Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
h00ligan said:
i dont' want to burst your bubble, but joe everyman doesn't own a mac, he owns a dell he bought fot $499 on teh intarweb super special.

apple sells things to gadgeteers and "artists"

aside from the ipod - they don't sell anything in quantity - and this isn't going to be an exception.

Joe Everyman wants to own a Mac and is on their way in the near future to buy one. Cuz they ain't just for gadgeteers and "artists" any more. That old adage is going away faster than you think.
And as stated this little box isn't OS dependent so even if Joe Everyman doesn't have a Mac now he can use iTunes for Windopes in the meantime until he wakes up one day with Apple on the brain and finds himself at the Apple store buying a Mac.

p.s. I think it was a very wise move for ole Steve to be so un-Apple like and give the world a preview into this particular product.
 
Name Change Needed?

In the UK ITV (Independent Television) is the group name for all regional broadcasting on the third analogue channel, and is also the name of further digital channels (ITV2, ITV3). I doubt therefore iTV will be permissible here because it has been a name associated with television for decades.

It will be interesting to see what this machine actually does though and whether it has the convenience and useability of the iPod, which needs to happen if it is going to succeed at the same level.
 
I'm not sure what the fuss or confusion is, this is just a box that allows you to stream media from you Mac to yout TV and thats it. As it uses FrontRow I assume iTunes and iPhoto will have to be open on your host Mac and set to allow access.

I've been doing this for years with a chipped xbox which is far more flexible or you can buy a cheap network DVD player, this product is nothing new.
 
mkrishnan said:
So it seems from the coverage that the device has no optical drive, and no internal mass storage? Is that correct? And also that it is not itself a DVR? Don't get me wrong -- I'm reserving judgment. I just want to understand at this point. It sounds as if the basic purpose of the device is to draw high quality AV off a computer and onto a home entertainment system, sort of as the Roku SoundBridge did for the iPod's audio, but in a very Apple sort of way? In other words, it follows the computer-centric sort of model where a desktop or notebook Mac on the network is the "server"?

Xcellent point.

I hope in the final configuration it has a DVD/CD player so I can get rid of any xtra components.

I love that it has HDMI, cox in my area does not support it and I can finally hook something up to the port on my plasma.

I like that they made it a hardware solution, just go to the store buy it and drop it among your current media center stuff. Even my folks should be able to do this...:)
 
i am definately interested in this.

i already have 3 airport xpress' streaming my music, and home theaters systems in 3 rooms at home. this is just another piece of the puzzle in eliminating wires throughout the home.

i am a tad nervous as steve mentioned dolby surround for the itunes store movies, and not 5.1 (or better). I am a pretty serious audiophile, and my main theater setup is 7.1, the last thing i want to do is start to consolidate/replace my dvd collection (1000+) onto one of my macs with standard dolby surround. Until 5.1 digital is offered, i dont see myself downloading too many movies. However, just for the convienience of browsing my libraries and streaming slideshows alone make the iTV worth the money. Throw in 5.1 and Im sold. I would definately buy more than one, and know many others that would do so as well.

it will be interesting to see if there will be any kind of "zone" capability. Say I have my downloaded movies on my quad in the office (largest HD capacity-will probably hold majority of my media), and want to watch Cars in the theater, but the girlfriend wants to catch up on Lost in the bedroom.... both are stored on one mac, would it even be possible to stream seperate files to different iTVs? If that feature IS in fact possible, and apple incorperates it, I see this device as revolutionizing home entertainment. Imagine being able to pick up multiple boxes, and basically have a central server providing individual entertainment to various rooms of the house. Kids listening to their iTunes music in their rooms, while mom watches Desperate Housewives in the bedroom, and dad catches up on the NFL season pass on the couch. Sure, there are ways to do this now, but the equipment, install and knowledge to achieve it makes it out of reach for many. After the cost of the computer (which most people already have obviously) and a tv/stereo setup for each room, 300 bucks to create a total interactive solutions is a STEAL.

alot of whining is going on already about this product, no dvr, no drive, no storage.... well thats the point. to add all those things, you arent gonna fit it in a slick box like that, not to mention that most of the people interested in this device, already have a stereo/theater setup with DVD players (how many people do YOU know that DONT own a dvd player? - i have 9 at home and 2 in the car), and you surely arent going to get all those things for 3 bills.

overall, todays event couldnt have been better.... unless they would have released the iPhone so i can finally throw my RAZR off a building.
 
A key issue...

jk8311 said:
So now Apple can't be grouped in the Amazon category and people will start buying movies with Apple's iTunes serivce since they know that within 3-4 months they'll have an end-to-end solution with the "iTV". Why get stuck with the Amazon service if you can't get it to the TV...

I think this is a key issue.... IMO Apple also need to take on board the feedback about the product today and will surely make modifications prior to release. From what I have read there are a number of very relevant issues already out there.
 
steve wanted to assure us that buying all this different media, and moving it all to a computer isnt all for not. it was un-apple, but necessary. too many people would have complained that having a ton of movies in your office, and not in your living room is a waste of time and money.

i mean jeez, they announced a pretty cool device months before its available, and people are STILL complaining. typical.


if they released itunes, and no ipod, who the hell would have bought music online? they would just buy the disc. the needed to go together, as this new device needs to go with the movie store.

apple has single handedly revolutionized the way we aquire our music, then tv shows (as the numbers obviously show), and now they are getting ready to do it for movies. they wont kill physical DVDs with it, much as i download some music, and others i purchase an actual disc at the store, they will just add another nice way to get it.

there are times when i am near a store and want to browse around and pick up a cd. but then if i am getting ready to travel, and late at night decide i want a few new albums, i hop on the ITMS and download them. Each method has its place and time.
 
I may be wrong, but...

Please correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't Apple's Q4 wrapping up Sept 30th 2006? If this is correct then iTV is due as early as Oct 2006 in Q1 2007. soon enough to make a big splash in X-mas season.

If this is correct then the 2-3 week advance notice is likely designed to get us all talking about what features we want in this thing today... in it's first incarnation.

I personally wanted DVR functionality. Which may be possible with the USB port. maybe you can connect an external HD or external DVD Burner. Neither are very pricey anymore. Either should become available in an Apple designed box so they look nice next to or on top of iTV.

my 3 cents

Rich
 
I wonder if this means the death of the headless mac pro mini dream.

I need a Mac near my TV because I only have one aerial point. It now seems that I need to use a mini with its poor graphics card and small HDD, or to somehow fit and imac near my TV. Neither are good options for me.

I do wonder what new stuff Apple will bring out in the next quarter besides the shuffle.
 
richat said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't Apple's Q4 wrapping up Sept 30th 2006? If this is correct then iTV is due as early as Oct 2006 in Q1 2007. soon enough to make a big splash in X-mas season...
Yes, that's Apple's fiscal quarters, but I watched the QT of the event and I'm pretty sure Steve specifically said "calendar Q1 of 2007".
 
mkrishnan said:
So it seems from the coverage that the device has no optical drive, and no internal mass storage? Is that correct? And also that it is not itself a DVR? Don't get me wrong -- I'm reserving judgment. I just want to understand at this point. It sounds as if the basic purpose of the device is to draw high quality AV off a computer and onto a home entertainment system, sort of as the Roku SoundBridge did for the iPod's audio, but in a very Apple sort of way? In other words, it follows the computer-centric sort of model where a desktop or notebook Mac on the network is the "server"?

iTV is basically a better looking version and even higher priced version of this:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...ender&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1091101680429
 
Macrumors said:


In a rare move, Apple provided a sneak peak of the long rumored Apple media center.


Don't be fooled by Apple showing an un-released product. This is no different than them showing the new Shuffle and saying it will ship in Oct. they completely just released the iTV, but since it wont ship till Q1 07, they're saying it's a secret thing they're working on since the release date could be up to six months away.
 
beaster said:
But that's just it - where is the HD content going to come from? Basically 3 choices that can be done LEGALLY from a Mac by joe-average Mac owner, without going through some messy analog loophole: 1) streaming directly off a Blu-ray disc (can't legally rip a copy-protected disc to the hard drive). 2) iTMS download, assuming they start selling HD versions. 3) User-shot home video on an HD camera. Did I miss any?

1) might become a reality when Blu-ray drives become a reasonably-priced add-on to Macs, maybe sometime next year? But then you're still renting/buying Blu-ray media from someone other than Apple (i.e. Netflix). Plus by the time you spend $299 on the iTV and however much more for a Blu-ray drive for your Mac, you could have bought a standalone player.

2) would require massive storage capacity on the Mac for even a modest movie library, or burnable Blu-ray drives/media (not cheap), plus mega-bandwidth or slick compression improvements. Possible, but still have the storage problem (after all, they're selling movies, not renting them).

3) A non-issue until HD video cameras come down in price.

I really like the overall idea, but w/out HD content, I'm waiting.

-Sean

All good points. I think that it's capability to show HD content is great. I'd much rather have it $299 and have longevity than lower priced and only have s-video out.

I think Panasonic and Sony's AVCHD cameras will bring HD to the masses very soon and modestly price.

The bump to 640x480 says to me that 720p content is just around the corner from iTunes.

I also think that iTV is just as much a part of the "iLife thinking" as anything, which is to create the content yourself (i.e the Italy slideshow) and beam to your TV.

Considering the price of the Roku Soundbridge, I still think this thing is a deal. It strikes me as the best method of moving media from your personal computer to your living room with little effort and little cost.
 
I know I'm going to sound like a complete idiot here...but what does this device do that an S-Video cable can't do?

If I want to watch a few movies that I've created on my Powerbook, I pick up the PB put it next to the TV and use the cables to join them together.

If it is just a case of higher quality and no wires, I'm obviously not the target audience for this product.
 
kerpow said:
I know I'm going to sound like a complete idiot here...but what does this device do that an S-Video cable can't do?

If I want to watch a few movies that I've created on my Powerbook, I pick up the PB put it next to the TV and use the cables to join them together.

Well, obviously you don't have to move your computer around anymore, just to watch some movies. Neither do you have to connect and reconnect cables all the time. In short: A lot less hassle. And the image-quality should also be better.
 
Evangelion said:
Well, obviously you don't have to move your computer around anymore, just to watch some movies. Neither do you have to connect and reconnect cables all the time. In short: A lot less hassle. And the image-quality should also be better.

It will appeal to others more than me. Desktop users obviously.

It's safe to say that Apple make other products that are more deserving of my hard earned $$$
 
Things I can tell you from hands on with the "iTV" box. Well the Apple reps weren't supposed to let us into the resolution settings we managed to get in.

HDMI outputs 1080p, which means this box released around the same time as leopard will offer 1080p out. This is excellent. It means Itunes hopefully by january will offer some HDTV content.

I used the itunes movie store today with my Macbook Pro. I bought Pirates of the Caribbean (it was widescreen), I simply plugged into my DVI-HDMI and I can drive my 60" Sony LCoS TV at 1080p with the macbook. The best part is I just closed the lid on the macbook pro and set it on top (closed) on my Comcast DVR. It works pretty much the same as the "iTV", I just launched frontrow, satback and used my remote.

So until then everybody if you have a macbook pro you can use it EXACTLY the same as the "iTV". Works fantastic, especially when I hook the optical audio out from the macbook to my surround system.

Also another consideration of "iTV" is that it will probably offer 802.11/a/b/g/ AND "n"

N will ensure better quality as newer macs come out.

But don't worry. 802.11g/a are more than capable of streaming HD 1080p content as long as your wireless network gets decent signal. I've done this with an XBOX306, as well as streaming with my Macbook Pro.

And with h.264 you can do HDTV in 2-3mbs instead of the full 8mbs of blu-ray.


PS. The 640x480 (which it obviously was larger because of widescreen movie i watched) looked great on my 1080p HDTV 60". It's really not much different than watching a DVD (720x???) on an HDTV.

So the new resolution with the h.264 codec makes it just like watching a DVD quality movie on your HDTV.

Macbook Pro users with HDTV go ahead and enjoy your "iTV" now...
 
kerpow said:
It will appeal to others more than me. Desktop users obviously.

Even with laptops, moving the machine around all the time, and reconnecting the cables would get pretty old pretty fast.
 
kerpow said:
I know I'm going to sound like a complete idiot here...but what does this device do that an S-Video cable can't do?

If I want to watch a few movies that I've created on my Powerbook, I pick up the PB put it next to the TV and use the cables to join them together.

If it is just a case of higher quality and no wires, I'm obviously not the target audience for this product.


Display on an HD TV with no loss of quality?
 
beaster said:
But that's just it - where is the HD content going to come from? Basically 3 choices that can be done LEGALLY from a Mac by joe-average Mac owner, without going through some messy analog loophole: 1) streaming directly off a Blu-ray disc (can't legally rip a copy-protected disc to the hard drive). 2) iTMS download, assuming they start selling HD versions. 3) User-shot home video on an HD camera. Did I miss any?

You missed one - iPhoto slideshows in pure HD would be be beautiful.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.