Quantcast
Subscribe to magazine
You are not logged in, click here to log in.
Up to Discussions in Story Discussion
38 Replies Last post: Sep 22, 2006 9:02 AM by minderbinder   Go to original post 1 2 3 Previous Next
Click to view Splashman's profile New Member
Splashman
30 posts since
Sep 27, 2005
15. Sep 20, 2006 6:24 PM in response to: HeyMan
Re: The media is the thing
Quote:<hr />
Has Apple dropped the ball on this one?

<hr />


Apple is in the business to make money; if there were no obstacles to selling HD movies, and they could make money doing it (even a little bit), they'd already be doing it. Do you doubt this?

Do you know ANY company that sells HD downloads of entire movies? Legally, I mean?

You seem to be assuming that Apple is deliberately out to ruin your day. A less moronic assumption would be that there are insurmountable obstacles for Apple to sell HD movies, or they have crunched the numbers and decided it's a money loser. For now.
Reply
Click to view jcbeckman's profile New Member
jcbeckman
16 posts since
Nov 27, 2003
16. Sep 20, 2006 6:27 PM in response to: MW Forums
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living room?
So how come a device with no HD content available only has HDMI and component video out? No S-Video? No composite? No ch 3/4?

I realize we didn't necessarily see the final product, but having none of these outputs seems very odd to me - again, since there's no HD content available to use with it.

It will be interesting to see what is officially announced when it's released.
Reply
Click to view kwill's profile Member
kwill
364 posts since
Jun 4, 2004
17. Sep 20, 2006 6:27 PM in response to: Flaming_Carrot
Re: Network protocol
Quote:<hr />
I read that 802.11n will not be ratified until mid-2007 so if that's the case I don't think Apple would be including it in its products anytime soon...
"According to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Project Timelines, the 802.11n standard is not due for final approval until July 2007."

<hr />
If my memory serves me correctly, when Apple first introduced the Airport Base Station the wireless networking protocol used had not yet been ratified either. By shear volume Apple virtually forced the standard.
Reply
Click to view Nobody's profile New Member
Nobody
58,347 posts since
Oct 18, 2007
18. Sep 20, 2006 6:41 PM in response to: MW Forums
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living room?
This is how to dominate: make it the ultimate wireless presentation tool. That easy!

1. Make Keynote or PowerPoint presentations on Mac or PC-Windows.
2. Save them to a flash pen drive.
3. Carry the pen drive to the presentation room, plug into iTV, boot Mac OS X inside it and give your presentation with a wireless remote control. No computer involved.

This gadget will sell millions in corporations, education and domestic markets. With a huge halo effect for Apple and the Mac.

What is Apple waiting for?
Reply
Click to view minderbinder's profile Enthusiast
minderbinder
1,094 posts since
Aug 30, 2004
19. Sep 20, 2006 6:41 PM in response to: pixelcruncher
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living
Quote:<hr />
Steve Job's own words were something like "almost DVD quality".

<hr />


That's the iTunes store. Who knows if the iTV can support even up to HD quality, it's a possiblity.

Quote:<hr />
If they would offer movies for say $3.99 that could be watched in the next 72 hours (for example), I'd be hitting that several times per week, at least.

<hr />


Really? I'd much rather use Netflix, if you watch a lot of movies, the price per disk is way cheaper than that. Hardcore renters are probably already using Netflix, and it's pretty much impossible for any online service to compete. If I was Apple I probably wouldn't even bother to try.

Quote:<hr />
It seems to me that an easy to use consumer box should be a one-piece that has internet connectivity and DVD and tivo and music and photos. The iTV seems to lack a built-in slot for disks. Are they expecting the home computer to handle the everything?

<hr />


Yes.

Quote:<hr />
Jobs said "near-DVD quality". 640 is "near" 720. If you expected "exactly" DVD quality, it's not anybody else's fault but your own.

<hr />


But 272 is nowhere near 480 vertical lines, I'm pretty disappointed by that. Hopefully they'll work out an anamorphic implementation in the future. Do the iTunes movies compensate for the low line count at all by being progressive instead of interlaced?

I also think it's borderline dishonest to advertise two channels of audio as surround.

Quote:<hr />
If Steve could expand his imagination beyond touting the smallest product on the planet, a hybrid system with a substantial 500GB HD would be awesome.

<hr />


He didn't do it for size, he did it for COST. Putting big internal hard drives and other features in would drive the price way up, and the market has already shown that most people aren't willing to spend what full DVRs cost.

Quote:<hr />
Do you know ANY company that sells HD downloads of entire movies? Legally, I mean?

<hr />


I agree that HD is out of the question today, but at least they could make their "near DVD" a little closer to DVD.

Quote:<hr />
So how come a device with no HD content available only has HDMI and component video out?

<hr />


Because you can bring your own HD content, and because the iTunes store may sell HD movies at some point in the future.
Reply
Click to view Splashman's profile New Member
Splashman
30 posts since
Sep 27, 2005
20. Sep 20, 2006 7:38 PM in response to: minderbinder
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living
Quote:<hr />
But 272 is nowhere near 480 vertical lines, I'm pretty disappointed by that. Hopefully they'll work out an anamorphic implementation in the future. Do the iTunes movies compensate for the low line count at all by being progressive instead of interlaced?

<hr />


640x480 is 4x3. If you've got wide-screen content, horizontal stays at 640, and the vertical reduces. 16x9 works out to 640x360; anamorphic (2.35:1) works out to 640x272. In other news, 2+2=4. It works the same way on DVD; if you're watching a wide-screen flick, you're watching a whole lot less than 480 vertical lines.

And all digital downloads are progressive. Yes, it's possible to encode interlaced, but nobody's going to sell it, unless it's intended for NTSC broadcast.
Reply
Click to view Jason Snell's profile Macworld Editorial
Jason Snell
2,131 posts since
Dec 11, 2000
21. Sep 20, 2006 7:44 PM in response to: Splashman
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living
Quote:<hr />
If you've got wide-screen content, horizontal stays at 640, and the vertical reduces. 16x9 works out to 640x360; anamorphic (2.35:1) works out to 640x272. In other news, 2+2=4. It works the same way on DVD; if you're watching a wide-screen flick, you're watching a whole lot less than 480 vertical lines.

<hr />


Not true. Anamorphic does not mean "widescreen." Anamorphic is a method of encoding extra lines of resolution in a standard 4:3 picture by filling the entire contents of a 4:3 frame with movie data, even though the movie is not in a 4:3 ratio. The end result is that you end up with only 640 (or 720, I guess, for DVD) pixels of width, but a full 480 lines of height instead of something like 272. The end result is that, on widescreen TVs or TVs with resolutions beyond the standard-def NTSC resolution, anamorphic content packs in more data than it would.

Or to perhaps put it more simply, widescreen content on a "regular" DVD (and this is true of Apple's iTunes downloads) contains 640 (or 720) pixels of width and a reduced number of lines in height. Anamorphic content on a DVD contains 640 (or 720) pixels of width, but a full 480 lines of height. If you viewed that in a DVD player that didn't support anamorphic discs, it would look all stretched, as if it were too tall. But most (if not all) DVD players display it properly, by mashing the image back down in a letterbox. If you've got a widescreen TV, it displays the full 480 lines of height and then stretches out the width, interpolating the pixels. The end result is a picture that's got more lines of resolution than it normally would.

Personally, I'm disappointed that the movies Apple's selling are merely cropped letterbox copies, rather than full 640 x 480 movies with an anamorphic flag.

Jason Snell, Editorial Director, Macworld
Reply
Click to view tomottoe's profile New Member
tomottoe
29 posts since
May 29, 2003
22. Sep 20, 2006 8:04 PM in response to: MacTechAspen
Re: The media is the thing
The future is neigh.


Frau Blcher would have something to say about that.
Reply
Click to view Wingman16's profile New Member
Wingman16
7 posts since
Jul 18, 2005
23. Sep 20, 2006 8:11 PM in response to: kwill
Re: Network protocol
Quote:<hr />
Quote:<hr />
I read that 802.11n will not be ratified until mid-2007 so if that's the case I don't think Apple would be including it in its products anytime soon...
"According to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Project Timelines, the 802.11n standard is not due for final approval until July 2007."

<hr />
If my memory serves me correctly, when Apple first introduced the Airport Base Station the wireless networking protocol used had not yet been ratified either. By shear volume Apple virtually forced the standard.

<hr />


Yes, but this was for the current 802.11g airport cards/base stations, not the first edition of 802.11b. Apple released these about 5-6? months before the official standards were set, and the official standards were relatively unchanged.
Reply
Click to view lwdesign's profile Member
lwdesign
438 posts since
Sep 28, 2005
24. Sep 20, 2006 8:15 PM in response to: Flaming_Carrot
Re: Network protocol
Quote:<hr />
I read that 802.11n will not be ratified until mid-2007 so if that's the case I don't think Apple would be including it in its products anytime soon...
"According to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Project Timelines, the 802.11n standard is not due for final approval until July 2007."
Saying that, I have a Netgear draft 802.11n router and cards now and it is seriously fast stuff, though I'm taking a gamble that the spec does not change over the next few months rendering my gear obsolete.

<hr />


The great thing about firmware is that it can easily be updated via the Internet and that includes 802.11n. I expect Apple to come out with 802.11n well before the ratification process is completed. They did that with Airport and they've long been leaders in including the newest technology. Your Netgear router and cards should be firmware updateable, that is if Netgear has been smart and placed the software in firmware rather than non-updatable chips.

I expect to see Apple successfully start the legal download of film revolution just like it did with music, and then continue to push the envelope into HD as bandwidth services improve.

I can also see third party companies jumping on the bandwagon to produce software and hardware that will turn the iTV into an easy to use Tivo-like device. I doubt that Apple will supply this functionality as they'd liberally upset TV content providers and their advertisers--why would people want to buy shows from the ITS if they could get them for free. However, the iTV will be a great basis for third parties to create all kinds of solutions, just like the iPod has been.

The terrific thing about the iPod and the upcoming iTV is that other companies can accessorize and improve them with add-ons and bells and whistles. This is what has made any platform or product successful--that and doing a great job of creating a human-friendly interface that is easy to use and makes sense, which is something Apple has excelled at since its inception.
Reply
Click to view Mississauga's profile Member
Mississauga
275 posts since
Jan 27, 2002
25. Sep 20, 2006 8:59 PM in response to: MW Forums
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living room?
Assuming Apple will get the "iTV" correct, right out of the box, it'll only be a matter of time before the product fulfills most of the gaps pointed out by current discussions. Like any other new Apple product, early adopters will be the guinea pigs and those of us who wait will likely be extremely satisfied.

We must all be aware the types of quality demands some are making are pretty unrealistic, while Apple seems to be currently trying to keep movie files to a considered practical size for download. When compression methods improve or the "pipeline" enlarges, I'm sure the quality will improve.
Reply
Click to view schoonerman's profile Member
schoonerman
267 posts since
Oct 16, 2004
26. Sep 20, 2006 10:03 PM in response to: MW Forums
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living room?
Quote:<hr />
Prediction: Look for Microsoft and Sony to try to delay ratification of the 802.11n spec until they can catch up.

<hr />


They may not have to. 802.11 is pretty much self-delaying.

Quote:<hr />
"According to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Project Timelines, the 802.11n standard is not due for final approval until July 2007."

<hr />


That's the current timelines. Before the early-2006 standardization meeting broke up in disarray, it was expected that ratification would be around Jan 2007.

It's going to be harder this time, as each of the vendors who have prematurely pushed 802.11n devices out the door (most of them not interoperating with anybody elses--speaking at the chip level) will try to insist that THEIR premature chips shouldn't need replacement, but that it should all be done with firmware upgrades, for them, with chip replacements being for the other guys).

We're much closer to the mess that happened during the runup to the V-90 "56K" modem standard than to the smoother development of 802.11b.

On the other hand, 802.11n MIGHT happen per the current timelines. Stranger things have happened. The good news is that there aren't all that many chip makers in the game--far fewer than there are consumer box nameplates.

THEN Microsoft and Sony might decide to step in as per the first quote.
Reply
Click to view MacTel's profile Enthusiast
MacTel
1,028 posts since
Jun 6, 2005
27. Sep 20, 2006 11:46 PM in response to: MacTechAspen
Re: The media is the thing
Quote:<hr />
Television has commercials. Paying a few bucks to watch a show free of commercials, even blurry fast ones, is worth it for a lot of people, and as a bonus you get to watch it again and again for no additional charge.


<hr />


If the commercials are funny and well produced then I want to see them. I don't mind commercials with TV programs but I do mind them with movies. Disney is the main violator of my DVD experience. They block the fast forward and menu buttons so you're stuck watching a millions previews before getting to the Chicken Little movie or whatever movie.
Reply
Click to view ryarber's profile New Member
ryarber
11 posts since
Nov 23, 2003
28. Sep 21, 2006 12:22 AM in response to: minderbinder
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living
Quote:<hr />
Because you can bring your own HD content, and because the iTunes store may sell HD movies at some point in the future.

<hr />


How do you propose to get it to the iTV? If you've got HD content on your mac, and don't have a hardwired network, you would have to have 802.11n on both ends to handle it.

The other option is the USB slot on the iTV. Could a HD-DVD or Blue-Ray drive hook up there and be run by the iTV? I'll bet that functionality is going to be built in. It would be a perfect solution. You could get your regular DVD drive now and wait for the prices to come down on the HD devices before you upgrade.

Yes, the HDMI and Component are there for the purpose of HD content. But Apple hasn't answered the question of where the HD content will come from yet. Certainly not from iTunes, and not from an iPod. How many of us actually have HD video cameras now? Not many.
Reply
Click to view jdb8167's profile Enthusiast
jdb8167
1,498 posts since
Aug 30, 2004
29. Sep 21, 2006 1:41 AM in response to: Jason Snell
Re: Analysis: Can Apple's iTV dominate the living
Quote:<hr />
Personally, I'm disappointed that the movies Apple's selling are merely cropped letterbox copies, rather than full 640 x 480 movies with an anamorphic flag.

<hr />
I'm guessing that it is all about the bandwidth cost and download times.

Take for example the one movie I've downloaded from iTS, Flightplan. It is a 2.35:1 widescreen movie which was delivered with a resolution of 640x272. Total running time is 1:38:03. The total size was 1.03 GB and it took approximately 35 minutes to download on my 6 mbps comcast cable modem. If the movie was delivered in anamorphic 480p, it would have an approximate size of 1.8 GB. Not a trivial change.

Also, does Quicktime know how to do anamorphic scaling? I assume it does but I don't really know. Maybe there is a technical limitation.
Reply
Go to original post 1 2 3 Previous Next

Actions

More Like This

Macworld powered by Jive Software's Clearspace ® -1.10.1 (Version: {3}) - Submit product feedback
© Jive Software