what?
I have a Sony UR and it's a piece of ****!
I heard the Harmony is cool. But I would not mind have something well designed and easy to use ala Apple style.
So I would say bring it on and sell it separately from AppleTV if it's that expensive!
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
what?
I have a Sony UR and it's a piece of ****!
I heard the Harmony is cool. But I would not mind have something well designed and easy to use ala Apple style.
So I would say bring it on and sell it separately from AppleTV if it's that expensive!
...I forgot where I heard it, but on standard def, it looks good, but with high def, you can see distortions in makeup and different problems w/ the human body (moles, zits, veins, etc.). Kinda bad for porn.
Have you ever noticed these problems in a movie theater? Because film is better than HD and has been that way for about a century.
So, now it's Apple's responsibility to solve the problem of HDTVs having an insufficient number of inputs for all the video gadgets we can buy? When Apple figures out how to get the TV manufacturers to address that problem, then they can move onto peace in the Middle East, global warming, and flatulence.
Absolutely.
I have a 55" 1080i Mitsubishi TV. Very nice television for its day, but it is (unfortunately) very much a 1st or 2nd-gen HD product. HDMI didn't publicly exist at the time this TV was built. It has one, that's right, ONE component input that supports HD. The other 3 component inputs are capped at 480p. A travesty by today's standards. However, considering that the only HD content available at the time the set was purchased was digital cable, the one lone HD input makes a bit more sense.
This is not Apple's problem, to be sure. However, it is discouraging that I have to go spend another $100 on a component-video switchbox so I can connect more HD devices to my set. I'd like to see AppleTV evolve into a slightly more robust convergence device so I can get rid of all the other junk I have plugged into my set, and just have the gleaming Apple box on my TV.
I totally Agree! I'm kinda sick of hearing people rip this product apart. The Semis have hardly left the warehouses and people are just bashing it!
Everyone heard "
TV" and thought. WOW THIS DEVICE IS GOING TO BE WHATEVER I WANT IT TO BE.NO its not. This device is designed to watch content from your ITUNES library (or ITMS) on your TV/Stereo. Thats it.
Its not a PVR, its not a media center... or SlingBox, or whatever you decided it should be without even reading the documents on apple.com before making judgments..
I think this will be a great product, i'm looking forward to buying it, and i'm sure i'll love it.
Although... I may wait until they start offering movies/TV show downloads in Canada.
Rant Over.
Fair enough but how about this scenario:
customer: The AppleTV looks pretty nice
apple-sales: It sure does! Oh, and it connects right up to your HDTV!
customer: Gee... really... How? I have 1 cable-box, 1 dvd player and my kids xbox 360! I've exhausted the 2 HDMI and 1 Component inputs* that are available on my $1K + HDTV (not an outrageous number of devices for someone to have and in fact I'd say most people with HDTVs have that many if not more boxes) so how exactly would I even be in a position to use this box?
Totally bone headed move and because of it I fear the AppleTV may be doomed.
Dave
So why is this different from HD Tivos, Blu-ray DVD players etc competing for inputs? Many of us have access to 5 or six HDMI / component inputs on a pre-pro and never send more than a single cbale to the TV or projector?
So what do you suggest they do? Include a non-HD or even decent composite video output? Then you'd be complaining that it didn't sent 1080P.
Why your absence of understanding about this dooms the device is beyond me.
There are 10 great universal remote companies in existence. It would be stupid for Apple to compete in this market - sold separately or not.
While I was a big proponent of Apple doing something like this... they really screwed up by not including a function that would have allowed me to RETIRE ONE OF MY EXISTING DEVICES with the easiest being the upscaling DVD player I have connected now...
Totally bone headed move and because of it I fear the AppleTV may be doomed.
Dave
its not up to apple to manage your devices or how many inputs you have plugged into your tv.
anyway, anyone that has spent many thousands upon thousands on an HDTV, surround sound, and multiple components without a PROPER switch and a PROPER remote to guide all of them is an idiot. Less than $200 covers your scenarios with both a good remote and switch - and that is a minor price compared to the rest of the equipment but I might say a VERY important part of your setup.
i have a 720p & 1080p sets at home.
To be honest i dont see a diffrence.
The diffrence is the 1080p is a sony xbr3 47" and the 720p is a phillips ambilight 37".
Why are people so into 1080p? i dont know they actually fell or the whole
FULL HD crap. If anything 720p is the most popular format now because 80p sets are still expensive-720p is becoming if not a standard on t.v.s so while i think apple TV IS A PIECE OF S*** IS SMART ON APPLES PART TO GO after 720p sets because thats what is looking around millionsw of homes.
To be honest i dont see a diffrence.
The diffrence is the 1080p is a sony xbr3 47" and the 720p is a phillips ambilight 37".
Why are people so into 1080p? i dont know they actually fell or the whole
FULL HD crap. If anything 720p is the most popular format now because 80p sets are still expensive-720p is becoming if not a standard on t.v.s so while i think apple TV IS A PIECE OF S*** IS SMART ON APPLES PART TO GO after 720p sets because thats what is looking around millionsw of homes.
Well I wasn't a reader of these forums back then, but I can only imagine.
So how about we give Steve Jobs some time, and in a few REVs, i'm sure this device will simply ROCK!
Don't be a goof!
What Apple NEEDED TO DO was make it so a user could REPLACE AN EXISTING DEVICE that was already using one of those valuable and it would seem limited connections.
How about throwing a dvd player in the freakin thing so I could replace my up-converting DVD player (problem solved) and for an 'upgraded unit for a few extra bucks' they could throw in a DVD-R so people could then replace any existing DVD recorder.
Why don't you list for me home many successful devices that require a quality connection to your HDTV. HD/BR etc DVD Player/recorder, Cable Box or TiVO & A game system.
Thats pretty much it - DVD, CABLE & GAME so TV makers have in most cases built TVs with 3 or 4 HD inputs (at the most)...
Now Apple rolls out a new box that can't in any way replace the functionality of any of the 'top 3 device categories' and yet they expect for it to be a success???
Apple shoulda thought this one out just a wee bit more...
Dave
That's just plain silly, i think the previous poster was referring to the fact that news anchors are bitching cause now we know how ugly they actually, are. monica Kaufman in Atlanta could scare the rats off of a garbage barge.
Did you forget that AppleTV primarily does not support MPEG-2 content which is one of the few codecs that supports interlaced video signals? For MPEG-4, including H.264 variant, content is either encoded as progressive or interlaced... not both.
In the case of MPEG-2 for DVD content, the MPEG-2 bitstreams under NTSC spec are encoded as interlaced, lower-field first. The process of converting 29.97fps interlaced back to 24fps progressive is done by hardware in a process called reverse pulldown or reverse telecine.
But in the case of computer-based content this is a different animal entirely because you're not implementing a decoder that knows how to do reverse telecine. You could, in principle, but the current specs for H.264 decoders don't include reverse telecine algorithms to the best of my knowledge.
1080i/60 to 1080p/30 is a different matter entirely because one has exactly double the fields of the other. No reverse 3:2 pulldown is needed.... merely a collimation of odd and even fields back into a 30fps progressive bitstream. Although 1080i/60 to 1080p/24 does require a reverse pulldown process.
Again I'm talking about signals that are transmitted digitally where there are some discrete requirements in the transmission of the digital signal. If you're talking about feeding video from an iPod as one user did, note that S-Video is analog signal output... different beast.
Don't be a goof!
What Apple NEEDED TO DO was make it so a user could REPLACE AN EXISTING DEVICE that was already using one of those valuable and it would seem limited connections.
How about throwing a dvd player in the freakin thing so I could replace my up-converting DVD player (problem solved) and for an 'upgraded unit for a few extra bucks' they could throw in a DVD-R so people could then replace any existing DVD recorder.
Why don't you list for me home many successful devices that require a quality connection to your HDTV. HD/BR etc DVD Player/recorder, Cable Box or TiVO & A game system.
Thats pretty much it - DVD, CABLE & GAME so TV makers have in most cases built TVs with 3 or 4 HD inputs (at the most)...
Now Apple rolls out a new box that can't in any way replace the functionality of any of the 'top 3 device categories' and yet they expect for it to be a success???
Apple shoulda thought this one out just a wee bit more...
Dave
Not bad points. But I wonder if you wouldn't be in the crowd whining " I already have a DVD player" or now it's too expensive.
I have 12 HDMI / component inputs and don't care.
Yep, that pretty much sums it up for me, too. I was planning to be first on my block with one of these puppies, but without the ability to stream those formats natively from my computer, there's no value to me.
[Closes wallet]
i would have loved to have seen slingbox like functionality
I agree wholeheartedly. The slingbox is one of the greatest inventions out there today. If you haven't seen one, you gotta get it.
I bought a sling box pro (with it's multiple inputs) thinking I MAY be able to (later) hook up an APPLE TV. No more lugging around a laptop or portable DVD player. Then all we need is a slingbox app that works in my iPHONE and I am set.
Has anybody had any success using a universal remote with their Mac infrared sensor? Accessing Frontrow... etc. I'd like to know. If you have, this would be the way to go.
Looks like a great product to me. And all of the neg voters really should find another website and/or computer platform.
I couldn't have said it better myself; these are my sentiments EXACTLY.
For me, the
TV will transform my HT setup into an easy-to-navigate home jukebox. When I have parties, I will be able to let my guests select the music without worrying that someone might spill their drink on my iBook. I'm reallly excited about this product!It does support 1080p. However, the current software does not (which makes sense since there isn't a hell of alot 1080p content available).
Do you actually have a TV that supports 1080P, if so what do you watch on it?
I find the discussion of Apple TV needing to support 1080P out of the box ridiculous, escpicially since 1080P is just starting to creap into the mainstream (it will happen, but it's taking time).
There's nothing wrong with 720P (except, again for the lack of content!), it's better than 1080i.
Which is why they MUST figure out a better way than paying $2.99+ per episode for a TV show. Otherwise, it might be a nice fantasy, but guaranteed to fail miserably. Actually, they only thing they can do to ensure it doesn't turn into a miserable failure is to add a subscription service for TV content and network streams. That's it, period. Without that, doomsday it will be.
I have a 1080p TV. Yes you can notice. The best 1080i content has a kind of "snap" that 720 lacks but 720 is still very good. Even "plain old DVDs" look good if you have one of those fancy DVD players that combines fields and upscales the image. People who don't know can be fooled that the DVD is HD.
It's like Audio. Most people after a certain point can't notice the difference between "acceptable " and "really good" unless they have spent time listening critically. So if you look, you can learn to see the difference between 720 an 1080. If you are using the TV as a computer monitor and put text on the screen you can see 1080p is by far better
As for what the human eye can see. It all depends on the geometry. How far back are you from the TV and how large is the screen? Having your nose one foot from a 60 inch screen is not the same as watching a 40 inch screen from 12 feet. Kind of depends on your age too if you are 25 or 55. So the answer is "it depends"