No one owns, or will own apple TV, its an epic fail...
That's interesting. I'm fairly certain that I know at least a dozen people who own them, myself included. It also does what it's built to do quite well. Not a failure in my eyes.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces Release of HD Movie Sales and Rentals via iTunes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's interesting. I'm fairly certain that I know at least a dozen people who own them, myself included. It also does what it's built to do quite well. Not a failure in my eyes.
Yeah, but you live in an iBubble (you're a MacRumors member, case and point). No one outside of that bubble owns an AppleTV.
No one owns, or will own apple TV, its an epic fail...
Edit: to add, f**k all this corporate money grabbing bs, apples moves have been all too obvious since the "year of HD" that never was, itunes sucks why was my old winamp using about 2% of a 700mhz Athlon and iTunes rinses about 50% of a 2.4ghz P4 on canterwood?
Plus it's totally screwed up one of my raids from crashing out whilst syncing my iphone... meh apple sort yo self oot
Are you being sarcastic? I LOVE my Apple TV and I know many people that want one. Anyone I show it to wants one, they just don't really know about it because Apple doesn't advertise it like its other products.
Soon it will be the hub of your digital life and entertainment center with DVR functionality and games and an SDK with the app store and much more, trust me.
Sales have gone up 300% too without any push on Apple's part!
Oh and iTunes rules!
I'm so sick of seeing this kind of BS. "Only just" ? What the heck does that mean? Tell me, is 1080i "just HD" also? I'm going to bet that your answer is no, it's REAL HD. Get a clue. The actual "information" difference between 720P and 1080i is practically negligible (1080i is really only 540 lines of information at any given moment and uses a trick of the brain to try and make you think you are seeing more than that; technically 720P at a given moment in time is higher vertical resolution). 1080i is interlaced which in general is inferior to a progressive image. For static images, you'll get an apparent higher resolution, but with motion you will get an inferior picture.
So does that mean you 'need' 1080P to be "real HD" ??? Let me clue you in. 1080P wasn't even talked about except in theory early on and some said it wouldn't come into real use at all because of the massive bandwidth requirements. Short of Blu-Ray or some kind of Internet delivery, this is still largely true. You will probably NEVER see it on Cable or Satellite for that reason. So by your "only just" standards does that mean that all the program material on broadcast television, cable and satellite out there in the whole world is "only just" HD??? THAT is exactly what you're telling me, after all. HDTV means television, but I guess we "only just" see HD on actual television broadcasts.
I find the utter snobbery disgusting (and that IS what I keep seeing, snobbery) associated with Blu-Ray and this whole 1080P business. I've said it before and I'll say it again, MOST of the people yelling the loudest about how utterly fantastic 1080P is and how HORRIBLE 720P is (all over that extra 360 lines) are watching it on smallish sets (under 60") at long distances (over 8 feet) and so the snobbish claims are LAUGHABLE to anyone that knows ANYTHING about resolving distances.
Check this article out: http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/12836
What this means is the human eye (with 20/20 vision) can resolve detail for 1080P to approximately 3x the screen height distance. Thus, if you have a 60" 16x9 screen (29 inch height), you can resolve all the detail out to about 7.25 feet. If you are sitting out further than that, you are starting to lose resolution acuity and any improvement is completely in your head and/or imagination (hence where the snobbery starts as in audiophile type claims where people seem to think they're super human and can sense things others cannot).
Here's an article with a chart that makes it perfectly clear as to where the benefits begin and end for a given format:
http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
As you can see, unless you are watching VERY LARGE sets and/or sitting VERY CLOSE (not true of MOST people), the benefits of 1080P are MOOT. I'm in no way saying that 1080P isn't 'better' than 720P. HOWEVER, you HAVE to be sitting within the range of that chart for your eyes to see the full resolution details (at 20/20 vision; if you have lower vision, the distances decrease that you have to sit at to see the detail).
So your average consumer might have a 46" HD set. You have to be sitting no further than 5.75 feet away with 20/20 vision to ACTUALLY SEE the full 1080P resolution! How many people do you know that sit less than 6 feet from their 46" sets? If you are sitting around 8 feet away, you will JUST be able to see the full 720P resolution! If you are sitting over 13 feet away, you might as well just watch a DVD because you will not see any more resolution than one!
I'm sure these numbers are coming as a shock to some and others think I'm crazy, stupid or nuts, but this is science, not active imaginations run wild with bogus claims about superior pictures they do not actually see.
I've got a 93" screen and one of the higher quality 720P projectors out there. I sit 8 feet away from the screen. At that distance and screen size, I could theoretically see the FULL benefit of 1080P so for my room and screen, a 1080P projector upgrade could be in my future. If I were sitting 14 feet away, there would be no point in ever upgrading. I couldn't POSSIBLY tell the difference. Yet I've seen plenty of 93" screens in use with seating distances of around 12 feet. At that distance, the difference between 720P and 1080P would barely be noticeable at all. And that's with a pretty darn large screen and a pretty average seating distance. Many people sit 20 feet away from their televisions. At that distance, you would need a screen that is at least 106" to just barely start to see a difference with 1080P and about 140" to see ALL the detail at that distance. How many people do you know that have 140" screens?
As for the lossless audio claim, it's suffice to say the ignorance surrounding what is audible out there even in (maybe especially within) audiophile circles is astounding. I followed the scene for years and met no end of "goldenear" types that couldn't tell 16-bit/44.1kHz audio from a 128kbit MP3 even when the test was done blind. Even with trained ears, you cannot distinguish 256kbit (128kbit per channel) AAC from the source material. The differences are inaudible. Dolby Digital could have audible differences, but the liklihood of one being able to tell the difference between it and even a "super lossless" format is pretty darn small once the test goes blind (science instead of imagination). Find me some people that even have DECENT audio gear and then maybe we can worry about whether a difference in quality is actually audible or not. I have $2000 ribbon speakers (Carver) upstairs with custom active crossovers and 500 watts (into 4 ohms) per channel total amplification on that system and over $3000 worth of speakers (PSB) in my home theater room downstairs. I'm quite familiar with "good" sound.
So what I'm saying is that yes, 1080P is superior to 720P. 4 is still bigger than 3 even in the scientific community. But that in no way substantiates the claims made by the masses, most of whom are completely ignorant about things like resolving distances and blind testing for audio. These "huge" differences aren't huge at all under many very common conditions (from small screens versus seating distances to cheap playback speakers) and I dare wager that most of the claims on this site are made from ego and snobbery, not actual science. Compression is another topic that is greatly exaggerated by the golden eyes types. Most of this stuff comes from the "my X (computer, hard disk, car engine, whatever) is bigger/better than yours lines of thinking. Sorry if I don't just lump sum it all into a neat package of 1080P is better period. If you don't take the room/TV size/seating distance into account, it's a meaningless statement.
Finally. Of course I am not sure about pricing. A bit expensive.
Apple's model for pricing was very simple and efficient. Now that the record labels and the movie studios are getting into the act, all that will go.
Both industries are notoriously greedy and short sighted. I only hope they will not destroy the goose that laid the golden egg. In their efforts to break iTunes' stronghold and increase prices, they are only inviting more piracy.
Apple's model for pricing was very simple and efficient. Now that the record labels and the movie studios are getting into the act, all that will go.
Both industries are notoriously greedy and short sighted. I only hope they will not destroy the goose that laid the golden egg. In their efforts to break iTunes' stronghold and increase prices, they are only inviting more piracy.
I don't get the comments about Apple not wanting bluray in their computers.
Why would they leave it out simply because it 'competes' (I disagree) with a service they offer?
they are selling operating systems and computers - thats where they make their profit. They can't deliberately restrict those because of a service, as it will make them uncompetitive in the market.
By that model, they should remove DVD and CD playback and force you to use itunes.
Personally the reason is simply money. They are making a fortune putting cheap superdrives into their computers and don't want to take the hit by putting 'expensive' bluray drives in and paying the license fees associated with them. Plus they would maybe need to support HDMI for audio which they won't want to do
Its just their greed stopping them. Eventually they'll be forced to put them in, at least as an option - its not a premium offering in the real world anymore, its in many normal computers.
Why would they leave it out simply because it 'competes' (I disagree) with a service they offer?
they are selling operating systems and computers - thats where they make their profit. They can't deliberately restrict those because of a service, as it will make them uncompetitive in the market.
By that model, they should remove DVD and CD playback and force you to use itunes.
Personally the reason is simply money. They are making a fortune putting cheap superdrives into their computers and don't want to take the hit by putting 'expensive' bluray drives in and paying the license fees associated with them. Plus they would maybe need to support HDMI for audio which they won't want to do
Its just their greed stopping them. Eventually they'll be forced to put them in, at least as an option - its not a premium offering in the real world anymore, its in many normal computers.
oh and as for superHD, and why do we need 1080p when 720p is fine?
For me, bluray is archival quality. I shouldn't need any more than that. With DVD I didn't have that.
When I'm collecting movies, I'd be happier to spend the money knowing that movie will stay with me even as my equipment improves. Sure, DVD might look great on your 40" screen, but it doesn't when you have a projector. and the difference in audio is very noticeable between DVD and bluray.
As for 4k, I don't see it. Digital 2k cinema at the moment is pretty much only 1080p at the moment, and while that will likely improve (possibly to 4k) that won't be needed at home
For me, bluray is archival quality. I shouldn't need any more than that. With DVD I didn't have that.
When I'm collecting movies, I'd be happier to spend the money knowing that movie will stay with me even as my equipment improves. Sure, DVD might look great on your 40" screen, but it doesn't when you have a projector. and the difference in audio is very noticeable between DVD and bluray.
As for 4k, I don't see it. Digital 2k cinema at the moment is pretty much only 1080p at the moment, and while that will likely improve (possibly to 4k) that won't be needed at home
Thanks for the chart - I was wondering where it was on the internet.
BTW, I can tell the difference between 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. I'm 6.5 feet away from a 55" diag screen in 16:9 mode - I have a projector and I can tell the resolution difference with the way it processes 720 input vs 1080 input....
Same here. It's nice to know you're buying physical media that is capable of higher res, even though you may never need it.
Yes, when you have a front projector, large screen, a dark room, and sitting close, you can tell the difference.
Please stop spreading your FUD...
MacBooks with the GMA3100 graphics play iTunes 720p files just fine...
MacBook Airs struggle with the lower processor.
Neither of them with the nVidia graphic chips will have a problem at all and even play 1080p.
Are you being sarcastic? I LOVE my Apple TV and I know many people that want one. Anyone I show it to wants one, they just don't really know about it because Apple doesn't advertise it like its other products.
Soon it will be the hub of your digital life and entertainment center with DVR functionality and games and an SDK with the app store and much more, trust me.
Sales have gone up 300% too without any push on Apple's part!
Oh and iTunes rules!
No Sarcasm at all, its no good as a 'media hub' as it's all tied in to apple hardware, I'm not going to buy one and I don't know anyone who owns one.
And as for iTunes it is a massive system hog for something that should use minimal resources.
And when will iTunes sync my phone with firefox?
I'll bet never cause they want to tie people in to all apple hardware, I dont like this attitude it is protectionist and ultimately bad for competition.
Mmm. Not entirely. Half of the other users are Windows users. My best friend, Matt, is very much a windows guy, but he's the first to admit that Apples got a few things right. He's got an iPod, not because it's trendy, but because it serves his needs and interfaces well with iTunes. He had a HTPC for a couple of years, but decided to go with the
tv when he saw mine.Not everyone is trapped in the "iBubble" just because they use Apple's hardware. None of the content on my iPod or
tv are DRM'd (except my television season). I've got about 200 movies at my disposal whenever I want them, and at least 20 of those are HD rips I performed myself. I avoided buying an overpriced BD player and instead bought a (somewhat cheaper) BR drive so I can rip them to a playable format for my tv.Some may say it's a work around, but it's all about the convenience of having it all instantly. Will I ever pick up a BR player for my TV? Maybe when they drop down to the $99 mark. In the mean time, I'll keep enjoying having all my discs in a couple of bins in my attic, out of the way.
EDIT:
Do you mean, "it's all tied into apple software"? Because I'm pretty sure many people use iTunes without a Mac. And I'm also pretty sure that many iPod owners are Windows users. Could it be that you would like to think Apple requires you to have all Apple hardware to use their other hardware, because if so, you are sadly mistaken. Plenty of people use the Airport Extreme without a Mac in sight. I know plenty of college students who use both a MacBook (given to them by their school) and a desktop PC. It's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.
I gave an tv and I use it almost everday. I have about 700gs of movies because I rip them. I used to have a quad mac pro, but it died so appple I'd replacing it with a quad 2.26 nehalem, so my rip speed will increse dramaticly.
I'm a film maker and I can def tell the difference. I will most likely not be buying hd movies from apple. I prefer to buy bluray films mainly brcayse one day I will rip them drm free.
I use an iPhone and a touch but unless apple released a bigger screen product I will buy an archos player with a hdd to play my movies on when I travel. I like my touch 32gig but there I'd not enough memory for my movies and my music.
tv and I use it almost everday. I have about 700gs of movies because I rip them. I used to have a quad mac pro, but it died so appple I'd replacing it with a quad 2.26 nehalem, so my rip speed will increse dramaticly. I'm a film maker and I can def tell the difference. I will most likely not be buying hd movies from apple. I prefer to buy bluray films mainly brcayse one day I will rip them drm free.
I use an iPhone and a touch but unless apple released a bigger screen product I will buy an archos player with a hdd to play my movies on when I travel. I like my touch 32gig but there I'd not enough memory for my movies and my music.
Mmm. Not entirely. Half of the other users are Windows users. My best friend, Matt, is very much a windows guy, but he's the first to admit that Apples got a few things right. He's got an iPod, not because it's trendy, but because it serves his needs and interfaces well with iTunes. He had a HTPC for a couple of years, but decided to go with the
Not everyone is trapped in the "iBubble" just because they use Apple's hardware. None of the content on my iPod or
Some may say it's a work around, but it's all about the convenience of having it all instantly. Will I ever pick up a BR player for my TV? Maybe when they drop down to the $99 mark. In the mean time, I'll keep enjoying having all my discs in a couple of bins in my attic, out of the way.
EDIT:
Do you mean, "it's all tied into apple software"? Because I'm pretty sure many people use iTunes without a Mac. And I'm also pretty sure that many iPod owners are Windows users. Could it be that you would like to think Apple requires you to have all Apple hardware to use their other hardware, because if so, you are sadly mistaken. Plenty of people use the Airport Extreme without a Mac in sight. I know plenty of college students who use both a MacBook (given to them by their school) and a desktop PC. It's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.
I use a Compaq Presario Desktop I got on closeout for $199. I share my PC Printer so I can print from Windows. I added iTunes and it's my AppleTV server. I also sync my iPhone to it.
Before I got the AppleTV, you were supposed to "easily" use Windows Media Sharing and get the content (non-iTunes anyways) on an XBox 360. Well 2 evenings (for a total of 8 hours) later of being unsuccessful, I went and got an AppleTV.
It took 5 minutes to set up and get it working...
I own three and they work great.No one owns, or will own apple TV, its an epic fail...
I also have BDs and DVRs.
In order of quality:
BR
ATV
DVR
In order of convenience:
ATV
DVR
BR
Order of Compatibility:
ATV
BR
DVR
You've got "70GBs @128KBps" and you're talking to me about "trimming" the garbage? Really?...128 Bit rate?
My music collection is so large not only because I have so much music (collected throughout the years), but because it's a much higher quality than anything in your 70GB iPod quality AAC iTunes music library. I actually listen to my music on a decent audio system..so I can easily tell the difference between crappy, highly compressed 128KBps AAC iTunes Music files, and 320KBps and above MP3 files. I hope you never have to listen to your 128KBps files on any real speakers - outside of Pod earbuds, or those low-end computer audio outfits...cause only then are you going to realize how much money you've wasted buying 70GB's worth of tinny, flat, muffled audio files, with major distortion at higher base & treble levels.
And that's my point. Most folks have been so dumbed down in media quality for the sake of "convenience", or space, that they have happily settled for lower quality music and videos - even if it still cost them around the same price, or more, as the higher quality alternative.
Try listening to Miles Davis's "Kind of Blue" in your 128KBps AAC format, and then try listening to it in 320KBps MP3, or Aiff file format on a good Denon receiver with a couple of Klipch XL-23 speakers. You'll weep at all the money you've rat holed in iTunes 'Music'.
No one owns, or will own apple TV, its an epic fail...
I'll be buying one myself eventually once I buy an HDTV.
Sorry, as a Mac consultant serving about 400 clients I would guesstimate that about 10% or more have AppleTV's. And none of them are in the Macrumers/Apple bubble.
Hmmm, you use the inferior MP3 (compared to AAC in general for a given bit-rate) format and listen to horn-loaded (distortion) speakers that cut-off bass at 86Hz (awful crossover point and no mention of a sub to augment the total lack of bass those speakers have) and yet you feel the superiority to disrespect other people?
For reference, I maintain both Apple Lossless and 256kbps AAC libraries and my primary music listening room has $2000/pair Carver ribbon speakers with an active crossover system. I still don't feel the need to badmouth those that have 128kbps AAC libraries. It's neither as bad as you make it out to be to begin with and doesn't take into account the switch to 256kbps AAC (over 80% complete at the iTunes store) with the ability to upgrade previously purchased music.
Like the Blu-Ray 1080P arguments in general, I believe some people on here have self-esteem issues that they feel the need to put down others to make themselves feel superior.
Please. Give it a rest. This has nothing to do with the thread's topic. Thanks.
I use a Compaq Presario Desktop I got on closeout for $199. I share my PC Printer so I can print from Windows. I added iTunes and it's my AppleTV server. I also sync my iPhone to it.
Before I got the AppleTV, you were supposed to "easily" use Windows Media Sharing and get the content (non-iTunes anyways) on an XBox 360. Well 2 evenings (for a total of 8 hours) later of being unsuccessful, I went and got an AppleTV.
It took 5 minutes to set up and get it working...
The xbox360 is great, I can pull media and radio right from my pioneer reciever, media from any from the 4 computers and from the NAS.
Al 3 Xbox360s are networked and can pull media from any PC, receiver and NAS
So why are you an Apple user??? If you don't like the ecosystem which is the best, easiest, most fun, and most seamless out there, then you can get out!
As for the whole Apple TV argument, it is pretty subjective that you don't know anybody with one or that wants one but I do, however Apple's sales numbers obviously point to the accuracy of my statement over yours!
I find this a huge step forward for digital distribution, but I have the equipment where 720p isn't enough. Wow, Mac stuff not good enough.
Really though, with bandwidth caps and DVD only sound on downloads, its hard to fully take to digital downloads.
1080p DTS MA is just the best, and sadly its on disc only. I do love the convience of digital has (we have a bunch of DVDs ripped to a huge hard drive that we access via the PS3), but right now disc media for me.
Love digital copies on Blu-rays for the travel.
Really though, with bandwidth caps and DVD only sound on downloads, its hard to fully take to digital downloads.
1080p DTS MA is just the best, and sadly its on disc only. I do love the convience of digital has (we have a bunch of DVDs ripped to a huge hard drive that we access via the PS3), but right now disc media for me.
Love digital copies on Blu-rays for the travel.