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 TV Review by Walt Mossberg
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
technically you can have an external HD to be used for Apple TV but it will require
1. Airport Extreme N
2. movies from the external HD imported to iTunes (not the whole content but the list)
so $179 + $299 = $478.
Apple website has refurbished Mac Mini for $519.
we know what's a better deal here if you want more than 40gb of contents.
1. Airport Extreme N
2. movies from the external HD imported to iTunes (not the whole content but the list)
so $179 + $299 = $478.
Apple website has refurbished Mac Mini for $519.
we know what's a better deal here if you want more than 40gb of contents.
WHAT? it doesn't support 4k ? who cares about 720p and 1080i/1080p, I want 4k!!
the whole 720p/1080i argument is lame. As an HDTV consumer (52" LCD HDTV), 99% of what I watch on my tv is SD (standard definition). It looks like crap.
of the 10-12 HD (1080i) cable channels I get, only 3 or 4 consistently have 1080i HD content, the rest are 720p - which is very nice indeed.
The best picture is from the HD DVD player, which does 1080i and it looks amazing. Even 480p standard DVD's look incredible upscaled to 1080i.
Apple TV at 720p is a non issue, its sure better than 99% of what is available out there through cable or other means.
Apple TV will drive content, so expect 720p from iTunes very soon. That will be fantastic. And it only goes up from there.
And that whole remote thing? WTF are you doing using that remote? If you have a home theater system, you are an idiot if you have more than one remote that controls everything. your argument of 'it doesn't support changing the volume' is pretty significantly stupid. Now, yes, I WOULD buy a universal remote from Apple if they made one, but until then, Harmony does a sack kick to everyone else's.
the whole 720p/1080i argument is lame. As an HDTV consumer (52" LCD HDTV), 99% of what I watch on my tv is SD (standard definition). It looks like crap.
of the 10-12 HD (1080i) cable channels I get, only 3 or 4 consistently have 1080i HD content, the rest are 720p - which is very nice indeed.
The best picture is from the HD DVD player, which does 1080i and it looks amazing. Even 480p standard DVD's look incredible upscaled to 1080i.
Apple TV at 720p is a non issue, its sure better than 99% of what is available out there through cable or other means.
Apple TV will drive content, so expect 720p from iTunes very soon. That will be fantastic. And it only goes up from there.
And that whole remote thing? WTF are you doing using that remote? If you have a home theater system, you are an idiot if you have more than one remote that controls everything. your argument of 'it doesn't support changing the volume' is pretty significantly stupid. Now, yes, I WOULD buy a universal remote from Apple if they made one, but until then, Harmony does a sack kick to everyone else's.
No, I think that pretty much says it all. The fact AppleTV's size IS the biggest selling point is why it's hard to get excited about it. I'd rather the AppleTV be the size of a TiVo box, Sling, DVD, etc, and have more functionality, than to be microsized and fairly crippled as-is now. iTunes video content is pretty weak w/ titles, pricing, and resolution.
You do know that both 480i and 480P have a 720x480 resolution, right? If 480P is supported on the AppleTV, there is no reason what so ever that 480i can't be supported.
Ummmm, Component video is analog... Why would a set need a Digital to Analog Converter on an analog input?
Protected WiFi ?
What I would like to know is how (and if) you connect to protected wireless networks (WEP/WPA)... Is that even possible with the
TV ?
What I would like to know is how (and if) you connect to protected wireless networks (WEP/WPA)... Is that even possible with the
TV ?
Supporting interlaced is not that hard, notice that the AppleTV can output 1080i, which is interlaced. Why would there need to be progressive and interlaced versions of the content? I guess you are unaware how this works, I'll give an example:
DVD's are Interlaced. But they can have a Progressive output. This is done by only encoding the 24frames per second, and then using a repeat field flag. Same with 1080i movie channels, encoding of 24fps, but output of 1080i.
Setting my MacBook Pro to output 1080i works pretty much the same, all HD Trailers come through at 1080i with no loss of resolution, same with low resolution clips, they are scaled to 1080 then piped out the DVI port as interlaced. Quite simple, computers have been doing this for many many years.
Two versions of the content would not be needed for an interlaced output, all content will be either 24fps or 30fps, both of which perfectly convert to either 1080i60 or 480i60.
If you can watch 40GB of content (where a typical movie is 1~2GB) without leaving your chair then my hats off to you. I for one don't mind setting it up to only have stuff I want to see while leaving the rest on more safe storage (raid 5). You can set it up where the AppleTV only has stuff that you want / haven't seen yet and it will update as you watch things.
What I would like to know is how (and if) you connect to protected wireless networks (WEP/WPA)... Is that even possible with the
I would assume yes but don't know 100%. Their airtunes can so I would think the AppleTV could too.
I guess I'm the minority when I say I can't wait to get my hands on an tv....
1080p would be nice but one 2 hour movie would be about 5GB itself would it not (maybe even more...I'm just guesstimating right now)...
I do like the idea of a subscription based method where I could rent the movies rather than buy them...but I'll take what I can get
tv....1080p would be nice but one 2 hour movie would be about 5GB itself would it not (maybe even more...I'm just guesstimating right now)...
I do like the idea of a subscription based method where I could rent the movies rather than buy them...but I'll take what I can get
I am defining US as a "developing country" what comes to mobile networks there. I hope this clears my previous comment up.
What comes to the iPhone, why would I assume Apple to ship things they could have announced if existed? If they had a roadmap to launch iPhone with 3G radio in Europe right from the start, they would have announced it already. There is no point downplaying such an important feature.
Apple isn't a company to "give the customer what they want." Apple dictates what they think the customer "will want." I think it's an interesting concept that keeps all the products small/simple/easy to use.
I think the iPod would be far different if they implemented features that groups of people are complaining about. I purchased an TV because I dropped satellite and plan on purchasing the 4 shows i watched off "pay" channels on the TV. I now watch my local channels via over the air HD. If i miss a show, i can easily watch it on the TV.
IMHO this device has the possibility of a new iPod effect where many people don't see where this device can fit, but ends up being a very successful product.
I think the iPod would be far different if they implemented features that groups of people are complaining about. I purchased an
TV because I dropped satellite and plan on purchasing the 4 shows i watched off "pay" channels on the TV. I now watch my local channels via over the air HD. If i miss a show, i can easily watch it on the TV.IMHO this device has the possibility of a new iPod effect where many people don't see where this device can fit, but ends up being a very successful product.
Do you have a black-and-white TV, or did you make the leap to color technology? Did you wait until all content was color before making the switch?
Whether you use the term "obsolete", or "trailing edge", or whatever - Apple missed an opportunity here. Or, they're keeping their hands on your credit card with planned early obsolescence.
If the iTV supported 1080p, that wouldn't mean that it couldn't play 720p as well.
I guess it's basically for the same reason that I can't set the volume on my TV with the sat remote... I still need two remote (one for volume, one for channels).
Cheap remote...
A typical 480i movie is about 5-7 GB on DVD.
A lot depends on the size of your TV - highly compressed video looks better on a smaller screen (or at a larger distance from a large screen).
If you're happy with VHS quality, you can go to 1 GB/hour or so - but on a big screen you'll see the difference.
I guess I'm the minority when I say I can't wait to get my hands on an
1080p would be nice but one 2 hour movie would be about 5GB itself would it not (maybe even more...I'm just guesstimating right now)...
I do like the idea of a subscription based method where I could rent the movies rather than buy them...but I'll take what I can get
Errr... a 720p movie in decent quality is already 8GB when using H2.64. 1080p is tremendously bigger than that. As a reference, A standard DVD-movie is about 3,5GB, and that's crappy standard definition
I'm only two pages into reading this thread, so maybe it's already been said, but...
NO! For a "high end" type product I expect quality audio and quality video! This means I do NOT want the Apple TV attenuating my audio signal prior to the amplification stage!
Think about it: Your typical DVD player, CD player, Apple TV, whatever, sends a line-level audio signal to your TV or receiver. There is no concept of volume except how much your TV or receiver ends up amplifying this signal. Put another way, the signal going through the audio outputs is the "maximum" signal level. To have a "volume" control built into the Apple TV means it would only be able to turn the line-level signal down... which drops the signal-to-noise ratio. Then your TV or receiver ends up amplifying the weaker signal -- noise and all.
Also, now you have TWO places to change volume: the Apple TV device AND your TV or receiver. Imagine the confusion if your friend turns the volume down on your Apple TV without you knowing, and next thing you know you're turning up the TV volume straining to hear anything, and all you hear is 60 Hz hum noise, and you finally realize what's going on and turn up the volume on the Apple TV and YIKES! It's loud, and ...
No, they did the right thing.
That's completely worthless because there aren't any HDCP-compliant Mac graphics cards or displays yet.
Specs-wise, the iPod has fairly consistently been well behind the rest of the mp3 player industry since its inception. There's nothing I can think of off the top of my head that they did first (maybe 'better', but certainly not first). I'm not sure why we'd expect anything different from the Apple TV. It's how they do. As somebody else said, they define what they think the consumer will want. On a related note, then, isn't it long past time to get rid of that "Kentsfield mini tower" thing in your sig?
Not gonna happen.
I'm excited to see how this pans out.
I have a 1080i TV, and a TON of H264-encoded video pulled from my DVD library.
However, the rumored lack of multi-channel audio is the real deal-breaker for me. As folks on here start getting their hands on AppleTV, I'd love it if someone could verify/refute this rumor. Seriously, this is pretty much the only feature preventing me from getting one.
I have a 1080i TV, and a TON of H264-encoded video pulled from my DVD library.
However, the rumored lack of multi-channel audio is the real deal-breaker for me. As folks on here start getting their hands on AppleTV, I'd love it if someone could verify/refute this rumor. Seriously, this is pretty much the only feature preventing me from getting one.
You all have been brainwashed into thinking you MUST HAVE 1080p to watch anything good on TV. TV is just that...TV...Channels are SO limited at 1080p it not even funny. It's just a marketing ploy to get you to buy the next best thing and trash your old TV. Which could go another 15 years without replacing....
I mean come on people, how defined do you need Debbie doing Dallas, really...
I guess it's basically for the same reason that I can't set the volume on my TV with the sat remote... I still need two remote (one for volume, one for channels).
I guess most people buying an AppleTV have a $1000+ TV and a $400+ surround sound system already. You have one giant remote for the sound system anyway, which is good if it sports audio-compression (makes sound levels more even, i.e. reduces dynamics) so you can watch movies late at night without having to make it louder for dialoges and wake up your neighbor in action sequences.
Sorry, late to the discussion
I agree somewhat. My only disagreement with this is Kids movies. My kids manage to pretty much kill most DVD's through scratches, unknown sources of goo from their hands, etc.
With an
TV, I rip their DVD's and put them away. They can watch content at will instead of having to find the DVD, clean it (remember the goo?) and get it going. Saves me from having to buy the same DVD over and over (did I mention kids like to watch the same show a billion times?). I think they are marketing this to the iTunes segment of the market (duh!). They already have broadband (in most cases). They already have the Computer and iTunes. It doesn't matter if you have wireless since the thing already has an ethernet adapter built in. You can get you iTunes library to your stereo if you haven't already done so and not have to plug in your iPod to a special doc. Plus, if you buy more than one, you can stream to multiple TV's throughout the house.
720P output is a non-issue, as most have stated. If your a videophile (is that a real term?) you either have a media PC already or an upconverter if you own a high end 1080P set.
It has a lot of potential, we'll see what Apple Marketing has up their sleeve. It should be simple enough of a product that the general population understands what it does. Go ask the average Joe what a media PC does for you or for that matter, a slingbox. Most folks I know still don't know what a Tivo (or DVR) is. OK, I'm a closet Geek... But these same people do have Flat panel EDTV or HDTV's sitting in their living room.