'iTV' Availability: Late January/Early February?

[Rocketman]

I wonder if the device will also be a 802.11n basestation kind of like the Airport Express is a basestation and music streaming relay device. I sure could use an upgrade to my original graphite Airport basestation.

I also read somewhere that devices based on the draft spec of 802.11n may not be compatible with the final spec.

Steve Jobs himself stated the iTV box he showed has Wi-Fi. He did not narrow down which spec probably because he does not discuss details of unreleased products.

But as soon as dual-booters under WinXP of C2D iMacs, MacBooks, MacBook Pros, and MacPros started detecting WORKING 802.11n cards under OS Win XP, it was made clear.

The primary chip supplier for 802.11n is Intel. Therefore Intel can simply do in the future what does not break the past. Other third parties will have to conform to Intel chip details to not break, but considering the domoinant market share of Intel, who wouldn't?

The top three wi-fi chip suppliers have committed to conform to Intel style releases.

So even if n evolves a bit you can expect a "high degree" of backward compatibility. In Macs in particular, these are all insertable cards, so if the unexpected happens you have a $100 upgrade path in any case.

I wonder what Wi-Max stuff will cost?

Rocketman

 

[davork]

Cheap SAN or NAS

Hmm...

I'd expect a NAS box for the low end... perhaps using Infrant's hardware and some of the usual apple special spice... hmm... maybe I'll hold off upgrading my stuffed-to-the-gills infrant for a little while longer! LOL

I guess there could be an iSCSI SAN, but... hmm... I don't think they'd get the price level down this year9!)

And how come apple don't have any blade servers...

 

[TheSpaz]

You must admit that not EVERYONE likes TV as much as some. Also, they should probably think about changing the name of iTV because it could get confusing over the phone when talking about EyeTV and iTV. I probably won't be one of the people buying this thing when it comes out. I can't find a reason to justify it. I have a nice Apple Cinema Display... why wouldn't I just watch TV shows on that?

Also, speaking of resolutions here, do you think Apple iTunes Store will soon be offering TV shows and movies in 1080p or 720p? Anything would probably be better than the current 640x480 shows they're trying to sell you. I'm getting an EyeTV 250 so that I don't have to pay for TV shows anymore.

 

[ChrisA]

Why would iTV be any better than a Mini?

Easy. The iTV will sell for less than 1/2 the price of the mini.

Apple would not sell to many $700 set top boxes. If you ask me, $300 is high After all an iTV is just a video iPod with no screen and no storage but with a bundled wifi card and a remote. I'm expecting a device that is much smaller than a Mini.

 

[ChrisA]

Hmm...

I'd expect a NAS box for the low end... perhaps using Infrant's hardware and some of the usual apple special spice... hmm... maybe I'll hold off upgrading my stuffed-to-the-gills infrant for a little while longer! LOL

I guess there could be an iSCSI SAN, but... hmm... I don't think they'd get the price level down this year9!)

And how come apple don't have any blade servers...

What I'd love to see is a Sun/Apple alliance.

Apple lacks a professional class service network. Seriously standing in line with your computer at an an Apple store and waiting two or three days for a repair is a total deal breaker any business. If something important breaks you needs it fixed in hours not days. Sun has a world wide network that can do same day on-site response. In many places Sun can offer one hour on-site service. Sun also sells storage that scales to many many terrabytes and hundreds of simultaneous users

Apple has a good desktop machine while Sun's is horrible (I know I have one) Sun needs a way to get onto the desktop and they've not been able to do it although they've tried for years

Sun and Apple already have a slight relationship -- two of Solaris' big innovations are going into Leopard Dtrace and ZFS. I'm sure neither of these could have been done without help from Sun so at least the Sun and Apple kernel hackers are talking.

Apple gets a World class service network and gets to re-brand some high end storage and servers and Sun finally gets on the desktop.

 

[GregA]

Watching TV is a VERY passive thing that we all do! Whatever form the release iTV takes; it will make watching TV laborous. I and the whole 95% of the human species will not bother with it if we have to think of what we want to watch every single time we turn on the tube. For the iTV to succeed, it will have to be very easy to use.

As it stands, the iTV is a different way of viewing TV. People will need to do different things - that takes some effort to learn, but once learned it may not be more laborious.

My mother-in-law is someone who supports your example She has only had a DVR for 2 weeks, but she still sits down and watches whatever is on, rather than look in the planner. For her, a POSSIBLE interface would be to channel surf through the recorded programs, showing her every recorded program just a minute into the show. Or she could channel surf the trailers for each show. As it stands, perhaps she'll learn to use the planner... time will tell.

(if I dropped cable) I would currently loose sports channels I watch, like ESPN and EPSN2. You can't get those over the air or watch events live (or almost live) via the internet.

That's a big blackspot for IPTV for now. At least ESPN is Disney - perhaps Apple will find a way of streaming ESPN & ABC News shortly.

they should probably think about changing the name of iTV because it could get confusing over the phone when talking about EyeTV and iTV.

Not just that - the iPhone name is taken, so Apple needs a different name for their phone. This may be a chance to make a similar branding for iTV & iPhone - and gain mindshare.

 

[GregA]

deinterlace a 1080i signal <snip> nearly identical results to a straight 1080p transmission.

If there's no movement, a deinterlaced signal is identical to a progressive signal. Movement causes problems, faster movement causes more problems - to the extent that 1080i is sometimes converted to 540p for best response.

The good thing is that colour & contrast is far more important than resolution.

why (were) composite and S-video conspicuous by their absence.

Good question, and it does tend to indicate that this is for high end devices. I'd like to see better support for ye-olde TVs there would seem to be a big market for them. So Apple is aiming for the new technologies?

OS X in a smartphone would be. . . difficult to say the least if I understand the basics on how Darwin works.

OSX Lite wouldn't be built on Darwin. In fact, for a TV or Phone a realtime OS might be more appropriate (ie: It's not OSX-Lite so much as Embedded-Realtime-OSX)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_operating_system)

Still, do you know how long it would take to actually download 5GB worth of data?

83minutes if you've got 9Mbps. .

as of today, i am not certain HD distribution is altogether feasible. The bandwidth required (and hence cost) for that is substantial. People with DVRs know how much space HD eats up. I would love to get some 1080p content for my new TV, but I'm not holding my breath. Maybe something between DVD & HD quality is a more reasonable expectation for the time being.

HD programs of 5GB ARE unreasonable over Australian broadband (and most western countries' services I'd guess), due to Internet fees as well as download speed. However, in a check of Sydney, ADSL2+ provides 75% of the population >10Mbps - so there's a substantial potential market if you're only looking at the last mile (but not universal).

Still, if you wanted to watch 2 HDTV shows live/streamed you'd be in trouble! If everyone turned on the TV at once the backbone from the exchange to the ISP would clog up quickly too. Locally available iTunes servers would help a bit, OR an amazing iTunes Bittorrent sharing system that identifies nearby users and forms high speed local peer-to-peer communities.

Still, all things considered, even at SDTV bandwidth we would have trouble if it became more common. Downloading at least ensures TV quality, whilst sacrificing "live"/streaming.

 

[balamw]

So that might be output through the DVI port, and Apple already has adaptors to convert DVI signals into various analog schemes like VGA, S-video etc. Why waste money building those ports into the device when you can charge people extra for the adaptors?

I agree with you, this certainly fits with all recent Macs, except for one thing. The iTV as previewed does not have a DVI-I port, only HDMI and component. Unlike the DVI-I ports on Macs, HDMI doesn't carry the analog singals required to convert to VGA or S-video, instead opting to carry audio. So they'd need some other kind of adapter than the ones they have today. Digital to analog adapters (HDMI to VGA) do exist, but they are about as expensive as the iTV!

B

 

[Mac'Mo]

HD iTV

 

[virduk]

I just hope its easier to get the iTV to play other formats than it is the 360. I really want something that handles HD to replace my Xbox with XBMC.

 

[GregA]

more bandwidth thoughts

I've been thinking alot about the bandwidth issues (I'm at work, getting paid to answer phone calls, and no-one is calling).

In 10 years time, I'd guess that bandwidth will not be an issue. For now, it certainly is. So how can Apple release the next generation of TV in a way that gives us a great user experience, and that will not bring the internet to a grinding halt?

Stage 1:
1) Sell shows - not rental or subscription. People limit what they spend (fewer downloads) and they only download once. If they compare it to buying DVDs online, it's much quicker than waiting for postal delivery even on slower connections.
2) Avoid VoD. Don't even mention it. (Some people will start watching soon after pressing "buy"... but don't mention it!)
3) Allow purchases in advance. If I buy all of this season's Stargate in ADVANCE.. iTunes could download the next episode before I ask for it. It could download the whole thing the day before it's released and authorise it only when it's released. If I buy 5 episodes in a row, it could anticipate I want the next and download in advance (or put up an ad so I can purchase in advance?).
4) Record FTA (HD and SD). No bandwidth required, and it covers a large number of popular shows (optionally recompress into h264!)
5) Support downloads through Bittorrent uploads. In particular, connect to other iTunes users with fewer "hops" (closer) to minimise congestion. Pass on the savings as rewards to those uploading.
6) Have iTunes regularly report to Apple so Apple can create a map of activity on the net, and offer advanced services to users who can handle it.

edit:
7).... Remote downloads - download a show via the local Blockbuster/Wallmart/Apple-store.
If I pick a movie in iTunes, it'll start downloading. But why not take my iPod down to the local store (which has fibre internet) and plug it into their docking station. Apple knows I'm 12% through my download at home, so they can automatically download the rest of the show to my iPod over the fibre connection. Plus any other shows that Apple "predicts" I might be interested in (and has locally available). Same goes for if I go to my brother's house and he has high speed internet while I don't (assuming he authorises me!!)

Stage 2:
1) Collaborate with existing developments for streaming content (Sport & News for starters) over multicast. Encourage IPv6 multicast setups.
2) Make deals with ISPs. Sell Apple-branded media servers to ISPs (otherwise use Akamai). Sometimes donate them to blackspots (if it's a backbone issue). ISPs may use servers at a country level, city level, or exchange level??
3) Offer VoD services like HBO On Demand to users with good bandwidth.
4) Offer entire cable "channels" by subscription, broken up into downloadable chunks
5) Provide shows FREE by inserting 1 ad into each ad break. Charge the advertiser more (the same as 8 regular ads!), since
a) it's only 1 ad per break
b) the ad is only shown to a specific subset of viewers interested in the product
c) the viewer can't fast forward through it.

I think the key is to create small groups of users who upload to each other without putting any strain on the internet backbone.

Okay enough rambling ...

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Okay enough rambling ...

Phase 1: Collect Underpants
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Profit