Apple Announces Apple TV Take 2 + Price Drop

[whatever]

I've yet to see any real comments here comparing AppleTV 2 to the Pay-Per-View services generally available from cable & satellite alike. I seem to recall that their prices are not too far off Apple's mark - and this is equipment already in many homes. So why would you pay $229 for another box that duplicates those features you already have?

Being stuck home sick last week, I found myself looking for something to watch OnDemand and I have to tell you in the HD department there wasn't much (less than 15 in the PayPerView area and less than 50 total). And as far as new releases go, there were only two movies that were released the same day as the DVD.

I ended up spending the afternoon watching various Podcasts and YouTube on my AppleTV.

 

[mileHighness]

When they say HD, is it 1080 or 720? I wonder how good the compression will be. If it's good I may finally buy into this scheme.

Just pulled down the iTunes update, which states that the HD movies are 720p. Oh well, there's always 2009 Macworld...

 

[iindigo]

I just wish Apple would add DVR capability already... my TiVo and the dumb monthly fees that accompany it are just itching to be replaced.

 

[GQB]

????????????????????????????

How did this AppleTV Take 2 thread become a discussion about HD Pixel Density (or whatever...)?

Go get it, download stuff, enjoy...

I agree.
And I'm much more concerned about how AAPL tanked today, and whether that was keynote related or just a by product of Citibank's bomb today along with the rest of the market.
We'll see next week.

 

[nubero]

Except a 1080 display is not necessarily 2.25 x the area of a 720 display. You're not really talking as much about resolution as you are pixel density, and that's a lot more difficult to distinguish than screen size.

That's what people are talking about with diminishing returns. You put 50 billion pixels in a 3" display and it's not really going to look all that much better than a 1 megapixel 3" display or even a 640x480 3" display.

Of course.

You will have to rearrange how you sit if you want to go through the trouble of doing that.
In my case it's 40" 1080p from almost exactly 2 meters away. that's pretty close though a 50" would probably be ideal. I do however see the resolution difference from 720 to 1080 and it does make quite a difference.

 

[stompy]

No ***** sherlock. Nobody cares about 720p, unless you're trying to defend a piss poor movie deliver service

<edit> Summing up your reasoning: </edit>
1080p > 720p : 720p is for idiots.

This website is stupid.

So is this one.


(BTW, I'm not endorsing Apple TV's resolution, just tired of blanket statements about 720p vs 1080p.)

 

[Maclomaniac]

My point is that in the public mind in the UK, 1080p is the standard. Almost any new TV you can buy is 1080p. All the marketing in the shops reflects this and anyone looking for a new TV wants 1080p (regardless of whether they know what it is). So why would Joe Public they think a 720p AppleTV is a good match for their 1080p TV?

As far as I know - the AppleTV is supposed to be a mass-market consumer TV device, not especially for computer monitors.

It may be "the new standard" as far as displays, but it's definitely not as far as content. Do those people realize nothing is broadcast in 1080p? Considering half the people who buy HDTVs are watching 480i stretched into 16:9 and think they are watching HDTV, it's doubtful.

Also, a conversation on 720p v 1080i and which is better is irrelevant and a waste of space here. Each one may be a little better for certain kinds of content, but it's really difficult to compare because quality depends on so many things, including how it was originally recorded, the display you're using, etc. No one can say definitively 1080i is better than 720p or vice versa, though lots of people may say they prefer one or the other, which is likely dependent on what types of content they tend to watch.

 

[DakotaGuy]

No ***** sherlock. Nobody cares about 720p, unless you're trying to defend a piss poor movie deliver service

It's funny you say that, yet the US broadcasting standard is 720p or 1080i. When I watch a football game in 720p or 1080i and they say I am watching it in HD are they lying to me?

There is a reason that they don't broadcast in 1080p. It would take way too much bandwidth. This is the same reason why Apple is using 720p. Maybe when things speed up they can go the next level, but for now many people will be very happy with the quality of 720p HD. That is much better then DVD quality. Yes HD DVD and Blu-ray will give you 1080p, but this is the next best thing to those and it is very convenient. I have always SLAMMED Apple hard for making a dud like the Apple TV, but this is a big improvement and I give them credit. If you don't like watching anything that isn't 1080p you should probably turn off the TV because that is what you get from every network and yes IT IS HDTV.

 

[gkarris]

I agree.
And I'm much more concerned about how AAPL tanked today, and whether that was keynote related or just a by product of Citibank's bomb today along with the rest of the market.
We'll see next week.

Definitely the stock market overall...

Apple did great things today:

1. iTunes Rentals
2. AppleTV sw update and price reduction
3. Awesome Sub-Notebook
4. iPod Touch software to make it the greatest PDA

The Windows and PC fanboys are fuming right now...

 

[stompy]

delete double post... weird

 

[jettredmont]

*sigh* Seriously, you have a MONTH to press play. If don't have the time within a 24 hour period to watch a 2 hour movie, I don't think those extra 6 hours are going to make or break the deal.

As for 5.1 audio... "Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound pass-through" from the tech specs of the AppleTV page. I'm guessing they're updated... That doesn't sound like 5.1 aac converted to Dolby to me...

Umm, actually, it's the 25th hour that typically breaks the deal for folks with kids. You put the kids to bed at 8:30, watch an hour of the movie, then need to put it aside for whatever reason. The next night you put the kids to bed at 8:30, and the movie just vanished. Sorry. You either go to be pissed off or you pay again to watch the second half of the damned movie then pitch the tv into the sewer so you don't make that mistake again.

25, 26, 27, 30 hours. Any of those would cut in half the number of annoyances with the 24-hour window. 24 hours is expertly designed to annoy customers, and (tinfoil hats on) slow the adoption of digital downloads as a medium.

 

[toshiba1]

Umm, actually, it's the 25th hour that typically breaks the deal for folks with kids. You put the kids to bed at 8:30, watch an hour of the movie, then need to put it aside for whatever reason. The next night you put the kids to bed at 8:30, and the movie just vanished. Sorry. You either go to be pissed off or you pay again to watch the second half of the damned movie then pitch the tv into the sewer so you don't make that mistake again.

Exactly correct. Apple needs to extend to 30 hrs.

 

[Howmanoid]

I'd assume they're adding real AC3 (Dolby Digital) support to Quicktime. Handbrake can already rip the AC3 track into an AVI container, and if you have Perian and QT Pro you can open an .avi file with AC3 audio and "Save As" a Quicktime .mov which can then be imported into iTunes. It then can play in FrontRow, but it won't work on a stock AppleTV. Perhaps once the AppleTV updates are done it will.

If that is the case, I'm sure Handbrake will get updated to allow it to rip the AC3 straight into a .mov or .mp4 file.

Can you get AC3 encoded audio into an MP4 container? My understanding was that the only multi-channel audio format supported by MP4 was AAC 6 Ch. AC3 in AVI is no problem but MP4???? Thought the MPEG guys had open standards theology pretty exclusively.

 

[jettredmont]

1080p > 720p : 720p is for idiots.

This website is stupid.

So is this one.

(BTW, I'm not endorsing Apple TV's resolution, just tired of blanket statements about 720p vs 1080p.)

The first link shows that there are more factors than just resolution in picking a TV. I agree. This doesn't speak to digital downloads, but the same holds true there: compression artifacts are far more likely to be an issue than the difference in resolution between different services and physical disks. For instance, a download service at 720p will often look worse than a DVD (at 480p) because of blockiness introduced by the level of compression required to make the movie download in "better than realtime" across as wide a variety of connection speeds as possible.

The second link shows that, on my 50" screen, so long as I am sitting less than 10 feet from the screen I'll easily see the difference between SD and 720P, and that if I'm between 6.5 and 9.8 feet from the screen I'll see some benefits with 1080P. My chair is about 8 feet from the screen, so I sit right in the middle of that range. When the kids lay out on the floor in front of the screen, they are more like 4-5 feet away, well within the "obvious differences" range. His science is a little off (treating eyes like fixed-position digital sensors), but even going by his numbers, a 1080p movie will be perceptibly higher quality than a 720p movie in my house.

 

[joemama]

Now to wait for all the DVR wishers to complain!

And here they come. This update is boring....yawn...nothing to see here.

It's still not going to sell well because there is no DVR. Maybe one day Jobs' business model will work, but not just yet.

People want DVRs. Plain and simple.

 

[GQB]

1080p > 720p : 720p is for idiots.

This website is stupid.

So is this one.


(BTW, I'm not endorsing Apple TV's resolution, just tired of blanket statements about 720p vs 1080p.)

My my... was THAT ever a well thought out and articulated argument.
The links you point to are absolutely correct as they apply to human perception.
Go have a talk with Nigel about 11 being well, LOUDER, than 10.

 

[/dev/toaster]

I love the fact you can pull images directly from .Mac. Yes, I do use my .Mac account a lot for my picture galleries. I have close to 300 pictures on my AppleTV, and its a pain to maintain all of that.

Too bad you can't browse and download podcasts, that would be a sweet feature. Again, its another thing I have to maintain. Most of the video podcasts I download I watch on my TV. Very rare I watch it on my Mac or my iPhone. (However, I listen to audio podcasts all day at work)

Although I don't own a surround sound system (yet), having an HD video with "SD" audio is ... well, strange and missing. I know it would increase the download size, but come on ... give people the option.

 

[ChargerSteve]

Not perfect, but pretty damn good

I think a lot of folks here are missing the point of AppleTV. I don't think it is meant to satisfy a hardcore videophile's need to critically watch movies anymore than an iPod is meant to satisfy a hardore audiophile's critical listening needs. It is not just a movie rental box(like VuDu, etc). It's about convenience, simplicity and elegance. For $229-$300 you can:
- play movies, TV shows, podcasts, etc you buy or rent from iTMS (or other sources)
- play your existing ripped DVDs (whether or not this is officially supported)via a beautiful interface
-play all your iTunes music on your living room system via a beautiful interface on your TV
-show pictures and slideshows on your HDTV

$229 seems like a good value for the large audience that this would appeal to. To put it in perspective, I know many people who happily paid $200+ for a box to just stream music from their computers to their stereos (with a crappy little interface on the box). It may not be perfect, but it's pretty damn good!

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Maclomaniac]

I love the fact you can pull images directly from .Mac. Yes, I do use my .Mac account a lot for my picture galleries. I have close to 300 pictures on my AppleTV, and its a pain to maintain all of that.

Too bad you can't browse and download podcasts, that would be a sweet feature. Again, its another thing I have to maintain. Most of the video podcasts I download I watch on my TV. Very rare I watch it on my Mac or my iPhone. (However, I listen to audio podcasts all day at work)

Although I don't own a surround sound system (yet), having an HD video with "SD" audio is ... well, strange and missing. I know it would increase the download size, but come on ... give people the option.

I think you can do this. At least, you can browse the podcasts, according to their press release:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/01/15appletv.html

 

[ShavenYak]

Can you get AC3 encoded audio into an MP4 container? My understanding was that the only multi-channel audio format supported by MP4 was AAC 6 Ch. AC3 in AVI is no problem but MP4???? Thought the MPEG guys had open standards theology pretty exclusively.

Actually I'm not sure about MP4. I know you can in .mov, as long as you have Perian installed.

 

[djellison]

Contrary to what that previous poster said - I would say that 90% of TV's on sale in the UK are 'HD Ready' which means they only do 720p. They can handle a 1080 signal, but the screen itself is only able to show 720p.

Is £199 the same price that the A-TV was before the keynote? £199 vs $229 is a bit harsh even by Apple standards. I was expecting something like £169

Doug

 

[GeekLawyer]

I think a lot of folks here are missing the point of AppleTV. I don't think it is meant to satisfy a hardcore videophile's need to critically watch movies anymore than an iPod is meant to satisfy a hardore audiophile's critical listening needs. It is not just a movie rental box(like VuDu, etc). It's about convenience, simplicity and elegance. For $229-$300 you can:
- play movies, TV shows, podcasts, etc you buy or rent from iTMS (or other sources)
- play your existing ripped DVDs (whether or not this is officially supported)via a beautiful interface
-play all your iTunes music on your living room system via a beautiful interface on your TV
-show pictures and slideshows on your HDTV

Finally! Someone who gets it! The people who are the market for this device will find it meet their needs well. And that's a very large market.

 

[GQB]

I think a lot of folks here are missing the point of AppleTV. I don't think it is meant to satisfy a hardcore videophile's need to critically watch movies anymore than an iPod is meant to satisfy a hardore audiophile's critical listening needs. It is not just a movie rental box(like VuDu, etc). It's about convenience, simplicity and elegance. For $229-$300 you can:
- play movies, TV shows, podcasts, etc you buy or rent from iTMS (or other sources)
- play your existing ripped DVDs (whether or not this is officially supported)via a beautiful interface
-play all your iTunes music on your living room system via a beautiful interface on your TV
-show pictures and slideshows on your HDTV

$229 seems like a good value for the large audience that this would appeal to. To put it in perspective, I know many people who happily paid $200+ for a box to just stream music from their computers to their stereos (with a crappy little interface on the box). It may not be perfect, but it's pretty damn good!

Just my 2 cents.

Give the man a cigar!
Someone who gets leaving the videophile/audiofile market to the fringe players who want to pay big $$ for the bragging rights, and concentrate on satisfying the bulk of the market with excellent quality and ease of use.

 

[stompy]

The first link shows that there are more factors than just resolution in picking a TV. I agree. This doesn't speak to digital downloads, but the same holds true there: compression artifacts are far more likely to be an issue than the difference in resolution between different services and physical disks. For instance, a download service at 720p will often look worse than a DVD (at 480p) because of blockiness introduced by the level of compression required to make the movie download in "better than realtime" across as wide a variety of connection speeds as possible.

The second link shows that, on my 50" screen, so long as I am sitting less than 10 feet from the screen I'll easily see the difference between SD and 720P, and that if I'm between 6.5 and 9.8 feet from the screen I'll see some benefits with 1080P. My chair is about 8 feet from the screen, so I sit right in the middle of that range. When the kids lay out on the floor in front of the screen, they are more like 4-5 feet away, well within the "obvious differences" range. His science is a little off (treating eyes like fixed-position digital sensors), but even going by his numbers, a 1080p movie will be perceptibly higher quality than a 720p movie in my house.

Certainly, and you're saying the same thing that I wanted to illustrate: many factors create the final result. 1080p vs 720p is not meaningful without any other points of reference.

 

[nubero]

Well, that's a pretty misleading graph because it makes it look as if 1080' is 3 times sharper than 480p.
Video to DVD was clearly a monumental step up, and consumers were able to see that easily.
DVD to 720p/1080i often leaves (again) most consumers scratching their head about what the big deal is. Get familiar (as we are) and its obvious, but that's not what retailers are finding with most users.
720p to 1080p is even more 'marginal'. That's how I'm defining it.

I don't think that graph squares with human perception.

I'm framing this in the context of 'what is the sweet spot in the market for Apple to be chasing to have the biggest impact.'
I just think they have it right in that context.

There was only a difference in perceived sharpness when people moved from VHS to DVD due to less/no noise in a well mastered DVD. Which is good in it's own right...

Everyone friend that came to my place yet though is stunned by what HD can really be when they see it.

When the combination of physical distance and screen size is right, everyone sees the difference...

I do get how you defined marginal in your previous post and i still can't get my head around that...

I am working with Sony's HDCam format in Video Post Production and I can tell you that 720 is dead meat. In three ears of HD workflow I have yet to see something that was intended to be 720... that conversion only happens when the station is broadcasting. Capture happens at 1080 since the studios and stations want to fill their footage libraries with only the best possible material.

The only reason the send 720 through at the moment is bandwidth constrains. So if you have a 720 TV that's good. But I tell you that in 5 years from now you won't even be able to buy them anymore.