Apple TV Details and Specs

[~Shard~]

I'm with you Shard!

This seems to be a weird year in the history of Apple. SJ and company really haven't uttered a peep about the computer products at all.

In addition, WWDC2006 introducedLeopard, with secret features to follow. Yet when MWSF2007 rolled around not even a screen shot in the presentation mentions Leopard or any secret features.

Now people are speculating that Leopard will appear soon but we really haven't officially even seen what is going to be included. It just hasn't been Apple-like at all.

Now the rumor mills are filled with talk on ipods, TV's, iPhones, etc. etc. Yet there hasn't been a significant change to the form factor of any of the Mac line since 2000.

There have only been processor and GPU card changes and that is about it!

Let's hope that April brings news and glimpses of the future of Apple computers. Apple device are fine and nice but personally I only really use and work with Apple computers. I like the product enough that I hope it just doesn't go away when Apple re-invents itself.

Well, they are "Apple Inc." now, no longer "Apple Computer Inc.", so perhaps that explains some of it. I have no issues with the iPod, Apple TV, iPhone, etc., but Apple, let's not forget about the Mac!

 

[Avatar74]

Cost most? Do you mean a license cost, or hardware cost? The Intel HDA chipset is already in place on all of the Apple Intel systems. I assume it's on the Apple TV's motherboard as well... I also assume there are licensing issues/costs for hardware/motherboard manufacturers to implement it, but perhaps that's the whole reason for the "play it through the Apple TV" solution is being marketed, e.g., it's potentially a multi-channel solution requiring only one license, vs. than Apple licensing Dolby Live for every computer it sells. But maybe I'm missing the some aspect of this... ?

Well, a couple things... I wasn't sure if the Apple HD audio chipset was in there.

However, there are still a few potential problems...

If the chipset itself does transcode AAC to AC-3, then Apple is already paying a license fee to Dolby indirectly through the wholesale cost of the Intel chipset. Intel pays the license directly in such a scenario.

If the chipset DOESN'T transcode AAC to AC-3, then somewhere, either in software or hardware, the AAC bitstream needs to be converted to AC-3 prior to optical transmission. This cannot be done without a licensed technology from Dolby Laboratories.

It doesn't matter if the HDA chipset can output multichannel AAC, LPCM or any other format outside of AC-3. If it doesn't actually output AC-3, a receiver's Dolby Digital decoder will not recognize it as AC-3.

Normally, AC-3 is transcoded from other sources offline, i.e. not in real-time. However, a few solutions like Dolby Digital Live exist whereby the multichannel bitstream source is converted to AC-3 on the fly. This is the solution AppleTV would require to send output Dolby Digital decoders in home audio equipment can recognize. But again, it's not something Apple or Intel can just invent because AC-3 is a proprietary format. If they invented their own solution, they'd have to license certain technologies/algorithms from Dolby... but the simpler thing would be to license Dolby Digital Live and let Dolby's R&D worry about quality control, fidelity criteria, etc. internal to the transcoder.

 

[Avatar74]

*if* Dolby Digital Live (DDL) is used to encode (convert) raw 6-channels of audio into AC-3 5.1 format.

Correct. Something has to transcode the AAC multichannel stream to AC-3 in order for a home receivers Dolby Digital decoder to recognize the format.

According to the Intel, its HDA chipset provides a built-in DDL encoder.

Intriguing... I didn't know this. If the HDA chipset is the same as is in the AppleTV, then the hardware is already in place and it's just a matter of Apple beginning to carry multichannel files and perhaps a software upgrade to the internal OS on AppleTV to allow the playback component to work with multichannel content and send it on to the HDA chipset for transcoding and output.

 

[Peace]

Correct. Something has to transcode the AAC multichannel stream to AC-3 in order for a home receivers Dolby Digital decoder to recognize the format.



Intriguing... I didn't know this. If the HDA chipset is the same as is in the AppleTV, then the hardware is already in place and it's just a matter of Apple beginning to carry multichannel files and perhaps a software upgrade to the internal OS on AppleTV to allow the playback component to work with multichannel content and send it on to the HDA chipset for transcoding and output.

BINGO!

Enter Leopard and a couple of new codecs

 

[Diatribe]

Digitalclips in the other thread posted this link.

VERY interesting speculation.

 

[50548]

Dude, you need to get over this "internet content rules" thinking. This "little box" as it stands today will NOT replace all those components ROFL. Seriously? No way, no how. Not until it has at LEAST 5.1 surround sound, 1080P and playback of non-Apple content. Sure, it's a cute little thing that may get "ooo's" and "owwww's" at your next little cocktail shin-dig, but for now it's a $299 paper weight.

Sorry, but what the hell is the worldwide proportion of people using the overhyped 1080p thingy, receiving broadcasts in 1080 or watching DVDs in 1080? CLOSE TO ZERO? Thanks.

As for content, it's about what iTunes ACCEPTS, not about what it may sell. Your whole music library is there, your whole photo library is in iPhoto, many DVDs you've bought may be just ripped in Handbrake in great quality.

As for playing a real DVD, there is no damn point in changing rooms to swap discs...your player is already there with the TV, period.

The AppleTV will have a bigger acceptance than you may think, even in non-US markets...simplicity is KEY. The rest of the market will keep selling complicated crap that only geeks and a handful of MR members buy...

 

[Peace]

If Apple doesn't do something about the ability to listen to 5.1 surround sound , which is a STANDARD for HDTV there will be an uproar.And I will join it.

 

[~Shard~]

Sorry, but what the hell is the worldwide proportion of people using the overhyped 1080p thingy, receiving broadcasts in 1080 or watching DVDs in 1080? CLOSE TO ZERO? Thanks.

Blu Ray. ... ... That's all that comes to mind in terms of native 1080 content...

I agree.

 

[Avatar74]

If Apple doesn't do something about the ability to listen to 5.1 surround sound , which is a STANDARD for HDTV there will be an uproar.And I will join it.

Let's be careful about that word "standard".

Standardized as A/52 by the ATSC, Dolby Digital (AC-3) is not the only perceptual coding schema capable of multichannel surround, therefore it's erroneous to say that "5.1 surround sound" is standard for HDTV. Dolby Digital is.

Furthermore, AC-3 is not strictly a surround format. It's a perceptual coding schema that supports up to six discrete channels of audio (L,C,R,SurL,SurR, and LFE). Also, it is not the only perceptual coding schema capable of multichannel surround, therefore it's erroneous to say that "5.1 surround sound" is standard for HDTV.

Also, ATSC is only one standards group for HDTV. Japan's ISDB HDTV uses the MPEG-Dolby-Fraunhofer co-developed AAC codec as its standard.

 

[Peace]

Let's be careful about that word "standard".

Standardized as A/52 by the ATSC, Dolby Digital (AC-3) is not the only perceptual coding schema capable of multichannel surround, therefore it's erroneous to say that "5.1 surround sound" is standard for HDTV. Dolby Digital is.

Furthermore, AC-3 is not strictly a surround format. It's a perceptual coding schema that supports up to six discrete channels of audio (L,C,R,SurL,SurR, and LFE). Also, it is not the only perceptual coding schema capable of multichannel surround, therefore it's erroneous to say that "5.1 surround sound" is standard for HDTV.

Also, ATSC is only one standards group for HDTV. Japan's ISDB HDTV uses the MPEG-Dolby-Fraunhofer co-developed AAC codec as its standard.

I'm not being careful.No desire to be.

Either it has HD.Which in the USA almost ALWAYS implies and includes dolby 5.1.Or it doesn't.

If it doesn't Apple should fix that FAST..

 

[7on]

whew, I'm glad I sprung for an Xbox media center instead (total cost = $80 for the 320GB hdd, the xbox was traded for a DS). Though I wished the box would play h264 files... converting my DVDs to xvid makes the files bout 2x as big as similar quality.

 

[drditty]

another angle to atv

I think that an angle that has not been examined is a household with multiple TVs. For me, aTV is ideal in the kitchen. This is where people congregate at any social setting, and aTV seems like the ideal way to show photos. As it has been for the past 8 years, I've had to drag people to the study. This should be an easy way to show off photos (? possibly home videos) and another easy way to bring music to the kitchen. I don't think that people necessarily are looking to jam a DVD, cable box, game console into one monitor.

 

[dejo]

Yet there hasn't been a significant change to the form factor of any of the Mac line since 2000.

Um, not even the iMac?

 

[SeaFox]

1. PICT is replaced by PDF on Mac OS X. I wouldn't expect Apple TV to open PDFs.

PDF isn't an image format, it's a way of packaging PostScript. All those images you see in PDFs? They're jpegs generally.

There's multiple configurations for Apple TV. Should Apple package together HDMI cables, component cables, analog audio cables, ethernet cables, and maybe even a DSL filter just for kicks?

How many DVD players come with cables for every connection they support?

DiVX sure is popular. Name me one commercial video service that sells you DivX files...

I don't lknow of any video service that sells mp4's that don't have Fairplay on them, yet the AppleTV supports those as well. How about AVIs? Many digital cameras output movies in AVI format.

 

[Rocketman]

simplicity is KEY. The rest of the market will keep selling complicated crap that only geeks and a handful of MR members buy...

Correct.

I think that an angle that has not been examined is a household with multiple TVs. For me, aTV is ideal in the kitchen. This is where people congregate at any social setting, and aTV seems like the ideal way to show photos.

Interesting lifestyle observation. One host iTunes computer is valid to 5 display devices with Apple TV's according to what I read.

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2007/03/appletvbriefing/index.php

"Each host (iTunes 7.1 or higher running on OS X or Windows) can sync with or stream to up to five different Apple TVs."

They're trying to sell as many TV's as DVD players have been sold

Rocketman

Kitchen
Bedroom
Boat
Pool
Front Yard

 

[Stella]

iLounge has a good article of why you don't need an aTV yet:

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/top-ten-reasons-you-dont-need-apple-tv-yet/

All in all, the reviews haven't been stellar.

BBC did a good review of it as well, which is well considered:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6478575.stm

 

[djpl]

No prob

Wow, I was about to be really shocked if anyone found my post offensive. But I guess you were referring to the other guy. I was just saying that for my money, I wouldn't buy Apple TV for the reason I listed, but not at all saying others shouldn't or would be foolish to buy it. People are so sensitive around here if you say anything negative about an Apple product. Jeez... Thanks Stella for the support

 

[digitalbiker]

Sorry, but what the hell is the worldwide proportion of people using the overhyped 1080p thingy, receiving broadcasts in 1080 or watching DVDs in 1080? CLOSE TO ZERO? Thanks.

Ah come on now! That is like back in the 1990's saying "Why the hell should we build these cell phone tower thingies, after all the worldwide proportion of people using overhyped cell phones instead of land lines is CLOSE TO ZERO."

People expect more from Apple, especially after all the hype. Really if the best they can support is 720p at 24 fps and no 5.1 Dolby surround, then they really shouldn't be advertising as HD. Lowest level spec for HD is 720p at 60 fps with at least 5.1 surround. Mid range is 1080i. High-end is 1080p.

Come this summer there will be a lot of 1080p content available and it will grow rapidly from there. Sony is going to have a download service supporting 1080p direct to Bravia HD TV's coming out in May. Directv this summer is adding 150 HD channels that support 1080p/1080i/720p with new 1080p receivers released later in the year.

I'm sure Apple TV will develop as well unless it never really gets a market hold because of limited capabilities and limited content.

 

[aristobrat]

BBC did a good review of it as well, which is well considered:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6478575.stm

IMO, that's reads more like a commentary than a review (where they actually used the product).

 

[3282872]

Sorry, but what the hell is the worldwide proportion of people using the overhyped 1080p thingy, receiving broadcasts in 1080 or watching DVDs in 1080? CLOSE TO ZERO? Thanks.

As for content, it's about what iTunes ACCEPTS, not about what it may sell. Your whole music library is there, your whole photo library is in iPhoto, many DVDs you've bought may be just ripped in Handbrake in great quality.

As for playing a real DVD, there is no damn point in changing rooms to swap discs...your player is already there with the TV, period.

The AppleTV will have a bigger acceptance than you may think, even in non-US markets...simplicity is KEY. The rest of the market will keep selling complicated crap that only geeks and a handful of MR members buy...

Read my previous responses to these comments. you contradict yourself. Simplicity isn't ADDING another piece of hardware onto an already heavily laden shelf of peripherals, but replacing them with multi-purpose devices. Why the hell would I want another piece of equipment on top of my DVD, DVR, AVR and surge top set next to MY 1080P Pioneer 50" (and yes, there ARE people that own 1080P systems that can afford them and know that the technology is still far too new to be mainstream but would be moronic to dismiss) that only plays sub-DVD quality movies? It doesn't do very much to warrant $299, and most Apple users I've spoken with agree that it's just Apple's way of pushing more iTunes sales. Add on DVD streaming, DVR capability, 5.1 surround sound and then you'll have my interest. The uptight comments about "why would I want to stream a live DVD from my player to my TV?" from some people are pure hypocrisy as why would you want to spend HUNDREDS OF HOURS RIPPING DVD'S TO HDD'S WHEN YOU COULD EASILY JUST STREAM IT LIVE FROM THE MAC TO A TV!!!! It DOES make sense, get over this ripping this, the average consumer isn't a tech geek who knows how to rip high quality DVD's to their Mac or PC or even has the TIME to do so.

I went into an Apple store here in NYC yesterday to check them out, and honestly most of the comments were NEGATIVE. People said EXACTLY the same points I made, "WHY ADD MORE". Even the Apple employees said it's been a flop so far as not many people have been buying them. It's just a waste until they make them more versatile. Certainly after version 3 or 4, when they add more functions to the unit such as streaming live programs/DVD's, DVR functionality, etc. it will revolutionize the internet entertainment world. Until then, most people don't want to spend their time ripping DVD's to their systems, adding more equipment to their home entertainment systems OR BUY CRAPPY QUALITY MOVIES ON iTUNES. Think REALISTICALLY.

 

[macinfojunkie]

Correct.



Interesting lifestyle observation. One host iTunes computer is valid to 5 display devices with Apple TV's according to what I read.

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2007/03/appletvbriefing/index.php

"Each host (iTunes 7.1 or higher running on OS X or Windows) can sync with or stream to up to five different Apple TVs."

They're trying to sell as many TV's as DVD players have been sold

Rocketman

Kitchen
Bedroom
Boat
Pool
Front Yard

that's one hell of a range you have on your wireless network rocketman. Or do you just have a very big pool?

 

[ftaok]

Target Customers

In reference to a lot of the posts here, positive and negative, I wanted to make this comment.

Apple has a specific target customer for the aTV. Based on the specs and how it's been advertised, the target customer is/has the following:

1. HDTV or EDTV owner

2. iTS customer

3. not a "cutting edge" or "early adopter" - based on the fact that it doesn't employ the latest technologies/formats (i.e. 1080p)

4. looking for simplicity - just look at the Apple Remote

Based on this, I have to rule myself out as a target customer based on point #3 and #4. But I'm a tech-geek and I have certain requirements that the aTV doesn't meet, yet. I also believe that there are many people that are like me, but the target customer group outnumbers us by a large margin. What evidence do I have to support this ... well none, but Apple's track record of late is favorable and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

In summary, the aTV may not be the do-all device that I (and others) want, but it's probably equipped and priced at the right level for the target customer. We'll have to wait and see if Apple's decision makers earned their pay for this one.

ft

 

[aristobrat]

Even the Apple employees said it's been a flop so far as not many people have been buying them.

Are you kidding? Apple TVs have been in stores for barely 24 hours. It's way too early, even for employees, to call it a flop.

 

[macinfojunkie]

But the paradigm itself is a shift from the way that most people are currently viewing movies and TV on their TV sets. So to that extent, they are aiming at early adopters. Not all early adoption is about a new technology. Sometimes it just involves using something a different way.

I agree ATV is aimed at the mainstream, but in the current form it is the more eager of the mainstream. It is certainly not a high end device which most technological early adopters usually go for.

For those who want a true DVD ripper that will stream HD, then there are already solutionson the market. Problem is they cost $1000s - That's why people are bitching about ATV - they were expecting high end systems for peanuts.

Can't wait to receive mine though. Currently it is in Amsterdam. Hope the truck driver does not get too distracted on the way over to the UK

 

[ftaok]

Sorry, but what the hell is the worldwide proportion of people using the overhyped 1080p thingy, receiving broadcasts in 1080 or watching DVDs in 1080? CLOSE TO ZERO? Thanks.

I'm going to take exception to this statement. It's probably true that the worldwide penetration rate of 1080p TVs is very little when you consider all of the TVs in the world, including 3rd world nations, etc. However, Apple isn't trying to sell to those people. They are trying to sell to people with HDTVs (or EDTVs). That drops the number of potential customers by a lot.

Then you have to figure that many newer HDTVs are going 1080p. You can debate whether 1080p is any better than 720p, but it's a losing arguement. In 2 years, the only non-1080p TVs you will be able to buy would be the low end, small TVs. More and more TVs are going 1080p. It's the new buzz word and it's what today's customers want.

By then, I would expect the aTV to be able to output 1080p and be able to run 1080p material. It's going to happen, whether we like it or not.

ft