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.
Live Coverage of Apple's 2010 Fall Media Event
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 1080p argument is a foolish one. 1080p does not guarantee pic quality. I had posted this in another thread. The only TRUE 1080p device is a blue ray. All of these other devices claiming to be 1080p are just upconverting a lower quality signal to 1080p (Unless you are playing back a blueray rip). Most suck at this., There is not any quality video processing going on. So you get jaggies, artifacts, etc.
You therefore can get a better quality pic in 720p vs an upconverted 1080p. You are better off letting the device output in the native resolution and use a quality receiver, that has video processing like DVDO (Anchorbay) or use their separate video processor.
The bandwidth required to download or space required to save a full 1080P rip is tremendous. You also really need gigabit ethernet as well for a reliable stream. Especially if you plan on streaming more than one program.
Also, size of the TV monitor matters as well. You really have to go larger than 50" to start seeing any benefits 1080p.
There is nothing wrong with 720p as long as it is encoded well and has a good quality pic. The movies I have purchased or rented in HD on my ATV look great. So not missing that much anyway. As I said, if you use a good quality processor you can get a pic from 720p or 1080i that is close to pure 1080p.
...and you will most likely get stereo only. Most tv's don't pass the DD or DTS signal through to the optical out.
I am honestly considering buying every product announced today, and will without question buy the new apple TV.
and the nano is so cool, but i also want the iPod touch, and i don't have $500 to buy all of them, so once again apple has managed to piss me off
and the nano is so cool, but i also want the iPod touch, and i don't have $500 to buy all of them, so once again apple has managed to piss me off
How on earth did Apple come up with the Sony/Nintendo statistic? Seeing as how at last count, Nintendo alone has sold (and shipped many many more) 132 Million DS machines. Meanwhile, Apple says 120 Million iOS devices have been sold. Did they explain how they came up with this mind-bending statistic?
Well first of all... the list price for that WD device is $149. Secondly no wifi. What the hell.
Are you serious?
That's the MSRP. Usually Best Buy and Amazon price it between $109-119. Likely it'll be $99 after Christmas.
Which brings up another strong point to not going Apple for your media needs: WD actually UPDATES their models in terms of hardware generations, rather than cooling their heels for extended periods of time. It's a hobby project for them too, being such a major storage manufacturer, but at least they take it seriously and don't introduce it on the coattails of sure-fire success products.
This is the future. People having their own physical libraries is going away.
I don't know. Would be cool. For a start I hope Netflix could do it. Would be good if others could as well.
People in this thread don't know so much about so many different things it is head-to-wall pounding bad.
enlighten us please, those of us (myself included) who are less-than-up-to-date on video streaming formats?
I think it's wise (from their point of view) what they're doing with the nano. They're reconfiguring it in the line-up as a step-up from the shuffle, appealing to low-end consumers on a budget. An affordable luxury, but for us lot, essentially useless.
Then the new ipod touch is really the entry level where people who are into technology would make their purchase. It's wise thinking from them. I would have gone for a Nano a few years if the capacity was there but there's no chance now.
I just wish they had done something with the Classic, even a small bump would have been great. The problem is that it just doesn't fit into Apple's strategy now. Apple is focusing on delivering continual content and not hardware*. The only people buying Classics now are people like me with XGBs already on their computers and so the 'after-sale' income of a Classic is essentially naught. This is completely against the grain of everything Apple does now apps, tv programme streaming etc.
edit: * in relation to its music and entertainment arm and not computers obviously...
Now, this is such a misguided statement and doesn't represent me, certainly.
I have a 1080p capable 50" plasma set. I have a Blu-Ray player (rentals through Netflix), and use OTA for HD broadcast.
So, most of my content watching on this set is either SD or HD locals.
Adding HD streaming (even 720p) for additional content would be useful to me.
Well to some people here who talk about other boxes like the WD box being better.. then talk about how they can watch 480p content with commercials...
I don't get this thread... So many people are so ridiculous.
It is like one guy is comparing a grape to a banana to a mango to a coconut to a lamp post.
Well buy a real receiver. If you've used up all your inputs you went cheap and got what you deserved.
apple tv 1080p not needed
This is SOOOO true - its all about the bitrate of the signal - 1080p resolution does not necessarily mean you are getting a great signal. The bitrate of Apple (and others) so-called HD is well below broadcast (19Mbps or less) or Blu ray (40Mbps) so whether it does 1080p or not really doesn't matter if you plan on renting "hd" movies - now streaming ripped blu ray / home movies is another story.
That's an awfully abstract and baseless comment to make on the subject. On the surface it makes sense; by and large the cloud is forming and internet speeds are rising upwards in a way that will eventually prove your statement true. But you also make the assumption that, given the current state of affairs, the technology of the device matches its environment, which it doesn't necessarily. You are paying for a futuristic approach that, by its own far-seeing design, handicaps itself by limiting its operational options to only an incredibly narrow, primarily proprietary niche. The idea of 'too far ahead of its time' is often looked back upon as the killer of good ideas, but ultimately a good idea is a combination of innovation, salability, and convenience to the time in which it is released; unfortunately, the Apple TV and Apple's 'rent' campaign only fits 2 of those 3 requirements.
Yeah, right. Streaming doesn't work in any kind of internet downtime. Blu-rays are HIGH quality, streaming is mediocre at best.
I have 90% av all my content in 720p... looks superb on my 136" screen.
Right... if you use your own DVD/Blu-ray rips etc. you could easily rip toTV compatible formats. MKV is just a container... pirates like to use.
Typical fanboi nonsense. And he has a 13.6" screen being in Northern Europe - bwhahahaha!
So now iPad users have to wait two more months for the promised iOS update?
Huh?
Dang it! Why the long wait? It's been over two months now so far and now two more?
Huh?
Dang it! Why the long wait? It's been over two months now so far and now two more?
Apple fans always confuse list price with retail price (understandably so because there is no difference between the two in Apple land
). The device is sold for $119 by Amazon. It does no come with WiFi but it is WiFi capable. One can add USB wireless adapter (for example, very good ASUS USB-N13 Wireless-N Adapter - $22)The Nano looks horrible. If you look at it from the front, it's a combination between normal corners and rounded corners on the black border. Who does that?! It looks so wrong!
Other than that, pretty cool event. Had hoped for iLife though, since I'm buying a mac soon.
Other than that, pretty cool event. Had hoped for iLife though, since I'm buying a mac soon.
Because the only people responding here are Apple TV owners or wanna-be owners. They aren't technically that astute about their home theater setups, many having likely hired someone else to come set things up for them in the first place. This is the current audience Apple aimed the product at and the most likely audience for the refresh. Did you see that list of features that Steve claimed "current customers" demanded? That wasn't a list created by discerning audio/video-philes. That was a list created by affluent consumers who insist on look/feel and ease-of-use more than feature/functionality.
For that matter, that last sentence pretty much describes MOST of Apple's core audience.