the consumer will undoubtly involve some form of buffering by the iTV unit - leading bob to talk about 'storage' i believe.

I'm already running a mac mini hooked up to my Sharp LCD TV - I really enjoy being able to sit on the couch with my bluetooth mouse and surf the net, surf google earth, check my widgets and watch TV with eyeTv - all on the big screen - so I probably won't get too excited about iTV intially - then again, if iTV could pull your desktop through to the TV and had a bluetooth receiver so your bluetooth mouse and keyboard could remotely control the desktop...that would be awesome...and I'd be turfing the mac mini and twin eyeTVs to the spare room and sliding the compact iTV under the Sharp without a moments hesitation.

I'm sure Apple's got some more surprises to pull out of the bag...can't wait for MWSF keynote!