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

Apple TV compatibility issues

G

Gosh

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Aug 14, 2006
349
0
Thought I would start this by asking if anyone understands the advertised TV requirements (I'm not too up on these)?

I have a 16:9 widescreen with component conection but no idea if any of the above "formats" (of some kind) apply.

I'll be the stupid one who asks the question!:eek:
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    21 KB · Views: 947
It is displayed on a widescreen TV and 99% of all HDTV's are widescreen as well, the numbers are the number of lines that the TV can display the more lines the better, the i is for an interlaced so it has 1080 interlaced lines (this means that in each pass the tv displays alternating lines) the 720p the p is progressive, 720 lines that are displayed all at once. The p is better because there is less chance of flicker and it provides an overall smoother picture.
 
It would be easier if you knew the model number of the TV you have.

Chances are that if it is 16:9 and has component, then it'll work. I would say that 99.99% of TV's that fit the description that you provided will work.

ft
 
ftaok said:
It would be easier if you knew the model number of the TV you have.

Chances are that if it is 16:9 and has component, then it'll work. I would say that 99.99% of TV's that fit the description that you provided will work.

ft
Click to expand...

Sorry about that it's a Toshiba 28ZT29B analogue/digital. It has progressive scan - I can't find anywhere in the spec it indicates the number of line!?!
 
Gosh said:
Sorry about that it's a Toshiba 28ZT29B analogue/digital. It has progressive scan - I can't find anywhere in the spec it indicates the number of line!?!
Click to expand...

I tried to do some googling. I don't think this is a high-definition TV (HDTV). If it has progressive scan, that means it does 480P and 576P (the highest non-HD resolutions). It doesn't appear to be capable of the high definition formats the Apple device supports (720P and 1080I).
 
mkrishnan said:
I tried to do some googling. I don't think this is a high-definition TV (HDTV). If it has progressive scan, that means it does 480P and 576P (the highest non-HD resolutions). It doesn't appear to be capable of the high definition formats the Apple device supports (720P and 1080I).
Click to expand...
No, but it would probably work. iTunes doesn't sell any programing above 480 yet anyway. (Hopefully that will change soon.) It'll be interesting to see what people are actually using the ATV device for. Should be nice for streaming music to your home theatre as well as showing slide shows of your photos on a big screen. Whether or not that will be popular remains to be seen. One might be better off just buying an iPod for those purposes.
 
Another compatibility question

I'm sure no one has the definite answer to this yet (until the it's out in the market), but does the TV absolutely have to be widescreen? I know the system requirements state that a widescreen TV was necessary, but what would stop you from trying this out on a standard 4:3 TV that has component video inputs? Would it try to stretch the image to fit? Would it add black bars to the top and bottom? Would it trim the sides off? Or would it simply not work?

IMO, there's still no really good reason to get a new HDTV until there is more Hi-Def programming available, or until Blu-ray player prices drop significantly.
 
ky0t3 said:
IMO, there's still no really good reason to get a new HDTV until there is more Hi-Def programming available, or until Blu-ray player prices drop significantly.
Click to expand...
Good point. I bought a HDTV but since my cable company doesn't offer much in HD and I don't live in a city where I can get over the air broadcasts, it's frustrating. It'll be interesting to see just who uses the aTV and how, when it becomes available.
 
iDave said:
Good point. I bought a HDTV but since my cable company doesn't offer much in HD and I don't live in a city where I can get over the air broadcasts, it's frustrating. It'll be interesting to see just who uses the aTV and how, when it becomes available.
Click to expand...

Where do you live that you can't get OTA? I can see mountains becoming an issue, but have you tried to hook an antenna up to your HDTV? You might be pleasantly surprised at what you can receive.

Case in point. I get lousy analog reception in my house. I'm about 30 minutes outside of Philly. I hooked up a cheapo amplified antenna I bought years ago to my new TV that has ATSC. Just for kicks.

Anyways, I got all of the local broadcasts in digital, plus they were absolutely crystal clear. With analog, the broadcasts were unwatchable. With digital, the picture was as good as the Cable HD. The reason is that with digital, either you get a crystal clear picture or you get nothing. No in between.

So if you have an old antenna (I'm guessing that a powered one would be better) lying around, you might want to plug it in to see what you get.

Of course, if the town you live in doesn't have anyone nearby broadcasting HD, then it won't work. But I thought that pretty much everyone these days are broadcasting digital, per the FCC's direction.

ft
 
ftaok said:
Where do you live that you can't get OTA? I can see mountains becoming an issue, but have you tried to hook an antenna up to your HDTV? You might be pleasantly surprised at what you can receive.

ft
Click to expand...
I appreciate the thought but I live in the mountains. Denver is the nearest city that broadcasts TV. It's 100 miles away on the other side of the Continental Divide. Cable and DirecTV are my only options. Neither is ideal for HD but I hope they'll get better.
 
you have to live very far away from a tv market to not get at least SOME digital signals OTA.

If you can see any of the major networks on an analog TV with a pair of rabbit ears or a roof-mounted antenna, then in 95% of the cases, you'll get at least that many channels in digital (HD when running national network stuff that is HD). You might need a powered antenna, but they're pretty cheap.
 
that's too bad, man.

why is dishnetwork out of the question?

i've been much happier with them than I was with either cable or directv.

their new hddvr is better than the new tivo's.
 
ky0t3 said:
I'm sure no one has the definite answer to this yet (until the it's out in the market), but does the TV absolutely have to be widescreen? I know the system requirements state that a widescreen TV was necessary, but what would stop you from trying this out on a standard 4:3 TV that has component video inputs? Would it try to stretch the image to fit? Would it add black bars to the top and bottom? Would it trim the sides off? Or would it simply not work?

IMO, there's still no really good reason to get a new HDTV until there is more Hi-Def programming available, or until Blu-ray player prices drop significantly.
Click to expand...

I was wondering this exact same thing. I've got a Panasonic from about 4 or 5 years back that is _not_ progressive, but has one component input (these days I juggle it a lot). It's 4:3 aspect ratio. I really want to get the Apple tv as it would work perfectly for me in my particular set up, but Apple doesn't seem to want to make it clear whether or not us normal folk who don't own fancy, new widescreen HD TVs will be able to use the Apple tv as well.
 
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