Apple Developing 'New Technology' for Delivering Video Content

One stream many viewers

What I'd like to see is widespread use of a streaming technology for watching live video, where the originator sends out one stream, and everyone who wants to watch hooks into that single stream. As opposed to the current scheme where the originator has to send out a stream to each viewer.

Is this technically possible with current IP technology?

Someone needs to work on the QUALITY OF THE CONTENT rather than the quality of the delivery... these TV people keep producing crap and expect us to be entertained by it... and apparently enough of "us" still are, but how long will that really last?

Edit: After a few moments of reflection, now I'm really depressed.

re original article and pic for it
1) hope "new technology" equates to "magical" - go tim go
2) get rid of the "glee" picture with the loser guy - use another screen pic

swagi said:

Yeah...sure. As 4K TV sets are bound to hit the consumer market in mere months.

They'd rather get a mini with Blu ready as HTPC. That'd be a nice product.

Click to expand...

Plenty of displays on the market greater than 1080p. One may be sitting on your desk. That might be why YouTube already has 4K streams. However, I think you may be neglecting the most important detail: Apple has a history of looking to where industries are going to be next, not now.

As for Blu-Ray, I think Apple drew a line in the sand with all the Blu-Ray licensees, and, while there has been some licensing consolidation (exs. BD4C Licensing Group, One-Blue LLC), it may be too little, too late. I believe Apple has moved on. Meanwhile, between BD having only been enjoyed by 15% of US homes in the past six months (according to Home Media Magazine) after the formats been on the market for five years, the disappearance of the local video store, and new online video services being announced all the time, perhaps Apple believes consumers have moved on, too.

blackpond said:

Great post. Thanks for the links. The Dirac codec is very interesting.

H.265 (HEVC) is another possibility. Delivering iTunes 1080P at iTunes 720P bitrates while maintaining similar or better quality is an intriguing concept and not outside the realm of possibility.

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

Or RedRay:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/home-thea...ession-codec-revolutionize-video-playback/731

Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback.

Yes, the Dirac codec shows promise if they can work out some of its performance issues. HD+ video without taxing our machines would be very nice indeed.

Thanks for the heads-up on H.265 (HEVC). I'll have to look into it.

I've been singing praise for RedRay for what seems forever.

MacNewsFix said:

Plenty of displays on the market greater than 1080p. One may be sitting on your desk. That might be why YouTube already has 4K streams. However, I think you may be neglecting the most important detail: Apple has a history of looking to where industries are going to be next, not now.

Click to expand...

Kinda reminds me of Wayne Gretzky's uncanny ability to always be where the puck was going.

gugy said:

No Apple Television. No need.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Because "wants" tend to drive the industry as much as "needs." And Apple really understands wants.

There was no need for an iPhone, either. Certainly no need for an iPad, right?

Now look where we are.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/2...estimates-through-2012-to-nearly-100-million/

http://goodereader.com/blog/tablet-slates/acer-reports-first-ever-quarterly-loss-blames-ipad/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/18/hp-to-spin-off-pc-business-as-sales-stagnate/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/1...e-pc-shipments-in-q2-2011-with-ipad-included/

If Apple plans to enter the TV/Video biz, count on a more than even chance of them redefining the entire market. It's what Apple does with their major projects.

*LTD* said:

Interesting. Because "wants" tend to drive the industry as much as "needs." And Apple really understands wants..

Click to expand...

That they do.

There is a tremendous amount thats frankly wrong about the way video content gets distributed. Why are we still tied to a system that pretty much lets broadcast and cable networks dictate what time I have to watch their shows? How come Hulu is fine with me watching a show on my PC screen, but won't let me watch it on my HD television set?

Obviously content producers, cable and broadcast networks, hardware manufacturers, regulatory agencies, etc. all have a stake in the way things turn out. And, if there was any company that seems to have the power to "shake things up" - as well as the IP-respecting credibility and history - it would be Apple.

But that said, I remain more than a little skeptical of even Apple's ability to get all the necessary players to agree on a platform. Even if Apple proposed a system that appeared obviously "win-win" for broadcasters, content producers, and consumers - I think there would still be a great deal of fear that Apple would somehow end up being the biggest winner of all.

Call it the Steve Jobs Paradox.

MacNewsFix said:

However, I think you may be neglecting the most important detail: Apple has a history of looking to where industries are going to be next, not now.

Click to expand...

Don't make me laugh. ESPN can't be bothered to do HD, they certainly aren't going to lead anyone into the next gen.

vrDrew said:

THow come Hulu is fine with me watching a show on my PC screen, but won't let me watch it on my HD television set?

Click to expand...

Huh? I do this constantly, using an HDMI connection. What problem are you discussing?

MacNewsFix said:

I've been singing praise for RedRay for what seems forever.

Click to expand...

Epic-X is out next week so maybe we'll see more about it soon. If they're truly achieving what they say they are (visually lossless 4k video at 10mb/s), then it's going to turn things upside down.

Would love to see what a format like RedRay could do for web video. My big dream is that Red will open a subset of RedRay for html 5 web delivery. But that's a big jump from their cinema ambitions.

I definitely think an Apple TV is in their pipeline. Why would Apple sell a lower-profit tiny little box (Apple TV) to people, when you can sell them the entire higher-profit screen?

spacepower7 said:

Why would Apple ever release a TV set? It's the most un Apple thing that I have ever heard

Click to expand...

Why not?
Quite the contrary, I'd say!
Apple is in the business of selling and renting movies to people (plus: providing people tools to make their own movies).
And at the same time, they're in the business of providing a unified/ integrated/one-stop-shop experience with their products.

vrDrew said:

I remain more than a little skeptical of even Apple's ability to get all the necessary players to agree on a platform. (...) I think there would still be a great deal of fear that Apple would somehow end up being the biggest winner of all.

Click to expand...

Do companys still believe that Apple won't "the biggest winner" anyway and that they can dictate their terms to Apple? Anyway... I believe Apple can at least get a few key players to their platform - they could even just go out an buy them with cash

vrDrew said:

Call it the Steve Jobs Paradox.

Click to expand...

That it is!

Delivering content is easy

The market is ripe for a new television service that disrupts the conventional model of selling bloated content packages. However, the barriers to enter the content delivery market are only getting more difficult. All the major players in the market (satellite, coax, fiber) all own their delivery channels — how would Apple deliver their new service? Probably over the Internet, right? Meaning through a pipe owned by a competitor.

As we have seen, these competitora (AT&T, Comcast, TWC, etc.) have all implemented bandwidth limits on their home broadband customers. Does the math work for a customer to switch from say, Comcast TV service, to an Apple service if they'll be hit with overage penalties? I suspect an anti-competitive legal challenge will be required to give any serious online distribution a fighting chance.

Gotta Hankerin said:

The market is ripe for a new television service that disrupts the conventional model of selling bloated content packages. However, the barriers to enter the content delivery market are only getting more difficult. All the major players in the market (satellite, coax, fiber) all own their delivery channels — how would Apple deliver their new service? Probably over the Internet, right? Meaning through a pipe owned by a competitor.

As we have seen, these competitora (AT&T, Comcast, TWC, etc.) have all implemented bandwidth limits on their home broadband customers. Does the math work for a customer to switch from say, Comcast TV service, to an Apple service if they'll be hit with overage penalties? I suspect an anti-competitive legal challenge will be required to give any serious online distribution a fighting chance.

Click to expand...

Sadly, the content deliverers, can claim that they are with in their right to do what they want with the pipes that they installed.

IPTV could be a big hit here if consumers would actually realize the benefits.

MacNewsFix said:

Plenty of displays on the market greater than 1080p. One may be sitting on your desk. That might be why YouTube already has 4K streams. However, I think you may be neglecting the most important detail: Apple has a history of looking to where industries are going to be next, not now.

As for Blu-Ray, I think Apple drew a line in the sand with all the Blu-Ray licensees, and, while there has been some licensing consolidation (exs. BD4C Licensing Group, One-Blue LLC), it may be too little, too late. I believe Apple has moved on. Meanwhile, between BD having only been enjoyed by 15% of US homes in the past six months (according to Home Media Magazine) after the formats been on the market for five years, the disappearance of the local video store, and new online video services being announced all the time, perhaps Apple believes consumers have moved on, too.

Click to expand...

Yeah - I got that. Apple declared the death of optical media and you hail for it, despite reality is proving you wrong without a doubt. And while I'm surfing the web to let you know I heavily disagree with you, I listen to "I'm with you" by RHCP in that old obsolete optical media called CD.

I don't give a crap about 'high quality encoded'-iTunes AAC - because for some music you'd like the real thing. And nope - Apple doesn't care what will be next - they lost that attitude when they dropped Computer from their name.

They care for what gives most profit - and that will be a proprietary codec solution that not only kills off Flash but also needs constant iTunes verification. Nah - thanx a lot.

And I care for what gives me the best entertainment on my current screen and audio setup that is readily available - and sorry, that is CD and BluRay. No optical - no deal. I don't see, why you don't get it.

JAT said:

Don't make me laugh. ESPN can't be bothered to do HD, they certainly aren't going to lead anyone into the next gen.

Click to expand...

I think you mean 3D, not HD, and it wasn't really a choice. Try channels 403, 404, 864, 865, 868, or 869, neighbor.

My point with the links to ESPN and the TV Cameramen Guild were examples of the video industry already beginning to prepare for what will come after 1080i/p and not what's here today.

swagi said:

Yeah - I got that. Apple declared the death of optical media and you hail for it, despite reality is proving you wrong without a doubt. And while I'm surfing the web to let you know I heavily disagree with you, I listen to "I'm with you" by RHCP in that old obsolete optical media called CD.

.......

And I care for what gives me the best entertainment on my current screen and audio setup that is readily available - and sorry, that is CD and BluRay. No optical - no deal. I don't see, why you don't get it.

Click to expand...

Gee, where do I start with all the supposition and snark? You're acting like Apple and I have formed some sort of cabal to take down physical media. As for ignoring reality, to which reality do you refer?

How many online video stores are there besides iTunes? Many. How many online music stores are there besides iTunes? Many. How many online software stores are there besides the Mac App Store? Many. If you are nostalgic for brick-and-mortar stores, just be happy that, for now, Apple doesn't provide unlimited streaming like Netflix or unlimited music rental like Spotify. Even Sony, developer of Blu-Ray, has Crackle.com where they play movies for free (albeit with commercials).

It's not like I haven't tried to support physical media. However, it is hard when there are no convenient, nearby video stores, and yet one lives in a major metropolitan city. Bookstores are increasingly going that way, too (Very sad! ).

Also, do I need to break out my old CD walkman, or can I use an iPod with music I purchased from Amazon as a download? I kind of find the former less convenient. See my point?

Apple didn't declare "the death of optical media." They looked at, for one, most of their customers lugging around laptops larger than they needed to be (since the optical drives were only being used to install the OS); so they built them an option. Customers responded by buying up MacBook Airs, ergo Apple gave many people what they wanted. It's not like the MacBook Airs and new Mac minis are sealed. Those who still need an optical drive can plug in an external, some of which are very portable.

If you want Apple to continue to survive, they cannot ignore that the world is going increasingly digital and to the cloud. Otherwise, their competitors will pass them by.

Do what you want. No judgments here. If you want to debate, fine. Let's just keep it from getting personal.

unobtainium said:

Maybe they're talking about a NAS system. So you don't have to keep your Mac running in order to access your content.

It would be sweet to have all your iTunes, iPhoto and media libraries stored in one central server in the home. You could stream to your various devices from there. I know that there are plenty of NAS solutions out there, but Apple has yet to put its characteristic spin on the concept.

Click to expand...

...iCloud

rmhop81 said:

obviously apple isn't a fan of physical media if you haven't figured that out already. The future isn't blu ray discs...it's streaming and having everything at your finger tips. Not items being shipped to you or picked up at a red box location.

Click to expand...

We don't live in the future we live in the present!

*LTD* said:

Interesting. Because "wants" tend to drive the industry as much as "needs." And Apple really understands wants.

There was no need for an iPhone, either. Certainly no need for an iPad, right?

Now look where we are.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/2...estimates-through-2012-to-nearly-100-million/

http://goodereader.com/blog/tablet-slates/acer-reports-first-ever-quarterly-loss-blames-ipad/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/18/hp-to-spin-off-pc-business-as-sales-stagnate/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/1...e-pc-shipments-in-q2-2011-with-ipad-included/

If Apple plans to enter the TV/Video biz, count on a more than even chance of them redefining the entire market. It's what Apple does with their major projects.

Click to expand...

Great links! Still on the fence as to the Apple TV (flat panel, not puck), but Apple never fails to surprise.

I'm remain somewhat dubious due to:

1) Apple has historically run services like iTunes close to cost with the true goal of moving high profit margin hardware. Will this endevor be a reversal of their usual MO?

2) Compared to the combination of the media industry and broadband industry, the notoriously cutthroat cell phone industry looks like rainbows and unicorns (ex. Networks To Google TV: Talk To The Hand, meanwhile service like Hulu remains as fragmented as Android). Now throw in the razor thin margins on HD TVs, and it looks like Tim Cook will have to pull off a miracle.

*crossing fingers*

42streetsdown said:

When i can use AirPlay to stream content from my Mac as well as my iOS stuff i'll be more interested.

Click to expand...

When can I stream YouTube videos from my Mac to any Airport Express or tv? You know the iPhone has had this capability about a year... Why not the Mac?

MacNewsFix said:

Gee, where do I start with all the supposition and snark? You're acting like Apple and I have formed some sort of cabal to take down physical media. As for ignoring reality, to which reality do you refer?

How many online video stores are there besides iTunes? Many. How many online music stores are there besides iTunes? Many. How many online software stores are there besides the Mac App Store? Many. If you are nostalgic for brick-and-mortar stores, just be happy that, for now, Apple doesn't provide unlimited streaming like Netflix or unlimited music rental like Spotify. Even Sony, developer of Blu-Ray, has Crackle.com where they play movies for free (albeit with commercials).

It's not like I haven't tried to support physical media. However, it is hard when there are no convenient, nearby video stores, and yet one lives in a major metropolitan city. Bookstores are increasingly going that way, too (Very sad! ).

Also, do I need to break out my old CD walkman, or can I use an iPod with music I purchased from Amazon as a download? I kind of find the former less convenient. See my point?

Apple didn't declare "the death of optical media." They looked at, for one, most of their customers lugging around laptops larger than they needed to be (since the optical drives were only being used to install the OS); so they built them an option. Customers responded by buying up MacBook Airs, ergo Apple gave many people what they wanted. It's not like the MacBook Airs and new Mac minis are sealed. Those who still need an optical drive can plug in an external, some of which are very portable.

If you want Apple to continue to survive, they cannot ignore that the world is going increasingly digital and to the cloud. Otherwise, their competitors will pass them by.

Do what you want. No judgments here. If you want to debate, fine. Let's just keep it from getting personal.

Click to expand...

Sorry if I came over as rude. And please don't get me wrong. I just wanted to point out, that optical still remains the choice when you are looking for quality. And just to let you know - the CD came from Amazon on release day. Which is as far from B&M as you can get.

And I feel sorry for you that there is no B&M alternative for BluRay-rentals in your area. I have one quite nearby and use it quite often (as I do casually use XBox Live marketplace for 1080p content). From my perspective the streamed Dolby Digital sound on XBox Live unfortunately doesn't even come remotely close to DTS on Blu.

Your casual iPod experience on the go - well I won't argue with that. But being at home I still prefer old school CD for audio content.

And an external optical on a mini just doesn't cut it, when I can get a Dell Zino as HTPC with Blu. That was my point. Nothing more, nothing less.

swagi said:

Sorry if I came over as rude. And please don't get me wrong. I just wanted to point out, that optical still remains the choice when you are looking for quality. And just to let you know - the CD came from Amazon on release day. Which is as far from B&M as you can get.

And I feel sorry for you that there is no B&M alternative for BluRay-rentals in your area. I have one quite nearby and use it quite often (as I do casually use XBox Live marketplace for 1080p content). From my perspective the streamed Dolby Digital sound on XBox Live unfortunately doesn't even come remotely close to DTS on Blu.

Your casual iPod experience on the go - well I won't argue with that. But being at home I still prefer old school CD for audio content.

And an external optical on a mini just doesn't cut it, when I can get a Dell Zino as HTPC with Blu. That was my point. Nothing more, nothing less.

Click to expand...

No harm, no foul. And don't worry, you were not the first and won't be the last. I even created a thread just so those who gravitate to it have a safe haven to discuss things. Part of my motivation was born out of forum members belonging to various professional media industries thinking I personally wanted to put them out of business. Huh?

I lament all the people whose lives have been disrupted by technology. However, that has been going on a long time and will likely never end, at least until our robot overlords claim domination.

-MacNewsFix

P.S. Don't laugh, but I still refuse to part with my LPs.

blackpond said:

If they're truly achieving what they say they are (visually lossless 4k video at 10mb/s), then it's going to turn things upside down.

Click to expand...

Saw the 'Tattoo' short at NAB this year on the first day which was a 4K uncompressed screening, then again a couple days later which was a RedRay screening. I didn't know there was a difference. It's that good.

blackpond said:

...(visually lossless 4k video at 10mb/s), then it's going to turn things upside down.

Click to expand...

Still 10 times more bandwidth than my Internet connection...

rmhop81 said:

obviously apple isn't a fan of physical media if you haven't figured that out already. The future isn't blu ray discs...it's streaming and having everything at your finger tips. Not items being shipped to you or picked up at a red box location.

Click to expand...

Really? I didn't know that. Thanks for pointing it out.

I was too busy watching the global economic collapse, the any day now GreatEST Depression, and infrastructure all along the US east coast getting blown out to sea to not be repaired to CURRENT speeds for two decades. And companies planning and for sure getting caps on download quantity and paying dearly for speeds suitable (one day) to download a 50 gig movie.

But that's the planet I live on. Would be nice to live on yours for awhile.

If only Apple acolytes could actually follow Steve to buddhahood.

CRSmoak said:

We don't live in the future we live in the present!

Click to expand...

Yup, and its going to be quite a while before internet connections are good enough to e.g. stream "wicked-quality media" (ok, lets for fun say... speeds around 20MB/s). Sure, we have the tech. to do it, i myself regularly download in speeds over 10 MB/s, and im hardly on the fastest net around here, but for something to replace something else its not sufficient that a select few can use it. For the new to become standard it must apply to a vast majority.

Edit: Just remember, Nielsen has some chart projection that is usually quite accurate in terms of lag. Cant seem to find it though, but lets say "a couple of years" - at least. :- )