Apple TV to be a Centrally Controlled P2P Network?

Rolgar writes "PBS' Bob Cringely theorizes that since the Apple TV will be an always-on device with a 40GB hard drive, Apple may move to content distribution via a P2P network. The ISPs will incur higher bandwidth locally, possibly lose some subscribers to cable TV, but have fewer costs through the Tier II Internet backbone providers. Bob also expects that Google will be involved with their fiber network and advertising expertise, and my hope is that they'll bundle in YouTube content as well. The article suspects that they won't get around to announcing the full details of this plan until they hit a half million units or more, and that this Apple and Google pairing will become the equivalent of a cable TV provider with almost none of the infrastructure costs. Eventually, he hopes, we'll see a real HD revolution from Apple and Google for this service." If Apple rolled something like this out to the service, would you bite on it? What would it take you to move to this over Tivo or MythTV?

Comments

better than ... how?

[jamienk]

How is this better than the following workflow (which is what many do now, and more will do soon):

* Find content on the Internet or other places (via whatever means)

* Download/aquire (again, however you need to)

* Watch on your TV (via any network-attached device or stand-alone DVD player that supports lots of codecs and can be controlled with a remote)

The only things outlined in TFA that differs from this is

* What is available is controlled by some bullshit companies who will have your worst interest at heart

* You have to watch ads

* You have to pay for downloads

* Apple and Google spy on you

Er, um ... no thanks!

Re:better than ... how?

[jamienk]

Fair use? Fair use is about reviewing, satirizing, or otherwise quoting or mildly incorporating someone's legally protected monopoly on some expression. It's an interesting edge case in the history of "US copyright court decisions" if you're into studying that academically.

No, what I'm talking about is the act of watching filmed scenarios, or whatever else the good artists of the world create in their infinite inventiveness in order to have people see.

What I'm talking about is participating in culture, and about benefiting from expression, and about enjoying art.

If that's illegal, then the laws are seriously broken. You can't break something that is broken. All you can do is try to fix it, and in the meantime, help spread the wonderful bounty of entertaining, enlightening, and thought-provoking artistic expression.

All the good people in the world share in this way. Many others would sacrifice their own and everyone else's children to try to grab some cheap, revolting, reactive power for a fleeting moment.

Re:better than ... how?

[jamienk]

I didn't make that accusation. I said that I think that you (or at least that other guy until you too came along) are defending the status quo because ... well because it is the status quo. That's why a lot of people defend the status quo. In fact I specifically distanced myself from claiming that this issue is anything like slavery, Nazism, etc.

Copyright law works the way it does because of a lot of factors, a large one of which is lobbying by people who came up with ways they could make money off of it and the minutia of the laws. A VERY small part was some sort of planned-out way to encourage artists or some sort of philosophical ideological agreement about inherent ownership of ideas or expression. The way you talk, you'd think think that it was a "natural law" -- "artists should have rights" you say. Artists rights means that people can't share a digital copy of art? Since when? Why?

I think a much more important "artists right" is the right to make your art incorporate others' art -- this is the way art has always worked, but it is this "copyright" which is now being used to deprive artists of this fundamental "right."

Copyright has everything to do with selling -- the idea justifying it (it is an exception to the fundamental concept of free-speech) was that, in order to encourage artists (and inventors) to make their art (and inventions), they would be provided with a monopoly to copy -- that is sell -- it, to give them a special leg-up on the competition.

And it very much does dictate meaning -- the forbidding of "copying" inherently makes the claim that I Micky Mouse, say, is not the kind of person who would ever [insert your interesting Mickey Mouse film idea here]. In the case of the Apple TV (and iTunes), they are presenting a model by which I consume their product. It is presented according to their classification schemes, with their descriptions, and their threat to me that if I "misuse" their materials, I will have the full force of the law come down on me.

Why do you (and that other guy) insist on calling me names and dismissing me with such violence? As you see it, the law is was and will be the law no matter what it says, and there is no room for the rest of us.

Re:I'm paying for distribution now, too?

[mtec]

Perhaps for a potential discount on movies?

Re:Depends on the features

[cayenne8]

"I love my Tivo to death, and have it set up just the way I like it. "

I like my Tivo, and really love my MythTV box(es). My thoughts are...will be cool if they do this AND someone figures a way to adapt Myth so that it too can hook into this 'network' and be able to get content off it just like the AppleTV box.

Cost

[DesertBlade]

I have DVR through Comcast for about $75 with digital cable plus. Now if I watch 10 shows a week, and the dowload costs $2 each that is $80 a month (10 shows * 4 weeks * $2), toss in the cost of the unit and then subscribtion costs and it is even less appealing. I won't replace my DVR.

Re:In Time & On...

[mblase]

The biggest problem I have with this new device is that it's only going to work with iTunes. I want to have a media distribution box (preferrably linux) streaming audio, video, and pictures to my tv and stereo.

While I agree on geek principles, I don't see how a keyboardless box like the iTV would be able to connect to any streaming software source the user might have, at least not without a lot of PC-end configuration. That sort of thing completely trumps Apple's ease-of-use principle, which is practically the First Commandment of their business.

On the other hand, iTunes is free, and Quicktime supports plugins and can handle just about any codec you want (disclaimer: I'm a Mac user and I know firsthand that there's plenty of things VLC plays better). So for the average user there's little to complain about, and for the non-average geek there's better ways to do what iTV does without buying iTV at all.

iTunes CAN do DivX

[alexhmit01]

iTunes plays anything that is in Quicktime Format, and Quicktime will happily store MPEG-4 video. Once you install the DivX Codec for Quicktime (a free download), you can play your DivX movies in Quicktime. All you have to do is save the new file with the Quicktime wrapper (that stores the meta-information) and copy it into iTunes. Remember, Quicktime is Apple's media playing system. The Quicktime Player is just a small front-end for playing Quicktime moves (on Mac), or an embedded Quicktime + Player for Windows.

I've been debating ditching my DirecTV + Tivos system, because I can't get the new HD content without MPEG-4, and once I go MPEG-4, I can't use my HD Tivo, and the new software seems crappy. The Wife and I realized that the amount of non-network television we watch is miniscule (the 6 networks, even pretended MyNetworkTV is a Network) cover 90% of our viewing... add Battlestar Galactica, Daily Show, and Colbert Report, and that's pretty much hit, save a one-two shows a year on HBO/Showtime that come out on DVD later anyway.

This raises the Question: instead of Satellite boxes all over the place, could a MythTV recorder with a nice fat RAID Array + 6 HDTV cards that record EVERY OTA prime time show in HDTV (why bother selecting programming when you can grab them all), with a Mac Mini running an Automator Script and/or a simple Applescript running hourly to add the Quicktime Wrapper + Meta Data get all my Content into nice and happy iTunes, for easy playback on Apple TVs in the house... doesn't sound far fetched, does it?

Re:I'm paying for distribution now, too?

[Random Destruction]

I'm pretty sure getting paid to send data would be against my (and most others') TOS

Re:In Time & On...

[monopole]

Um, Democracy Player?, cross platform, integrates bitorrent and VLC. Plays anything, automatically caches torrents, sweet GUI, zero configuration. All you have to do is download the installer run it and select or provide channel feeds. Search for content, get a listing and click the download arrow. When the file is ready just click on the listing and it plays. Doesn't get simpler than that!

Re:Leave TiVo? No Way

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

They can have my TiVo when they pry it from my cold dead hands.

A few years back I was looking at a device to record TV and basically function as a Tivo. I looked at MythTV, Tivo, Windows Media Edition, and a couple of others. When I looked into Tivo, I was pretty disappointed. They want you to pay a monthly subscription or a big chunk of change up front, with no guarantee the service will be any good in future. You have to jump through hoops to enable the skip ahead/back and the times are not easily configurable? There is no easy way to easily export the video to my laptop for viewing on the plane, and burning DVDs and VCDs is a pain. The interface was okay, but it seemed like some of the these features were no-brainers. What was going on? A little research showed Tivo's biggest customers are cable providers who ship them as cable boxes. Suddenly it made sense. They were not making features customers wanted easy, because it was not something their big partners wanted. That's a smart business move, but sure does not make me want one.

For the same reason I'm somewhat skeptical that Apple will ever ship a good PVR. They are also partners with some of the same content providers. I ended up going with an Elgato EyeTV unit. I had an old mac sitting around as a Web and media server already, so adding the functionality was cheap by comparison. It lets me skip commercials nicely without any easter eggs and burning a DVD of a show I want to archive is as easy as selecting the export menu item and dropping a blank DVD in. If I want to save some shows as mpegs for my next plane ride, it is easy as cake. I can pick from a variety of scheduling services, including free ones so there is no monthly fee.

I understand people who really liked Tivo back in the day, but isn't it clear by now that they sold out and are no longer doing what is best for users, in favor of doing what is most profitable for cable companies? Brand loyalty i something I'll never really get I suppose.

Two things..

[lightversusdark]

Two things rub me about the AppleTV.
Firstly, the networking hardware:

It has 802.11 (n!) wireless and 100BaseT ethernet. I think it's a bit tight not to have Gig-Ethernet, surely for the sake of pennies, and it appears that the wireless is only capable as a client. It's a shame that it doesn't seem like it can be used to create or extend a network, like the old Airport Express. I can see the business argument for making you buy another unit, however, I could be wrong about this.

Secondly, especially with the announcement of this product, I ask myself again "Why the hell haven't Apple bought Elgato already?". Their eyeTV tuners cater for terrestrial, cable and satellite broadcasts over USB and Firewire, and the lack of any conventional broadcast capability is the most glaring omission from the AppleTV. It's a perfect fit with any of the Elgato boxes, and the eyeTV software is very 'iLife-like', and even includes Front Row integration. I doubt that the Elgato functionality could be hacked into the AppleTV box, even though there's a USB port on the back begging to be connected to a tuner (a self-contained solution - perhaps even usable as a PVR without a computer). The hardware and software should be all integrated, and from where I'm standing the smartest thing that Apple could do is simply buy Elgato and knock the corners off the setup - it's nearly all there already.

Disclaimer: I think the Elgato eyeTV 410 is the best realised peripheral I have bought this millenium.