I don't think I would pay .99 for renting a show. Anyway most networks have their shows on line.
Where I live my internet provider cap my bandwidth at 85 Gb per month.
How many shows or movies would take to reach that limit?
Also if I cut the cable, my provider will increase the price of the internet by around 15 bucks per month.
Not happy about it![]()
Žalgiris;10918688 said:Multiple studies show that quality of the content takes over the quality of delivery system. IF what people se is good (they like it and they are into it) 720p or 1080p at whatever bitrate won't matter most likely.
Again talking about the content. I'm talking about hardware. Ship 1080p capable hardware. So that people who want and enjoy 1080p. It futureproofs the device and opens it up to more buyers.
Limiting to 720p based on the fact that "we will only stream 720p content" is retarded.
Well, for me personally, there's not much Apple can do because I literally get tv for free; my landlord pays for it. I do have an apple tv though and use it for streaming handbraked netflix discs.
Please provide a link to this, if you can...
Looks like rumor control for what Kevin Rose said couple of days ago.
I meant presented OTA its not in 1080p.
but it also makes sense not to ship 1080p capable hardware just so few image quality fanatics can use it.
I'm watching both 720p and 1080p videos on my LCD TV with WD TV HD LIVE from about 3 meters away. No difference whatsoever to me.
But it does matter to potential buyers of this thing. Kick out us more tech-savvy types here and think about Joe Sixpack. When he goes in to buy that new HDTV, what is the biggest thing that he is taught and probably remembers about HDTV? My guess is that 1080p is "True HD" or "Full HD". Much like GHz numbers and RAM sizes, he may not remember the fine details of tech specs, etc, but he probably remembers 1080p.
Hooking little boxes to that TV, he knows that anything less than 1080p capable cannot maximize what he bought. BD marketing keeps pitching BD as 1080p and "maximum picture & sound".
720p is a lower number. It's pretty easy to think that 720p < 1080p. Very little effort will clarify that (in spite of arguments that human eyes can't see the difference under average circumstances, "the chart", etc).
As I understand things, the paramount goal of Apple sales is to sell hardware. Since the cost difference between using a 720p chip and a 1080p chip is probably nominal (I'd even bet the latter would cost less than the former, given the popularity of the latter in many other set top boxes), why not build in 1080p?
The pro-720p crowd feels no pain in this. The 1080 iTV would still play their 720p files just as good. Retail cost would be exactly the same. They wouldn't have to buy 1080p content from iTunes if they favor 720p content. They wouldn't have to deal with bandwidth issue if they continue to download the same formats they download now. Etc.
And those who are pro-720p over 1080p mostly because they think that's what Steve/Apple likes, it's good for Apple too to use 1080p hardware over 720p because it means they can sell more units to those that will not buy unless it is 1080p capable.
There is NO LOSE for anyone in 1080p hardware. All the players completely win and can completely enjoy the experience however they favor it.
It just doesn't work the other way... where Apple arbitrarily chooses 720p limitations in the hardware. Then, the "1080p or bust" crowd doesn't buy, Apple doesn't sell as many units as they could, and only the "720p is good enough" crowd gets what they want (though they would get exactly the same with a 1080p platform too).
Yeaha lot of angles.
No, it doesn't make sense.
Why limit the hardware and not futureproof the device ?
What is your TV size ? The difference is dependant on both TV size and distance. 9 feet is quite a bit far to sit from a TV.
I would think rumor control would be slinging some higher prices unless this $99 really is around THE price.
So that's all you have to comeback with ?
I guess you now see the light and agree not shipping 1080p hardware is a dumb move if they do it.
Žalgiris;10919054 said:Oh come on. At this technology pace ... and at this price ...
It's also a market with so many existing players... Apple needs to make a presence in the living room before it even thinks of taking a large piece.
The point of it being for 'tech savvy hobbyists' I think is adequate. I know there are a few of us who are using dedicated G4/G5 towers specifically for streaming headless. For me however I do have to re-start iTunes or AppleTV on occasion. The average consumer would not be so forgiving when they have to troubleshoot a problem.
That being said. A $99 (highly mobile) wireless adapter that can take advantage of the iTunes store, and stream from your MacBook or iMac, would be a sweet spot for many consumers I think. It's not a game changer but it is getting a footing.
To a question "why not futureproof the device <with 1080p instead of 720p capability" you replied...
My reasoning would be simple.
- I bet cost for Apple would be the same or less if they use a more popular 1080p chip over a 720p chip
- Steve/Apple is very clear that they don't foresee a future for BD, yet they don't offer a complete alternative to it that competes on it's most popular benefits head-to-head
- Until there are lots of 1080p iTVs in homes connected to iTunes, there is NO INCENTIVE for studios to even test 1080i or 1080p rentals/sales. You have to have the hardware in place to support the test. Putting 1080p movies in there today means that no Apple TV user could rent/play them. But entrench 1080p-capable iTVs in homes and each additional unit sale becomes one more tug for the option of higher quality video & audio experiences to be added to the various video-oriented options in the iTunes store
- Apple sells more units if they give all camps in the market more of what they want. More sales is good for those that base their biases on what Apple tells them they should like or not like.
- Lastly, again, there is absolutely no lose for the 720p fan, as better tech will play lessor quality as good as it can be played. It just doesn't work the other way.
Žalgiris;10919249 said:I'm going with two:
1. It's 1080p out of the box.
2. It's 1080p out of the box, but firmware only allows 720p and 1080p may or may not be enabled with a firmware upgrade.
Wouldn't be the first time Apple pulls stunt like this right?
3 meters, 55" TV, 1080p is noticeable. Maybe you should remove the Steve colored glasses :
![]()