Hahahahaha, who on earth sells the quad core2 for "significantly" less than 1200 bucks? Your goin to have to prove that one. And no....ebay does not count. 99 percent of those machines have no os and software and use the crappy cases. And include an quality LCD??
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.
Notes Of Interest From Q/A
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hahahahaha, who on earth sells the quad core2 for "significantly" less than 1200 bucks? Your goin to have to prove that one. And no....ebay does not count. 99 percent of those machines have no os and software and use the crappy cases. And include an quality LCD??
Check out www.futureshop.ca. Acer Aspire Intel Core 2 Q6600 Quad 2.4GHZ Desktop Computer (ASE700-EQ662A) for $999. This week only bundled with a Samsung 216BW for $1099. That bundle is $200 less than the entry level iMac in Canada ($1299).
2.4GHz Core2Quad instead of 2.0GHz Core2Duo
1066MHz bus instead of 800
2GB RAM (probably full speed) instead of 1GB of 667MHz notebook stuff
500GB HD instead of 250
While I don't consider Acer a top tier brand, their components are mostly the same ones Apple buys and Macs are built in the same Chinese factories that discount brand PCs are.
Well, here's the problem with it, at least with us Americans. We don't have broadband. Not really. Not like it's available in Europe or Japan. We're 30% or 10% of their broadband consumer speeds respectively. Seriously. Major suckage when the country who invented the internet can't get its act together.
So, until Web 2.0 arrives to Joe Blow in the US, HD downloadable feature-length films won't be practical.
People order movies form Netflix and wait overnite. Why wouldn't they push a button on their computer to process a movie order that executes while they sleep. It's LEARNED behavior. Just like deprogramming ones self from driving to Blockbuster and using Netflix. People will learn to go to iTunes, order a movie and forget about it for a bit. The beauty is, that when bandwidth increases or Movie codecs drive down file sizes, Apple is already positioned with the store, buyer behavior and a library to WIN. And, there's nothing to send back!
aesthetics? I personally put aesthetics above all other factors when considering a computer purchase. I don't need the raw power to run iTunes or Safari. Games? I rather relax with friends over a cold beer or wine!
ease of use? I'm using a Dell at work and Window XP, and managing download and files is soo arcane and a chore.
Cinch
Except that it wasn't.
Blu-ray and HD-DVD both fill a need NOW (August 7, 2007). Later processor and internet speeds down the line will be able to fill that same need at that time without the need for competing formatted discs. BUT, then, don't forget, by then downloading Bly-ray movies will have the same pizzazz and allure of streaming blurry videos on YouTube. The HD target will continue to move upward. 1080p is NOT the final iteration. 1260p is here already via a Westinghouse HDTV capable of outputting video so sharp that each frame of 24fps video contains as much data as an 8 Mega-pixel camera. Multiply that out to a 2 hour feature film. Boom, all of a sudden that fast connection and quick transfer for 1080p just isn't up to snuff.
My randomly-arrived at point? All CE stuff is a moving target. It never stops. As soon as someone comes up with a way to transfer data faster, someone else comes up with a way to clog that pipeline. And the process starts all over again.
Actually, Moore's law has nothing to do with bandwidth.
Personally, I think the capacity of physical media will always lead what is reasonable with current consumer bandwidth. For example, when consumers can download 50GB in 10 minutes, There will be a new media/disc format that can store much more than 50GB. It is probably a much lesser challenge to roll out a new storage technology than it is to upgrade all the infrastructure required to just double the bandwidth for even 60% of a given country's population. For example, Hitachi can make a better drive and I can go to the store and buy it easier than it would be to lay fiber to all the homes that are still on copper.
It seems the hard part with new media types is getting everyone to buy into it. The switch from VHS to DVD actually happened pretty quickly- it almost seems like one day Blockbuster had all VHS and the next it was all DVD. However there was a HUGE gain in upgrading to DVD. Will consumers preceive the gain from DVD to BluRay in the same way?
Try here. I got it last month when there was a $150 instant rebate for $750 net. 2GB RAM, 500GB HD, comes with Vista (and runs Ubuntu quite well). Not as pretty as a Mac, but it's not hideous. I'd gladly have paid $500 more for a comparable Mac, but $1750 is way out of line.
Most new Blu-ray movies ARE encoded in h.264 (aka AVC) or some equivalent codec (VC-1). The video files are still near 30 GB (HD DVD) or above it (Blu-ray). This is just not practical for the common person to download at this point in time. Ridiculous, really, at all levels (bandwidth, storage)
I have no doubt that we are entering the transition to pure software with no physical media, but we're probably still too far away to make this jump right now for video. Blu-ray (or HD DVD) are superior to DVD in pretty much every respect (other than cost, at this point) so unless you are arguing that all DVD drives are currently pointless, going Blu-ray is a logical step.
Apple is waiting, as is most everyone else, to see which one wins out. In the meantime look for HD content to become available for rental/purchase thru the Apple TV revision that they hinted toward.
Looks like someone's getting an Apple TV for Christmas!
Actually not. With H.264 you can get quite small file sizes and very good pictures. I rip DVDs to Apple TV at 2.5 Mbps all the time. The resulting file is about 2.5 gigs.
It's not all that uncommon to see multi hundred meg trailers available for download.
It's definitely time to buy more Cisco stock!
You are correct. An Apple TV movie rental download wouldn't need to be 30GB. 10GB would suffice nicely. You could create a queue like on Netflix and the Apple TV could download in the background. Didn't Apple upgrade the Apple TV from 40GB to 160GB? Now why do you suppose they did that? HD rentals, that's why!
A few thoughts:
One poster said BluRay and HDDVD can meet current demand for a vastly improved picture over DVD. To people that know, there is no doubt how beautiful a pure HD picture is. But a good transfer of a film to DVD and projected with a line doubler (now cheap and installed in most DVD players with component outs) looks very good. The average consumer does not notice the difference. Most films are posted grainy and soft, that's the film look.
Only in broadcast tv, especially sports, does the average consumer really see a difference.
Also as far as download times. Pick a movie in the morning (or2) and download it while at work. ready to play when you get home. You can also start watching before the download is complete. Faster than Netflix !!
And then, also killing the disc market, is DVR and HD Broadcast. Buy Apple, not Toshiba or BluRay stock!
One poster said BluRay and HDDVD can meet current demand for a vastly improved picture over DVD. To people that know, there is no doubt how beautiful a pure HD picture is. But a good transfer of a film to DVD and projected with a line doubler (now cheap and installed in most DVD players with component outs) looks very good. The average consumer does not notice the difference. Most films are posted grainy and soft, that's the film look.
Only in broadcast tv, especially sports, does the average consumer really see a difference.
Also as far as download times. Pick a movie in the morning (or2) and download it while at work. ready to play when you get home. You can also start watching before the download is complete. Faster than Netflix !!
And then, also killing the disc market, is DVR and HD Broadcast. Buy Apple, not Toshiba or BluRay stock!
I'm guessing that guy is an HD DVD fanboy who is bitter about how the format war is going, the lack of HD DVD burners and that Blu-ray not only has mac compatible Blu-ray burners already (internal and external) from third-parties but standalone BD recorders already exist. To add insult to injury, Hitachi showed off camcorders that record to mini-BD discs which should be on the market by Christmas.
You are missing the idea behind Blu Ray, HDDVD and HD in general. People want less compressed video/audio not more compression. I understand that the H.264 is very good at compression but either way you are losing detail and it's being compressed. Just like when Xvid/DivX came out everyone was going around saying "Xvid/Divx is the same video/audio quality as DVD but 1/4 the size.". Are you joking? Talk about ignorant statement. We don't want 2.5Mbps video we want 40-50Mbps and higher! The higher the resolution with the higher the Mbps the better more crisp and pristine the image will be. I don't want no crappy compressed video and audio. If that is what you like and enjoy then fine that is fine. However try blowing that crappy resolution and 2.5Mps(which is below even DVD standards) video on a screen bigger then 50" and you will see that your "very good pictures" doesn't look so good. Just stated earlier that Westinghouse already has the next gen resolution monitor running at 1440P take a 2 hour movie with umcompressed audio and high biterate you have a movie that is well over 100GB with extras and what not.
I disagree. I've shown a regular DVD version of POTC: DMC(Pirates of the Carribian) on my friends 52" RCA HDTV through a PS3(with the PS3's good upscaler - HDMI obviously). Then I showed the Blu Ray version of POTC: DMC to people who thought they were seeing HD on regular digital cable. Each one noticed a difference which "blew them away" as they said. Now I am not saying everyone will be blown away especially if you are watching on a TV that is 30" or smaller with decent TV upscaler or decent dvd upscaler. However not all HDTV's or DVD players are created equal and the vast majority have not so good upscalers. Even then scalers can't compare to the higher bite rate and uncompressed audio of HDDVD or Blu Ray.
Why would I want to pick a movie wait until the next night to watch it when I want to watch it that night? How does that seem logical? Explain that to the average consumer.
"Oh you have to wait until the movie is down downloading before you can watch it."
"What!? Why can't I watch it now? I can watch DVDs when I pay for them right away just pop it in my player?"
Now me and you might not have a problem doing that. However can you see most the of less-informed-tech general public being able to understand that?
Looking at the Q/A, it seems that we will be getting a new event soon. One that is about iPods and AppleTV.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a September event for iPod, 
tv and audio/video content.
1. Apple wanted to focus specifically on the consumer Mac line with this announcement, so there was lots of talk about market share, unit growth, design, etc. of Macs, and very little (or no) talk about iPhone, iPod and Leopard. That was partly for the analysts, which like to have their story spoon-fed almost as much as tech journalists.
2. The iMovie section of the iLife intro video puts a lot of emphasis on scaling -- iPod-quality on up to better-than-DVD-quality video. Sounds like a good hook for a fall marketing blitz for scaling content for iPhones, widescreen iPods, Macs and (withtv) the family room HDTV.
3. iPods usually refresh in September or October ahead of Christmas shopping season.
4. The fall TV season starts in late September.
I'd like to see Apple announce in September: widescreen iPods, a TV subscription plan (all you can eat for $24.99 a month with a lot of titles available in HD, limited live streaming content), movies on demand ($4.99 and all in HD), and antv upgrade to allow direct purchase from the box. One more thing: The Beatles catalog.
I don't necessarily see the need for a hardware upgrade fortv -- depending on whether Apple emphasizes bandwidth, storage or both.
tv and audio/video content.1. Apple wanted to focus specifically on the consumer Mac line with this announcement, so there was lots of talk about market share, unit growth, design, etc. of Macs, and very little (or no) talk about iPhone, iPod and Leopard. That was partly for the analysts, which like to have their story spoon-fed almost as much as tech journalists.
2. The iMovie section of the iLife intro video puts a lot of emphasis on scaling -- iPod-quality on up to better-than-DVD-quality video. Sounds like a good hook for a fall marketing blitz for scaling content for iPhones, widescreen iPods, Macs and (with
tv) the family room HDTV.3. iPods usually refresh in September or October ahead of Christmas shopping season.
4. The fall TV season starts in late September.
I'd like to see Apple announce in September: widescreen iPods, a TV subscription plan (all you can eat for $24.99 a month with a lot of titles available in HD, limited live streaming content), movies on demand ($4.99 and all in HD), and an
tv upgrade to allow direct purchase from the box. One more thing: The Beatles catalog.I don't necessarily see the need for a hardware upgrade for
tv -- depending on whether Apple emphasizes bandwidth, storage or both.tv could also stock certain new releases by downloading the first 500MB or so of a handful of titles that you could start watching immediately.I think Apple will approach this area with a lot of caution to make sure that it's next to impossible to get 20 minutes into a movie and have it freeze up for lack of enough lag between the download and the playback.
Once you take out all the junk and use some decent compression you can get a high def movie down to about 4 or 5 gig (720p). If i max out my connection that downloads in less than 40 minutes, ie I could start streaming it live from the internet if iTMS would let me.
Decent compression? HD-DVD and Bluray are using VC-1 from Microsoft and AVC (i.e. H264). People like the extras, want 1080p video, and support for the new high-definition audio formats. If Apple were to release a 720p video service, I can guarantee you that people would be up in arms that its not 1080p. (Of course, a lot of the HDTVs out there can only display up to 720p and they won't be able to take advantage of 1080p, but they'll still complain).
Me personally, I'd be up for a 720p HD download service, and would make use of it even with the extended downloads, but I don't think the common person would.
Well I saw yours and the other person that posted a quad deal. Consider me proven wrong. I honestly didnt realize there were some quad deals out there that low. I guess technology is moving faster then I can keep up with it. haha
Video purists like myself scream when anyone tries to refer to "decent compression". There is no such thing when it comes to HD. Look at the DirecTV "HD Lite" lawsuit if you question how important we view pure mouthwatering HD quality.
I'm glad you replied. You are clearly one of Apple's most important customers, a person who is willing to pay extra for their fine industrial design. I buy Macs because I like the operating system. The box running it could be bright pink with orange polka dots for all I care. It's a tool not a work of art. I'll never understand people who think their computer should be on top of their desk instead of lurking somewhere underneath or beside it. (obviously this doesn't apply to notebooks)
As I stated in my original post I happily pay more for quality components and MacOS X, but the gap between the components Apple puts in their boxes and those from less aesthetically pleasing corporations is big. When Apple was designing their own motherboards and integrating technologies not commonly found in the wider PC world their costs forced them to price their machines higher than others. Aside from the case (which forces some engineering work and costs a few dollars per unit for Jonathan Ive's vision) and the operating system, today's Mac is a PC so price comparisons are a fair subject.
Yes by decent compression i mean h.264, The previous poster said that the download would be 50 gig, given that HDDVD uses h.264 and only stores 15gb per layer (and does 1080p) a 720p feature could easily be only a few gig without the extras. You may like extras, I don't, i never watch them. If apple does release HD downloads they will only be 720p because thats the max the appletv supports.