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

Apple TV a 'Dud' says Fortune Mag

lol I really think Apple missed it on this one by not having DVR capabilities. I know, they want to sell content blah, blah, blah. I think they could've successfully done both.
 
It doesn't require a HDTV, just one with component inputs.

I love my AppleTV, fortunemag can go......you know!
 
Rather unfair comparing it to the Zune. Its not even brown.

I have always felt that the :apple:TV was too early for its intended audience as their is no HD content to download and most homes don't yet possess the necessary bandwidth. The lack of composite or s-video does seem rather petty (or arrogant). Repackaging a base Mac mini would have been a smoother move, IMHO.

I guess Apple sees :apple:TV as a kind of Airport Express for video and in that respect it is but without content it really lacks a purpose at the moment.
 
I also believe that Apple's arrogance got in the way of this product. It was too early to release it aswell. If MS is sending HDTV content to XBOXs, why isn't Apple-the power house of online media- doing the same?

The AppleTV is too over priced for what it does period, and Fortune Mag has it right on this one. Although the comparisons I didn't like.
 
The article does make some good points, and I feel appleTV would be a better product if it had some better/other function. It SHOULD be able to order stuff from itunes, and for $30 more they could have put in a a DVD-ROM drive so you could replace your DVD and CD player. Heck, make a $500 dollar one that can play blu-ray and you are set.

Ive wanted an AppleTV since it came out, and, although its pretty cheap compared ot some apple stuff, I just cant figure out what I would really do with one.

Wish someone would hack "Backrow" and install it on a Mac Mini with DVD playback.
 
I'm open to seeing what Apple's long term strategy is. I don't think the current device is hugely impressive, but I probably would not have bought a first generation iPod either.
 
mkrishnan said:
I'm open to seeing what Apple's long term strategy is. I don't think the current device is hugely impressive, but I probably would not have bought a first generation iPod either.
Click to expand...

I would agree, I don't really think :apple: tv is all that impressive either. I think this is a product that will advance, and as it does, we'll see it become more impressive.
 
It works for me

My wife is thrilled to look at photos on our TV. So much so that she actually watches them without my help. Its also made watching EyeTv programs a breeze.

I don't think its about HDTV. Its about getting access to your media where you want to watch it.
 
mkrishnan said:
I'm open to seeing what Apple's long term strategy is. I don't think the current device is hugely impressive, but I probably would not have bought a first generation iPod either.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much what I'm thinking too.

I think that Apple's setting themselves up early in a young market that they appear to want to compete in, just like they did with the iPod back in 2001.

I don't think many people here would have purchased a first-generation iPod, either (had they have been of purchasing age in 2001). It was considered too expensive by a lot of people, and lacked many of the features of other MP3 players on the market. Sound familiar? 🙂

If the 1G AppleTV's not for you, then it's not for you. But I wouldn't rule out that one of the next few releases will make you bite.
 
Exactly. Apple TV is the first generation in a new product category. Maybe it will succeed, maybe it won't -- but trying to predict which way it will go is a pretty foolish business. And the volume control. Forget the volume control. It doesn't need one, any more than a DVD player needs one.
 
I know it is costly at $300, but I actually looked at the :apple:TV not for video, but as an interface to my iTunes music library, primarily because of its TV interface. I have a Roku SoundBridge ($200) that works just fine for the purpose, except that the only way to navigate is by using the Roku's front panel display, which is too small to read from the couch. I wanted something that would let me browse my music collection on my TV screen, so I immediately thought of the :apple:TV. Unfortunately, it has no setting for a 4:3 aspect ratio, so my menus would look funny on my tv. Ultimately I chose to use the DLO Homedock Deluxe and my iPod Nano, mostly because of the (IMHO) stupid decision to only support widescreen (I do have component inputs, but not ws). Apple just lost a sale.
 
danny_w said:
Then why in blazes doesn't it have a 4:3 setting? That alone leaves me out for the next several years at least.
Click to expand...

Well, Apple of course has a history of being very forward-looking (e.g. removing the floppy drive from all their Macs). I'm sure they are expecting there to be a big trend away from 4:3 devices very soon. I wouldn't be surprised if they intentionally left off any 4:3 setting as a way to encourage the adoption of 16:9 devices (in the same vein as leaving the floppy drive off the computer to force the adoption of other technologies...)
 
notjustjay said:
Well, Apple of course has a history of being very forward-looking (e.g. removing the floppy drive from all their Macs). I'm sure they are expecting there to be a big trend away from 4:3 devices very soon. I wouldn't be surprised if they intentionally left off any 4:3 setting as a way to encourage the adoption of 16:9 devices (in the same vein as leaving the floppy drive off the computer to force the adoption of other technologies...)
Click to expand...
At least when they left off the floppy device you could go buy a usb floppy without breaking the bank. After just paying nearly $3000 for a projection tv in 1999, I have no intention of shelling out for a 16:9 device anytime soon. Although hdtv's are selling well now, it will take a long, long time to make much of a dent in the installed base as a whole.
 
I'm the only one against firmly for the non dvr inclusion. I think that was the right choice. But I do agree with him on the lack of volume control on the remote, and the lack of DVD drive, and direct download.

but then he likes the brown zune.

I like the way zune looks, but brown... don't know. I'd have to think that one over.
 
IJ Reilly said:
Exactly. Apple TV is the first generation in a new product category. Maybe it will succeed, maybe it won't -- but trying to predict which way it will go is a pretty foolish business. And the volume control. Forget the volume control. It doesn't need one, any more than a DVD player needs one.
Click to expand...

Absolutely True. Since day 1 with my setup I've not used the TV's internal speakers, instead opting to turn them off, allowing sound only to come from the receiver speakers. Yeah, it's another device that has to be powered, but it's totally worth it.

I don't mind the lack of DVR or DVD, though I would have liked direct download. I might pick one up someday in the future.
 
Maybe I'm one of the few but the Apple TV is just what I want.I've encoded a LOT of HD music videos and my 2 other Mac's libraries are right there in the living room for me.Fortune needs to get some new cookies.
 
Decisions Decisions

First consumers haven't had time to save up for a HDTV to go for a :apple: TV with yet. My Dad for one cann't conjure up a reason to buy an Ampro super res projector without: a. movies to watch in high def, or b. movies he wants to watch, which don't alway come out as summer blockbusters. High def movies/TV aren't the norm yet. The :apple: TV in my humble opinion is there simply to offer a future plan around an 800 dollar blue ray device, and to give those early birds something to do with it before it's truely needed.
Another problem for the middlers or laggers is it may be computer buying season soon, i.e. to get the new system for free and have something state of the art to use it on.
 
It's a beginning like the first iPod.

It is quite capable in its current form but the product will only improve.
 
I think the perfect device would be a combination of a Mac Mini with an :apple:tv. It would be a DVD player. It would be a DVR. And It would have all of the functions of the :apple:tv. In addition to that, you could use OS X apps such as mail and Safari. Add in a wireless keyboard and a pointer similar to a Wiimote to use as a mouse.

And keep the price tag around $500.

Nah. I'm just dreaming.
 
danny_w said:
...After just paying nearly $3000 for a projection tv in 1999, I have no intention of shelling out for a 16:9 device anytime soon.
Click to expand...

So what kind of ATSC tuner are you going to be running in 18 months? 😉

Okay, not quite 18 months: the cutoff date for the legacy analog NTSC broadcasts is February 17th, 2009...but that's now less than 20 months from today.


Although hdtv's are selling well now, it will take a long, long time to make much of a dent in the installed base as a whole.
Click to expand...

True, but that's because most homes today have more than just one TV set: there's the "hand me down" and 3rd & 4th TV sets stashed up in the kid's bedrooms that count towards that installed base number. Personally, I'd expect that there's going to be at least one ATSC-tuner equipped TV in 50% of US households within the next 18 months. That's all that's needed to afford a market for the :apple:TV

In counter-balance, a lot of people will continue to get their feeds from Cable (even where OTA ATSC is both a better signal and free), so the real question will be how Cable makes their transition.


-hh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back