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

adversecamber

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 9, 2008
159
0
The idea of not having to trudge down to Blockbuster is fantastic, but the truth is far from acceptable.

I don't have Apple TV (and, as an English customer, don't really understand why I'd want it) so plugged my MBP into my HD LCD. The results were awful. It really looked like it was from the web - blocky, little detail, compressed and very little contrast. So why charge me the same as a high-quality DVD rental?!

As for the choice of films available, go and take a look and you'll agree that there's next to nothing worth watching.

I won't bother renting from iTunes again for a very long time. And when they wonder why the take-up is so slow, will they ask their customers? Pah, of course not!
 

northy124

macrumors 68020
Nov 18, 2007
2,293
8
The idea of not having to trudge down to Blockbuster is fantastic, but the truth is far from acceptable.

I don't have Apple TV (and, as an English customer, don't really understand why I'd want it) so plugged my MBP into my HD LCD. The results were awful. It really looked like it was from the web - blocky, little detail, compressed and very little contrast. So why charge me the same as a high-quality DVD rental?!

As for the choice of films available, go and take a look and you'll agree that there's next to nothing worth watching.

I won't bother renting from iTunes again for a very long time. And when they wonder why the take-up is so slow, will they ask their customers? Pah, of course not!
Another pointless thread if you had searched you'd seen this has already been covered.

Just curious but what type of connection did you use from MBP to TV?

OP might of used a DVI to DVI or DVI to HDMI cable, If the OP used DVI to VGA then he has no reason to complain as the connection is rubbish that way which gives crappy quality, I my self find them fine on a HDTV.
 

sandman42

macrumors 6502a
Oct 23, 2003
959
59
Seattle
resolution difference, iPod version vs. AppleTV version

Rentals via the :apple:TV are much better than rentals via iTunes. I'm pretty sure that rentals via iTunes are at 320x240 so that they're playable on all video capable iPods, whereas rentals via the :apple:TV (which aren't sync-able back to iTunes) are at 720x480 or 1280x720. When rentals were launched Apple made it clear that if you were planning on watching a rental on your :apple:TV you should rent from your :apple:TV, in order to get the best quality rental.
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
Apple only has high definition rentals from an AppleTV currently so if you're judging ALL rentals on the fact you're trying to watch a sub-DVD resolution rental through an HD monitor, well, that's not really seeing the whole scene, so-to-speak. AppleTV's 720P rentals look fantastic on my Panasonic 720P projector and 93" screen, better than cable's HD feeds (even HDNet) in most cases. I'm sure Blu-Ray has the edge, but for my 720P projector plus convenience, AppleTV works as a rental system for me. If I want to buy movies in HD, I'll consider Blu-Ray. I watch 85% of movies just once or twice anyway. They're not like music where you tend to listen over and over again (save a few really good movies that are worth watching again and again over time at least).
 

adversecamber

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 9, 2008
159
0
Rentals via the :apple:TV are much better than rentals via iTunes. I'm pretty sure that rentals via iTunes are at 320x240 so that they're playable on all video capable iPods, whereas rentals via the :apple:TV (which aren't sync-able back to iTunes) are at 720x480 or 1280x720. When rentals were launched Apple made it clear that if you were planning on watching a rental on your :apple:TV you should rent from your :apple:TV, in order to get the best quality rental.

Ah, ok. That makes sense. Still, unfortunately for UK users, Apple TV just doesn't seem to make economic sense. I'll stick to Blockbuster.
 

KelchM

macrumors regular
Aug 17, 2007
118
0
OP might of used a DVI to DVI or DVI to HDMI cable, If the OP used DVI to VGA then he has no reason to complain as the connection is rubbish that way which gives crappy quality, I my self find them fine on a HDTV.
The effect of using VGA instead of DVI on this kind of source material is going to be nil. Seriously.
 

megfilmworks

macrumors 68020
Jul 1, 2007
2,046
16
Sherman Oaks
The idea of not having to trudge down to Blockbuster is fantastic, but the truth is far from acceptable.

I don't have Apple TV (and, as an English customer, don't really understand why I'd want it) so plugged my MBP into my HD LCD. The results were awful. It really looked like it was from the web - blocky, little detail, compressed and very little contrast. So why charge me the same as a high-quality DVD rental?!

As for the choice of films available, go and take a look and you'll agree that there's next to nothing worth watching.

I won't bother renting from iTunes again for a very long time. And when they wonder why the take-up is so slow, will they ask their customers? Pah, of course not!
User error!! Don't blame Apple for your own lack of knowledge!
I have a 1080p 9 foot wide screen (projection); SD and HD content looks great.
 

northy124

macrumors 68020
Nov 18, 2007
2,293
8
The effect of using VGA instead of DVI on this kind of source material is going to be nil. Seriously.

Not for me any SD content rented through iTunes viewed via VGA looks crao change to DVI and it is better than DVI, Unless it is the TV.
 

KelchM

macrumors regular
Aug 17, 2007
118
0
Not for me any SD content rented through iTunes viewed via VGA looks crao change to DVI and it is better than DVI, Unless it is the TV.
You must be using a different resolution or you are using a poor VGA cable/extension.
 

KelchM

macrumors regular
Aug 17, 2007
118
0
Well whatever VGA sucks, DVI is the best is how I see it but drop it now as the OP isn't on about this.

Quite honestly, you don't know what you are talking about. DVI is better than VGA, but in no way does VGA 'suck'.
 

northy124

macrumors 68020
Nov 18, 2007
2,293
8
Quite honestly, you don't know what you are talking about. DVI is better than VGA, but in no way does VGA 'suck'.

Jeez shut up this is going of-topic and I was basing it on my own experiences not anyone else's and I do know what I'm talking about.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.