Component cables can (red, blue, green), composite (yellow) cables cannot... I think.
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.
Next Generation iPhone to Support HD Video and Apple TV-Like Behavior?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Component cables can (red, blue, green), composite (yellow) cables cannot... I think.
First things First please
...can those of us who've already purchased the Apple TV please get NetFlix and Hulu integration first?
I mean - come on ... why not?
For a little more money, maybe I should have bought a Mini! I'd be able to play multimedia in far more media choices that way.
...can those of us who've already purchased the Apple TV please get NetFlix and Hulu integration first?
I mean - come on ... why not?
For a little more money, maybe I should have bought a Mini! I'd be able to play multimedia in far more media choices that way.
There is only a requirement for digital outputs to be encrypted, so component HD is okay.
...can those of us who've already purchased the Apple TV please get NetFlix and Hulu integration first?
I mean - come on ... why not?
For a little more money, maybe I should have bought a Mini! I'd be able to play multimedia in far more media choices that way.
It would be nice if it were integrated from Apple but in the mean time you do have Hulu integration (and a lot more) with aTV.
http://www.atvflash.com/product_info.php?products_id=27
If you encode with the universal setting on handbrake or the apple tv setting on the elgato turbo.264, you can make files that play on all but (i think) the very first ipod that played video. even though the videos files technically don't meet the specifications that apple says ipods will play itunes will still sync them and the ipods will still play them. this way i've been able to get single files that play on the apple tv and my ipod. i've tried them on an iphone, ipod touch, and ipod nano (the first one which could play video - i can't remember which generation that is though!) and they all play fine.
Or maybe they just want it to be compatible with more TVs. I seriously doubt HD content is coming in a device with (presumably) only 32 GB of memory. It would also need enough firepower to decode H.264 at HD resolutions and enough battery life to last the entire length of the movie (at a minimum).
Why would anyone want to play HD from their phone/ipod. The device has way to little storage and though I realize that new ARM processor has a h264/vc1 decoder chip how many reference frames is this thing really going to be able to handle? This applies to the "ZuneHD" too it all seems silly.
What's your definition of real HD? Cable providers' pixelated version of 720p and 1080i? Or 2007's HD Buzz Word of the Year: 1080p?
They're all HD. Component can handle all of them, but I'm not sure if component can pass 1080p/24; only 1080p/60.
At any rate, I'm going to have to agree with a few of the other posters. DO WANT !
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/525.19 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/1.0.154.53 Safari/525.19)
When I first read "Behave like apple TV" I thought "Great! After I listen to one song, it'll stop everything to 'sync with iTunes...'"
I kid because I love...
Anyway, if this does happen it's clearly directed as a way to get people's foot in the door to buying from iTunes (and maybe even pushing people toward Apple TV once they've tried it out using their phone).
It's not an AppleTv killer by any stretch.
When I first read "Behave like apple TV" I thought "Great! After I listen to one song, it'll stop everything to 'sync with iTunes...'"
I kid because I love...
Anyway, if this does happen it's clearly directed as a way to get people's foot in the door to buying from iTunes (and maybe even pushing people toward Apple TV once they've tried it out using their phone).
It's not an AppleTv killer by any stretch.
Apple has always taken the position that Apple TV is a hobby. I interpret that to mean that it's a testing ground for new technologies as much as it is a useful product. Apple has been known to develop a cool technology in one product and then apply it to another, so this fits.
New York Times Article About Cost Of Data
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/business/20isp.html?_r=1&ref=technology
All of our economics are based on engineering for the peak hour, said Tony Werner, the chief technical officer of Comcast. Just because someone consumes more data doesnt mean they drive more cost.
Yet even as the providers continually upgrade their networks, the cost of the equipment needed to do so is shrinking steadily, reflecting the well-worn economics of computing.
Indeed, the equipment needed to add capacity to any household costs a fraction of one months Internet service bill. Comcast, the nations largest cable provider, has told investors that doubling the Internet capacity of a neighborhood costs an average of $6.85 a home.
The cost of providing Internet service is about to fall even more, as cable companies install new technology, called Docsis 3, that will both increase their capacity and allow them to offer much faster download speeds.
So far, however, companies in the United States have chosen to use Docsis 3 as an opportunity to offer far more expensive Internet plans. Comcast has introduced a new 50-megabit-per-second service at $139 a month, compared with its existing service that costs about $45 a month for 8 megabits per second. Time Warner just announced it will charge $99 for 50 megabits per second.
By contrast, JCom, the largest cable company in Japan, sells service as fast as 160 megabits per second for $60 a month, only $5 a month more than its slower service.
Why so cheap? JCom faces more competition from other Internet providers than companies in the United States do.
Cable systems in the United States use the same technology and have roughly the same costs. Comcast told investors that the hardware to provide 50-megabits-per-second service costs less than it had been paying for the equipment for 6 megabits per second.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/business/20isp.html?_r=1&ref=technology
All of our economics are based on engineering for the peak hour, said Tony Werner, the chief technical officer of Comcast. Just because someone consumes more data doesnt mean they drive more cost.
Yet even as the providers continually upgrade their networks, the cost of the equipment needed to do so is shrinking steadily, reflecting the well-worn economics of computing.
Indeed, the equipment needed to add capacity to any household costs a fraction of one months Internet service bill. Comcast, the nations largest cable provider, has told investors that doubling the Internet capacity of a neighborhood costs an average of $6.85 a home.
The cost of providing Internet service is about to fall even more, as cable companies install new technology, called Docsis 3, that will both increase their capacity and allow them to offer much faster download speeds.
So far, however, companies in the United States have chosen to use Docsis 3 as an opportunity to offer far more expensive Internet plans. Comcast has introduced a new 50-megabit-per-second service at $139 a month, compared with its existing service that costs about $45 a month for 8 megabits per second. Time Warner just announced it will charge $99 for 50 megabits per second.
By contrast, JCom, the largest cable company in Japan, sells service as fast as 160 megabits per second for $60 a month, only $5 a month more than its slower service.
Why so cheap? JCom faces more competition from other Internet providers than companies in the United States do.
Cable systems in the United States use the same technology and have roughly the same costs. Comcast told investors that the hardware to provide 50-megabits-per-second service costs less than it had been paying for the equipment for 6 megabits per second.
I suggested this months ago...
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=7918327#7918327
Go figure.
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=7918327#7918327
Go figure.
Yes! Now all we need is for it to support all the file formats that you can throw at the QT+Perian+Flip4Mac combo.
Not gonna happen I guess.
Not gonna happen I guess.
Come on... You don't launch such a complex technology at the last moment because macrumors posted a piece on a competitor about it! They've been working on this for well over a year at least.
LOL! This article is a stretch. The Apple TV won't even play 1080i. Don't look for the iPhone to play back anything more than scaled down stuff for some time yet. And who would want to tie up all their iPhone storage with a few movies of that resolution, because that's all that would fit.
MS came out of nowhere with the Xbox and now dominates the hardcore gaming market with the Xbox360. If they manage to tie Xbox360 and Zune functionality, there could be a large increase in market share. MS should also ramp up the marketing. When was the last time you saw a zune commercial?
Also, Apple should really give up on Macs as they are having such a hard time taking market share away from PCs
The video games market is absolutely nothing like the PMP market.
Microsoft increased their market share at Sony's expense. Sony dropped the ball with the PS3. Apple are much smarter than Sony.