Apple TV Shipping Tuesday, March 20th?

[Rod Rod]

740x404 is NOT full DVD quality. 854x*** (NTSC) and 1024x*** (PAL) is the full DVD resolution. Why? Because anamorphic widescreen video is stretched to display it in the correct aspect ratio. Even though the native resolution is 720x480 (for NTSC), the resulting image would be 854x480 when properly stretched. No point arguing this fact as I can provide all the evidence there is. Go google it or Wikipedia it.

The "resulting image" could be anything and that proves nothing. A regular widescreen DVD plays back at 2560x1440 on a 30" Apple LCD. That doesn't make "full DVD quality" any more than 720x404 or 720x480. Stretching out an image doesn't add to its quality. You're right that there's no point to your argument. You've provided plenty of evidence already.

 

[spicyapple]

Full screen DVDs scale to 640x480 on standard def TVs. In this case, the resolution is decreased! Oh, the humanity!

 

[Mr Skills]

Does the "export to Apple TV" option have any bearing on the ease of ripping DVDs to play on the Apple TV? It all seems a bit complicated to get this working at the moment.

 

[Shagrat]

740x404 is NOT full DVD quality. 854x*** (NTSC) and 1024x*** (PAL) is the full DVD resolution. Why? Because anamorphic widescreen video is stretched to display it in the correct aspect ratio. Even though the native resolution is 720x480 (for NTSC), the resulting image would be 854x480 when properly stretched. No point arguing this fact as I can provide all the evidence there is. Go google it or Wikipedia it.

From wikipedia...
The typical video resolution for an NTSC disc is 720 × 480, while a PAL disc is 720 × 576. The specifications for video files on a DVD can be any of the following:
Up to 9.8 Mbit/s (9800 kbit/s) MPEG-2 video
Up to 1.856 Mbit/s (1856 kbit/s) MPEG-1 video
PAL:
720 × 576 pixels MPEG-2 (Called full D1)
704 × 576 pixels MPEG-2
352 × 576 pixels MPEG-2 (Called Half-D1, same as the China Video Disc standard)
352 × 288 pixels MPEG-2
352 × 288 pixels MPEG-1 (Same as the VCD Standard)
NTSC:
720 × 480 pixels MPEG-2 (Called full D1)
704 × 480 pixels MPEG-2
352 × 480 pixels MPEG-2 (Called Half-D1, same as the China Video Disc standard)
352 × 240 pixels MPEG-2
352 × 240 pixels MPEG-1 (Same as the VCD Standard)

 

[FleurDuMal]

Does the "export to Apple TV" option have any bearing on the ease of ripping DVDs to play on the Apple TV? It all seems a bit complicated to get this working at the moment.

I wouldn't get your hopes up. If Apple implemented a one-click solution to DVD ripping, the movie industry would be right on their back.

 

[Mr Skills]

I wouldn't get your hopes up. If Apple implemented a one-click solution to DVD ripping, the movie industry would be right on their back.

You're right but I was wondering if this might make the current work-arounds a little simpler, at least.

Surely sooner or later some program like Handbrake will have a one-click Dvd-to-AppleTV function...

 

[FleurDuMal]

You're right but I was wondering if this might make the current work-arounds a little simpler, at least.

Surely sooner or later some program like Handbrake will have a one-click Dvd-to-AppleTV function...

That was my theory. The iPod took off because of the simplicity of one-click CD ripping, and I thought that the AppleTV would only take off with the simplicity of one click DVD ripping.

However, I think Apple might think the future of AppleTV is in downloaded movies rather than ripped ones as that gives them more control over content.

 

[gmidgley]

I just checked my store, and my delivery data has gone.....it was the 27th!

 

[steve_hill4]

You're right but I was wondering if this might make the current work-arounds a little simpler, at least.

Surely sooner or later some program like Handbrake will have a one-click Dvd-to-AppleTV function...

I would say more likely a one-click "Export for tv" which would basically import it to the relevant folder and playlist for said device. I think I am currently running the latest Handbrake and haven't seen an "Export to iPod function yet".

I'll get a HDTV or two myself before buying an tv, but it is also much more tempting to buy a Mac Mini loaded up and run that as a media receiver. Bonjoured to other machines and with a TV tuner in it, it's a fantastic little PVR and DVD player.

 

[Half Glass]

Wait a minute: Skimpy on the resolution!!!!

I sent a 1280x720 H.264 mov that I recorded and encoded from Migila's TV Mini HD and chose the Export to TV function for giggles (and to see what res and data rate they used.

The output file was 960x540.


That is 1/2 1080i's resolution, not HD in anyone's book.

--HG

 

[MeijApple]

YES It's shipping

Hello,

Same here. I also can not cancel the order anymore !

ITS SHIPPING TIME !

 

[CoreWeb]

The movie industry would go nuts, perhaps, if Apple allowed ripping to .mp4. But what if they allowed the AppleTV or iTunes to play VIDEO_TS folders? I don't remember, but I think the contents of these folders are still encrypted, and if Apple allowed ripping in this manner, it would be like simply opening the DVD, selecting the VIDEO_TS folder, and copying it to your disc - only, Apple would do it automatically. I may be way off base, but I think it is quite possible, and there would be no reason for anyone to get angry.

I was also wondering about the possibility that iTunes would convert stuff on-the-fly for AppleTV. For instance, say the format of the video in iTunes is not supported by the AppleTV; what if iTunes played the video, and streamed a 720p version of it in whatever format to the AppleTV? Not sure it would work due to CPU restrictions, but it could... Could also open up possibilities for screen viewing...

 

[Mr Skills]

The movie industry would go nuts, perhaps, if Apple allowed ripping to .mp4.

That doesn't preclude some nice piece of shareware doing it, though



.

 

[Avatar74]

740x404 is NOT full DVD quality. 854x*** (NTSC) and 1024x*** (PAL) is the full DVD resolution. Why? Because anamorphic widescreen video is stretched to display it in the correct aspect ratio. Even though the native resolution is 720x480 (for NTSC), the resulting image would be 854x480 when properly stretched. No point arguing this fact as I can provide all the evidence there is. Go google it or Wikipedia it.

Incorrect. NTSC DVD resolution is 720x480 with a pixel aspect ratio of 0.9. This is comparable to an image of 720x534 with a pixel aspect ratio of 1.0.

Note that LCD projector resolution (some are indeed 854 x 480) has nothing to do with NTSC DVD resolution.

704 x 480 is the size-proportional equivalent of 16:9 DVD non-anamorphic playback with no extra pixels.

720p, however, can be natively represented because all computer displays and operating systems that drive them are progressive-scan by nature and because the H.264 Main Profile 3.1 is capable of natively supporting it.

In other words, 704x480 is typically the adjusted EDTV 480p widescreen resolution when a system is not capable of anamorphic adjustment or nonsquare pixels.

 

[GregA]

740x404 is NOT full DVD quality. 854x*** (NTSC) and 1024x*** (PAL) is the full DVD resolution. Why? Because anamorphic widescreen video is stretched to display it in the correct aspect ratio. Even though the native resolution is 720x480 (for NTSC), the resulting image would be 854x480 when properly stretched. No point arguing this fact as I can provide all the evidence there is. Go google it or Wikipedia it.

The interesting thing about playing back a DVD is that while the full 480 lines is on the DVD (or 576 for PAL), if you are showing it on a regular TV the player just removes every 4th line.

This is why (when buying a 4:3 TV) it was better to buy one with a widescreen option. You would then tell your DVD player it was connected to a widescreen (so it would send the full 480 lines), and then have your TV squash that image (so that it was in the correct proportion but still kept 480lines). The extra resolution was noticeable.

Of course, these days you just buy a widescreen TV or plasma or whatever.

 

[NightStorm]

Here's to hoping we all get shipping notices tomorrow... I'd really like to start ripping my DVD collection; hopefully Apple will surprise us with some way to preserve/playback 5.1 soundtracks, and a nice 720p resolution bump on the iTS. I'd REALLY like to buy Heroes, but want it in HD, and will wait for the rumored HD-DVD release if necessary.

 

[MacinJosh]

Incorrect. NTSC DVD resolution is 720x480 with a pixel aspect ratio of 0.9. This is comparable to an image of 720x534 with a pixel aspect ratio of 1.0.

Note that LCD projector resolution (some are indeed 854 x 480) has nothing to do with NTSC DVD resolution.

704 x 480 is the size-proportional equivalent of the "live" area of a non-anamorphic hard-matted DVD when factoring in progressive deinterlacing. 720p is still 720p because all computer displays and operating systems that drive them are progressive-scan by nature.

This is to everyone alse I'm not quoting as well.

Let's talk NTSC for now.

DVD’s native resolution is 720×480. That’s a 4:3 aspect ratio but an anamorphic picture (squashed). When it’s displayed on a computer or widescreen TV, the picture is stretched to 16:9 and the resolution effectively becomes 854×480.

Read these links before you start arguing about things you don't understand:

http://gregl.net/videophile/anamorphic.htm
http://stason.org/TULARC/pc/dvd-for...widescreen-How-do-the-aspect-ratios-work.html

Quote from previous link: “Anamorphic video is
best displayed on widescreen equipment, which stretches the video back out
to its original width. Alternatively, many new European 4:3 TV’s can reduce
the vertical scan area to restore the proper aspect ratio without losing
resolution (an automatic trigger signal is sent on SCART pin 8). Even
though almost all computers have 4:3 monitors, they have higher resolution
than TVs so they can display the full widescreen picture in a window
(854x480 pixels or bigger for NTSC; 1024x576 or bigger for PAL).”

Joshua.

EDIT: 854x480 is a scaled resolution. 720 horizontal pixels have been stretched to "cover" an area of 854 pixels in order to maintain the correct aspect ratio. Yeah, you could convert to 720x400 which is also a scaled resolution as the 480 vertical pixels have been squashed to 400 to maintain the correct 16:9 aspect ratio. Anyone can see, however, that the most benefitial resolution to retain the most pixels from the DVD is 854x480 as it results in no lost original pixels.

 

[mrgreen4242]

To bad. i wish apple made one of these sans the hdd. I would love yo pay 179 for something like this. to be honest, I do not know why they just didnt make this into their airport extreeme router. I would snatch one up in a second.

What makes you think that removing a $20 HDD would knock $120 off the price, for starters? I'm sure that in a year or two they will do a "lite version" of the Apple TV built into a router, probably only supporting SD/480p resolutions to keep a "market separation" between it and the "real thing".

Anyways, I'm not keen on the AppleTV, either. I'm curiously awaiting the new "low priced" HD TiVos we're supposed to see this year. I JUST bought a Series2DT after having a Series1 for 4 years or so, but I'd upgrade again at the end of my one year discount service plan (for buying a refurb unit) if the hardware was right... The Series2 TiVo, with just a little bit of work and patience, effectively does everything the AppleTV does, except HD files, plus it's a great DVR.

 

[MacSamurai]

update to itunes +qtime

New update 7.1.1

 

[FleurDuMal]

Hmm...arguments about the actual resolutions of DVDs and HD content...


...GEEK FIGHT!!!!!!!!

 

[stealthman1]

New update 7.1.1

Has Quicktime always been able to play .VOB files? Sans audio of course?

 

[outlyer]

d data rate they used.
The output file was 960x540.
That is 1/2 1080i's resolution, not HD in anyone's book.

--HG

To be pedantic, that is half of 1080p, not 1080i. 1081i is 540 lines, just shown interleaved. That 'i' means that in any given refresh on the screen, 540 lines are being drawn, by interleaving them.

A 720p or 1080p television will deinterlace the signal to make it progressive, but the actual resolution of the source is 540 lines per field, just displayed over 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

 

[Avatar74]

This is to everyone alse I'm not quoting as well.

Let's talk NTSC for now.

DVD’s native resolution is 720×480. That’s a 4:3 aspect ratio but an anamorphic picture (squashed). When it’s displayed on a computer or widescreen TV, the picture is stretched to 16:9 and the resolution effectively becomes 854×480.

Read these links before you start arguing about things you don't understand:

http://gregl.net/videophile/anamorphic.htm
http://stason.org/TULARC/pc/dvd-for...widescreen-How-do-the-aspect-ratios-work.html

Quote from previous link: “Anamorphic video is
best displayed on widescreen equipment, which stretches the video back out
to its original width. Alternatively, many new European 4:3 TV’s can reduce
the vertical scan area to restore the proper aspect ratio without losing
resolution (an automatic trigger signal is sent on SCART pin 8). Even
though almost all computers have 4:3 monitors, they have higher resolution
than TVs so they can display the full widescreen picture in a window
(854x480 pixels or bigger for NTSC; 1024x576 or bigger for PAL).”

Joshua.

EDIT: 854x480 is a scaled resolution. 720 horizontal pixels have been stretched to "cover" an area of 854 pixels in order to maintain the correct aspect ratio. Yeah, you could convert to 720x400 which is also a scaled resolution as the 480 vertical pixels have been squashed to 400 to maintain the correct 16:9 aspect ratio. Anyone can see, however, that the most benefitial resolution to retain the most pixels from the DVD is 854x480 as it results in no lost original pixels.

This is a bogus argument. You are essentially stating (in your "EDIT" comment) that 854x480 is an imaginary figure (an "area of 854 pixels"). The screen resolution of a display, and the resolution of the digital input signal are two different things. You have clearly confused the two, as I'll demonstrate below.

In an anamorphic DVD, the resolution of the input signal is always 720x480. Whether displayed on a 4:3 TV or displayed on a 16:9 TV, the input signal is STILL 720x480. When the pixel aspect ratio is modified to "squeeze" the image to 16:9 frame aspect, the pixel count does not change. What is displayed is, excluding upconverting playback systems (let's assume a Widescreen EDTV for the moment), 720x480.

The presence or absence of matte bars does not change the effective resolution of the input signal, mind you. The resolution NEVER becomes 854x480... what you're reading in the paragraph you quoted is the stated resolution of some computer monitors which is dependent on the output signal of the video card. But note they are careful to differentiate between the resolution of the monitor and the "window" within which 720x480 NTSC video can be displayed.

In the two links you provided, the first doesn't even mention 854x480 once. The second only mentions it in the aforementioned paragraph, here (emphasis mine):

Even
though almost all computers have 4:3 monitors, they have higher resolution
than TVs so they can display the full widescreen picture in a window
(854x480 pixels or bigger for NTSC; 1024x576 or bigger for PAL).

I'll repeat myself for clarity...

The pixel count does not change.

The pixel aspect ratio does.

Before you go trying to correct people who have professionally authored DVD's, who also hold membership in the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, I suggest you do some further reading that isn't limited to misinterpreting googled information scrabbled together by laypeople on the internet.

 

[a456]

I believe Apple TV shipment is going to coincide with an announcement of the Leopard release date and the announcement of iLife 07 and iWork 07.

The Apple store gives mid-March as the shipping date, and if it is a Tuesday that means it has to be tomorrow. March 27, is not mid-March - even Steve Jobs would struggle to convince us of that.

Not sure that Leopard, iLife and all the rest will come out tomorrow. It might steal the thunder of TV. Then again such a release might successfully overshadow the delay of getting this product to ship.

My prediction for those looking for a mega version of the TV is that there will be an TV Pro - a refashioned Mac Mini that does everything the TV does and much more and with much more expandability through the already established style of stacking similar looking units above or below it. This will make the TV the nano of the living room and the TV Pro the choice of the hardcore gadget fan.

 

[davidwes]

I am sorry but I don't understand the quicktime export to apple tv. What is the source data? Can I put in a dvd and export to Apple tv? Otherwise, if its already a digital file, shouldn't itunes be able to read it and therefore it would play on the apple tv?