Slashdot Mirror
AppleTV Hits the Streets
Stories are starting to pop up all over the web about the AppleTV, which evidently means that Apple has set loose the hounds of marketing and the units are (or will be tomorrow) available in Apple stores. Still no word on whether or not it plays DivX files. That will be the key to me purchasing one.
"No wireless access to the iTunes Store. Less space than a TiVo. Lame."
The question is. When will we get (non Disney) content?
I'd imagine MPAA member execs will be a little cautious about entering a partnership with Apple after seeing Jobs' enthusiasm about music DRM turn into an about-face when confronted with interoperability regulation in the EU,
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Me too. I hate it when I buy hardware with too many features.
I still haven't bought a DVD player, because all the models I've seen include subtitles. WTF? I'm not deaf, why should I pay extra for subtitles!
I respond to your sigs
I'm a bit disappointed that it doesn't have some basic tivo functionality. You can't control a cable or satellite box, you can't tune in over-the-air broadcasts, analog or digital. All you can watch is iTunes content, most of which you have to *pay* for.
I would have snapped up an "HD iTivo" in a second but that's not what it is.
So when are they releasing the iRack?
Tivo is not necessarily the right product to compare it against. I think comparison between AppleTV and XBox 360 based IP TV will be a better apples to apples comparison (Saw what I did there? Saw what I did there?)
IP based TV is one area where I don't see Apple making a dent on Microsoft's solution. There are many things going Microsoft's way here:
(a) Microsoft's 10 million or so install-base
(b) The fact that unlike most other Microsoft products, 360 has decent reputation and following in it's field
(c) Xbox Live is also very much "alive" already
(d) There will be a huge intersection of gamers and early adopters of IP based TV
(e) Xbox 360 is already connected to your TV and your home-theatre
I was set to buy one, but it is fro wode screen only. II can watch widescreen movies on my standard TV, why couldn't the include s-Video and two analog plugs for sound? or wuold ahve making 9" to a side just been too big?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The thing will play specially encoded H.264 movies from iTunes with DRM bolted onto, end of story
Or, you know... not.
There's an "Export to [apple]tv..." option in the latest quicktime that produces unencumbered H.264 files. So DRM is not a requirement for it to play. The apple specs only declare a smallish subset of H.264 and MPEG4 files, but 720p H.264 isn't bad at all.
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
Will the remote only have one button?
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
iPods, iTunes, and AppleTV all support MP3s. You could probably have made the exact same argument for that. I don't think them selling protected videos in their store would preclude them from supporting Divx. At the same time, I think the chances of it supporting Divx out of the box are slim as their computers don't even support it natively (needs a codec download).
Personally I will be waiting for GoogleTV, where it streams 24/7 YouTube videos produced by amateurs.
Obviously with Google's advanced technology in search and category, these videos will be sorted into different categories, genre, rating etc.
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
My laptop is nearly as big as my tv and has a much nicer screen, and my DVD player handles .avis and jpgs pretty well, and will be good if I ever get a better TV. But lots of people have nice TVs and not so convienent computers, this will be good for them.
For thoseof us who use our computers near-constantly there doesn't seem to be a point of making it easier to go from computer to TV, I don't think this box is for us. Now, if iTunes gets more movies and/or better pricing on movies and TV shows, then that may help.
What operating system it runs?
I guess if one takes the word of the Apple spec sheet for the Apple TV box, it plays:
H.264 and protected H.264 (from iTunes Store): Up to 5 Mbps, Progressive Main Profile (CAVLC) with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 1280 by 720 pixels at 24 fps, 960 by 540 pixels at 30 fps)
iTunes Store purchased video: 320 by 240 pixels or 640 by 480 pixels
MPEG-4: Up to 3 Mbps, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 720 by 432 pixels at 30 fps)
So, it isn't quite as limited as so seem to say that it is. I'm willing to take a look, but I'm happy streaming to my Buffalo LinkTheatre and am looking forward to trying out the Galaxy Metal Gear 3500IPTV box when it gets here. I may try out the Apple TV just because I own a Mac and I like to tinker with such things, but at this point I wouldn't described myself as excited about it. I don't see it giving me much that I don't get with my Elgato EyeHome unit, except for the iTunes content access and the EyeHome has other nice features. (I wonder why Elgate quit selling it.)
But that's just my $0.00 worth. (Yeah, it's free and worth every penny.)
Or the many, many products (from a variety of companies) that do similar things but typically with more features (like DVD player, the mentioned AVI/DivX support, etc).
For example, the only thing that the Apple TV has that the D-link DSM-520 doesn't is the snazzy interface and the ability to play iTunes-protected media. On the other hand, the D-link gives you the ability to play a huge range of media formats (including DivX, WMV, MPEG-2/MPEG-1), has the S-video output, video up to 1080i, doesn't have that horrendous tiny remote and is $50 cheaper.
I'm sure the interface will be nice and the fact that it's the only system (outside of a cheap Mac Mini) that plays iTunes content will be a selling point for some, but I just don't see this taking off. I buy a lot of Apple gear and I've even bought my share of videos off of iTunes, but this just isn't on my list.
Thanks for your worthless post. You may want to delay hitting the submit button until you have something substantial to say.
Is this the Xbox 360 that can not sync your computer music to its harddrive for whatever bizzare reason? To listen to music on my 360, I have to turn on my computer (Laptop) in my family room. The user interface stinks and it does not play any of my iTunes stuff. No thank you.
Correction: Apple generally produces high-quality hardware six months after the product was launched. Until then, the early adopters are just one big beta team.
-----
PGP Key ID 0xCB8FF658
FYI, I have not yet used the AppleTV. On an OS X machine, running 10.4.9, with front row, there is a method to play many movie files that are not purchased from the iTunes store. For example, let's say you have digital video of your legal content, ie. kids hockey game, or a school play etc. and your Codec of choice is somewhere in the XVID or DIVX family. If you have the proper plug-ins for Quicktime/iTunes, they will play. It can get expensive in storage space if the content you are storing is in 22, 42 or 120 minute chunks, and doubly so if you have configured iTunes to copy all of your material into it's own DB. You can drag those video files directly into iTunes and edit their tags to sort them appropriately. Alas, I am not the source of this info, just one who has been able to make it work. The real trial and error - sorting out the bugs folks are here: http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20051 013124423475
Again, I have not tried this on the AppleTV, nor have I tried it on XP or Vista - just a macbook pro.
The XBOX 360 makes a great Apple TV replacement for people who use PCs intead of Macs. It costs a little more, but it will play DVDs and cool games in addition to streaming your music, photos, downloaded shows, and TV (including live TV). Works properly with HDTV and all the DRM crap as well for those with digital cable. And it even comes in white!
If you are trying to save cash, you can also use your classic XBOX or third-party dedicated device. We call them "Media Center Extenders" here at the 'Soft.
While I agree that the Apple TV is severely limited in functionality, your attack on the remote I think is misguided. Personally I've found the Apple remote to be one of the best things to happen to media viewing since TV remotes went wireless. Navigating through Front Row with the remote is elegant and simple and a far superior experience to using any traditional media remote. Everything can be achieved with far less buttons, in a much smaller and neater remote than any other TV/media device offers. It's more intuitive and has almost zero learning curve. That's the sort of innovation that Apple are famous for, and the Apple remote is not an exception.
Less buttons == better.
Perhaps you haven't actually tried using it?
As a Mac user, fully agreed. My question is though: Why haven't other manufacturers clued into Apple's techniques?
Case in point: AppleTV vs. D-link DSM-520. Which sounds sexier? Why do manufacturers keep insisting on using freaking SKUs for product names? It does not work! Especially when your brand name has no style cachet in existence!
Second: Apple spent a lot of time on that UI, and it's slick as hell and looks easy enough to use for a grandma. Why can't other DVR, set-top box, or any other electronics manufacturer for that matter, clue into this and start designing beautiful and functional UI?/p>
I may be an Apple fan, but I know that if these other companies started spending some actual effort on their packaging, presentation, and UI, they would have Apple in a world of pain. SanDisk did pretty well with the Sansa in that regard, IMHO, and I recently played with a Sony Ericsson K790, which is a hella slick phone. Why aren't other manufacturers doing this?
No, seriously, I can't wait 'til someone makes a Linux hack for it.
One feature they really ought to add, and it could be done all in software, would be the ability to stream video off network shares or NAS devices rather than relying solely on its internal HD.
The only thing that the Apple TV has that the D-link DSM-520 doesn't ...
You're wrong about the UI being the most important, the most important thing it has that the DSM doesn't is an Intel CPU. The AppleTV will be become the modders box du jour for video because of this fact alone. This is the FIRST Intel based media PC that is both silent and affordable. I'm expecting mine friday and the first thing I'm doing is popping the case open, pulling the drive, and seeing what I can do with this thing.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
"Still no word on whether or not it plays DivX files."
With an Apple product, "no word" definitely means it doesn't play them.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
How the hell did this get moderated "insightful" instead of "funny"? No, really. That's bad even for the kind of moderation you tend to get around here.
Tivo records any program I want, even pay-per-view movies that are cheaper than iTunes movies. If I opt for premium channels I can record all the movies I want from HBO, Showtime, etc for a low monthly fee.
My DVD player allows me to play DVDs I rent from a local video store that rents DVDs cheaper than iTunes sells downloadable movies. All I have to do is wait for a DVD release, and I have half-off membership to rent the DVD for $1.25 instead of $2.50 for a new movie because I am a loyal customer and get the discount as a result.
I don't need to have an Internet connection to use the Tivo or DVD players. In the case of Tivo most of the programming is due to a low cost monthly fee, and I get the Tivo player/recorder for free if I sign up for a year contract.
I don't really use iTunes, so I wouldn't benefit from an AppleTV box. I think that iTunes is ruining the market and locking down what we can and cannot play on our own equipment. We no longer can buy a movie, and we no longer have control over how we can play it and on what device we can play it on. For example my Linux box and third party MP3 player cannot play iTunes files, nor can my Amiga box. Ironically that my G3 iMac runs Mac OS9, and does not have the latest iTunes software for it to use with the AppleTV had I bought one.
AppleTV is a nice idea, I suppose if one buys a lot of iTunes files. I except Microsoft to have a MSNTV in a year or two to compete with AppleTV. I'd suspect they use some sort of Windows CE type device at the $299 or $199 price range, or maybe offer a discount on an XBox 360 if the buying agrees to a one year contract with media subscriptions and get $200 in rebates from the XBox 386 sale.
The limitations of the AppleTV is that it cannot get my satellite programming, cannot play my DVDs (do they expect me to rip them into some format and violate that MPAA agreement?), cannot work with my Linux and Amiga boxes, and limits how many times I can play a file or how long I can play a file due to DRM that isn't present on my Tivo or DVD players.
My Tivo and DVD players allow me to play any media any time I want for as long as I want for how many times I want to play it. AppleTV does not, so I don't need AppleTV.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
This whole article is an embarrassment to SlashDot. The OP starts off by "wondering" if Apple TV will support DivX when the information on supported formats has been posted on the Apple TV web site for months.
Most of the responders seem to know nothing about the product. Asking embarrassingly stupid questions like "does it have a keyboard?", "When are they going to have non-Disney movies?" and telling us that you can only play DRM'ed video on it???
There is hardly a question posed here that would not be answered by a ten second trip to the Apple TV website and anyone following the product even the slightest bit would know the answer to them. Most of the "opinions" on the product here are ill-informed nonsense at best. On top of that, there is a lot of bitter, mean-spirited, childish banter that one would expect on kids sites like Digg or Gizmodo, not SlashDot. I am truly embarrassed to see this kind of junk here.
For those who want to know:
- doesn't support DivX
- a keyboard would make it a computer, not a set-top streamer
- non-Disney movies already available (have been for a while)
- *does* play non DRM'ed music and video (just like iPod)
I am not going to bother trying to refute every point made here or talk up the device, but for a cool techie site populated by intelligent IT people who are supposed to be in the know on stuff like this... this article and most of the related comments are a joke.
OK. It's not hard to find a widescreen TV these days but my 4:3 still works. It's still good enough. How hard would it have been to just fit the stupid menus in 4:3 format as an option? Apple may be human-focused but it certainly isn't customer-focused.
Pixels? Kids these days! In my day, we had lines. Lots of them. And every one of them were horizontal. We had to line them up on our tubes (yeah, tubes!) to make pictures out of them. By hand. We had these dials see, with strange labels like V-Hold and Horiz.
Pixels! We would have died to have pixels.
The Spoon
Updated 6/28/2011
With an Apple product, "no word" definitely means it doesn't play them.
Well, but there's not "no word". There's specific word that it doesn't play them direct from Apple itself. It syncs with iTunes; that's what it does. It supports h.264 and QuickTime, which is what iTunes supports. That's what it plays.
Maybe eventually somebody will figure out how to hack it to play divx, but out of the box, it definitely doesn't. A simple look at the AppleTV product page would tell you that. The submitter apparently doesn't know how to read.
Or you could, you know, just use LiVES and create H264 files for free.
Welcome to Slashdot, you must be new here.
My other first post is car post.
"With an Apple product, "no word" definitely means it doesn't play them."
Counterexample: Did you ever notice how the MacBook specs never tell you it does 802.11a? 802.11g standard; 802.11n capable
Maybe it's because Jobs declared 802.11a dead a few years ago and nobody wants to make him look bad. I mean how could it possibly hurt sales to tell people it supports additional channels that they might use in the future?
Controlling complexity is the essence of computer programming. -Brian Kernigan
All this for $299? You could theoretically buy an Xbox 360 for the same price and watch video stored on your computer downloaded from the internet or DVDs, or play games. For $399 (not Mossberg's "50% more"), you can watch video stored on your computer, play DVDs, play games, download games and demos, and download episodes of shows and movies as well as trailers, etc. You don't even need to have a controller plugged in. The remote will do just fine.
For $300, you could also buy an old Xbox, "convert" it to something similar, and still have money for a Tivo. And I'm sure there's dozens of other options (that I'm not aware of) that work just as well for less.
I'm not a fan of useless combination of features but AppleTV is far, far away from being a killer app, as are most set-top boxes.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
- doesn't support DivX
- a keyboard would make it a computer, not a set-top streamer
- non-Disney movies already available (have been for a while)
- *does* play non DRM'ed music and video (just like iPod)
My additions:
- it *does* play H.264 and *only* H.264 video (protected and unprotected)
- it plays a myriad of audio formats (probably all the ones the iPods do) but, again, only 1 video format
- it has *no* video/audio inputs on the device, and cannot record *anything*, ever.
- it can connect to any copy if iTunes software running on a LAN and can either stream or be synchronized like an iPod using its built-in 40Gig HD
So, basically, this can be used for *four* purposes
1) Playing videos you have bought off the iTunes Store and downloaded off Quicktime trailers
2) Playing videos you have, for some reason, in H.264 format
3) Viewing Photos in most of the popular formats
4) Listening to supported audio files in most of the popular formats
It does *nothing* and I mean *nothing* else.
I, for one, will not be buying this. $1/song, $2/TV show, $10/movie all in awful fidelities and with a sub-par selection is absolutely ball-busting. Moreover, I can't loan any of this stuff to a friend or resell it when I'm done.
You buy your big-ass plasma TV and an AppleTV and you'll notice damn fast the difference between your HD Cable TV and the mess you downloaded off iTunes. Not to mention a 128kbit/s AAC iTunes song streaming to your stereo.
Apple's 'digital lifestyle' is cheap, highly limited crap with a high price tag. With the money I save from NOT buying into this vicious cycle of over-priced lock-in, lock-out, I'll buy myself a TiVo and a Netflix/Blockbuster account (which is now shipping HDDVD and BluRay). Larger selection, higher fidelity, more choices, choose to rent or choose to buy.
Latewire
By opening a Divx file into a registered version of Quicktime you can save a reference file of the movie that is loadable into iTunes and Front Row. Works with Xvid as well. I haven't tested this on an AppleTV but since it's the conduit for iTunes into your TV, I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The Splintered Mind - Overcoming
Compare the cost of your cable bill + netflix account + tivo service to that of just buying episodes of the shows and movies you watch. Maybe it doesn't work out well for you, but there are some people who would do very well with something like this.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
I think the reason why it doesn't support Divx is obvious. Apple wants to try and kill Divx as a de facto standard, if they possibly can. They would much rather have people using H.264 inside .mp4 container files, than Divx video inside .avi or .divx containers.
.divx or .avi into an .mp4 file without decompressing and recompressing it, thus avoiding loss. I'm not aware of any software tools that do this, though, and I might be misunderstanding ways in which Divx diverges from the standards.
.mp4 win this one, I'm not sure that they're going to; the installed base of divx-playing equipment may just be too big, and they may be forced to release an update to add support for it later.
.divx or Divx-containing .avis, which are just as much of a closed, single-vendor, proprietary format as MS Word's .doc is, and everyone loves to just shit all over that. The .mp4 container format is the video equivalent of ODF, and although I'm not going to buy one, I hope that the Apple TV is popular enough to get the script kiddies and release groups that push TV shows and movies out on bittorrent using it (because, lets face it, the main driver of Divx is "unauthorized" content, to put it politely).
It's my understanding though that at least in recent versions, Divx is essentially ISO-compliant MPEG-4 Part 2 ASP video, albeit in a nonstandard container. So it seems like it ought to be possible to 'recontainerize' a Divx
Although I would really like to see Apple and
I find it odd that so many Slashdotters seem in love with
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
You do realise not everyone in the world is an IT nerd/geek/(insert knowledgeable stereotype here) so you will probably understand why Apple keeps things so simple.
Part of the reason I own a Mac is because it's built for novice users to learn quickly, but it also has some real power under the hood.
AppleTV has the latter but not the former.
The AppleTV was designed by the makers of ElGato's EyeTV. Apple literally walked into ElGato and took their entire development team for it (it involved duct tape and tasers, from what I understand). The EyeTV had the ability to play tons of different formats including divx and VIDEO_TS. You could also browse the web (the real web, not special-formatted pages) and it was less than $200.
So all this really is is just a crippled version of a product Apple bought and killed. Don't tell me this was in an effort to make it easier to use. The video lock-in of this was specifically to point people towards Apple and keep people locked into Quicktime and iTunes.
The "hard apple" I'm sleeping on was the fact that I own an EyeTV and this immediately became unsupported when Apple "bought" the ElGato developers. I've been looking for a replacement ever since, and this AppleTV just doesn't measure up, even though it costs way more.
Latewire
My point wasn't about Apple TV specifically, the quote I was replying to was about Apple in general:
> Apple's 'digital lifestyle' is cheap, highly limited crap with a high
> price tag. With the money I save from NOT buying into this vicious
> cycle of over-priced lock-in, lock-out, I'll buy myself a TiVo and
> a Netflix/Blockbuster account (which is now shipping HDDVD and BluRay).
> Larger selection, higher fidelity, more choices, choose to rent or
> choose to buy.
Yes I own 3 Macs and the only turning point for me was the Unix kernel - Finally Apple introduces a command line capable OS!
I don't go for the simplicity but the power underneath and the fact it's no longer just something that looks good.
Besides, good luck finding decent support for a TiVo let alone someone who knows what one is in Australia!
With QuickTime Pro you can "Export to Apple TV" any content. It's slow, but it works. EyeTV also has the posibility of exporting to apple TV the shows that you record. I think that in short time we'll see a lot of software exporting things to this device.
... for half the cost you get a crazy additional amount of functionality.
Let's see. For "half the cost", I can buy a used device, take the time to modify it myself, and come up with a box that doesn't include a remote, support, or warranty; doesn't sync with or stream from iTunes; doesn't sync my photo library; doesn't have wireless; is about five hundred times larger; has 1/5th the capacity; and doesn't actually support playing back HD video .
Awesome.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
The AppleTV was designed by the makers of ElGato's EyeTV. Apple literally walked into ElGato and took their entire development team for it
Um. No.
So all this really is is just a crippled version of a product Apple bought and killed.
This turns out not to be the case.
The "hard apple" I'm sleeping on was the fact that I own an EyeTV and this immediately became unsupported when Apple "bought" the ElGato developers.
I dunno, Stimpy. I think maybe someone pushed the History Eraser button, because in my universe ElGato seems to be in business and providing support.
Funny story: I have this shiny new ElGato EyeTV Hybrid here, recording Lost from the local HD broadcast, and set to transcode it to H.264 and add it to iTunes. Once it hits iTunes, it also will be synced to the shiny little box upstairs. ElGato seems to be supporting their product.
I won't say you're wrong about the missed-the-boat notion, but I think you might be misunderstanding the role of this product. At the very least we don't see it doing the same things.
a mvp.html
From my persepctive, there are other similar solutions, but the Hauppauge MediaMVP is not one of them for a number of reasons. Just read the product page: http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_medi
For one thing, it's composite and s-video only. I know some people are whining that the AppleTV doesn't support those formats, but those of use with newer, high-def equipment are sick of componsite video signals.
For another, it only decodes MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 video. It plays DivX, but only by using your host system to decode them -- it doesn't have the on-board power to decode anything in software, and doesn't have DivX hardware.
And as far as "works with MythTV" I assume you mean "can be re-flashed and the hardware used to run mvpmc", since the factory software only support Windows as a host system and doesn't know anything about MythTV. mvpmc is a great bit of software -- I've used their code to provide non-Java interfaces for my ReplayTV -- but it's hardly a feature of the MediaMVP itself.
The Windows Media Center Extender is a much better comparison to the AppleTV -- supports wired and/or wireless in the same box, requires a host system for content origination but can play with or without live streaming, outputs to HD, has enough processor to decode in software (i.e. without being limited to an MPEG hardware decoder).
As someone who's had both commerical and home-built media systems, I've been waiting for more people to get into the market that AppleTV plays in. Like I said, the Windows Media Center Extender is a comparable product, but it wants Windows Media Center, which I don't (and likely won't) have. SlingBox claims they'll put out something in the near future, but they haven't announced a release date or specs yet, just some hype to counter the AppleTV. There are a couple of other players like Pixel Magic Systems, but so far there aren't in clear leaders.
I'm not sure yet that I want an AppleTV, but I'm glad to see another big-name player through its hat in the ring, with the hope that either AppleTV will become the product I want, or will help define the high-def computer-based-but-not-computer-in-living-room media playback market and eventually will help bring about some more refined, mature products in that market.
The AppleTV was designed by the makers of ElGato's EyeTV
Whoa, where did you get that from? I know that Apple bought another German computer/video company that did DVD authoring software but I've heard nothing about Munich based ElGato making a similar move to Cupertino. In fact I'm pretty sure they didn't. In any case the EyeTV line of products is mainly about tuners which AppleTV quite prominently does not have. There was a disappointing little product that ElGato sold, called EyeHome, that was like an NTSC version of the AppleTV but it appeared to be just a repackaged box also sold by Hauppauge called MediaMVP. The interface software was bush league and the performance was not quite good enough even for NTSC.
Don't misunderstand, I think the EyeTV tuner products and software are fantastic. All those pining for PVR capability for the Mac should get an EyeTV product (they have tuners made for several markets besides the US) instead of or in addition to AppleTV. In my opinion AppleTV would be worthwhile if it included tight integration with EyeTV (e.g. no conversion process at all) but I can see Apple is playing the format lock out game like everyone else.
You missed my point. Apple TV didnt invent anything new. It's just Apple's way of trying to infuse iTunes into the living room. It's too bad iTunes is DRM and the movies sucks for HD.
Netgear just released Digital Entertainer HD EVA8000. It does MPEG1, MPEG2, MPEG4, AVI, WMV, Xvid, YouTube, and PC Tv Tuner with HDMI 1080p. Their previous version is scaled down to just MPEG1, MPEG2, MPEG4, AVI, WMV, and Xvid with component cables.
Apple TV is not inventing anything new but just trying to brand themselves into your living room.
\
So it occured to me "Hey, why don't I go through the season passes on my Tivo and see how much it would cost me to subscribe through iTunes?"
So here's a list of most of my current season passes. I didn't bother including shows where I'm recording re-runs since theoretically I could buy DVD box sets or something and just always have them around. Also bear in mind this is a 2-person household.
Heroes: $42.99
Lost: $34.99
Battlestar Galactica: $25.99
Supernatural: $34.99
Colbert Report/Daiy Show: $9.99/16 episodes of each show
Stargate SG-1: $37.99
Stargate Atlantis: $37.99
Dresden Files: 19.99
Bones: $39.99
Monk: $29.99
Weeds: $19.90
Eureka: $23.88
Psych: $28.99
My Name Is Earl: $36.99
30 Days: $11.94
Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends: $19.99
Aqua Teen Hunger Force: $19.99
Venture Brothers: $19.99
Robot Chicken: $19.99
Frisky Dingo: $19.99
Some of our season passes are not available on iTunes. For some of these we could still get them over the air via basic cable, or just have to wait for DVDs to be released months/year down the road:
Dexter
House
Simpsons
Mail Call
Slings And Arrows
So a quick attempt to add up the totals above came to a bit under $540 for a "season" of the shows we watch. (Although the Daily Show/Colbert Report numbers should probably add more to that. We don't always watch every episode but we do watch more than 16 per year.)
Given that I curently have a fairly premium package from DirecTV, that total is only about 6 months worth of DirecTV bills for me right now. So while almost $600 certainly seems like a lot of money, it's still possible that it could work out to be a better deal. Of course I could easily save $40-50/month by downgrading my DirecTV package (there's maybe one or two shows left I care about on premium channels at this point so I'm probably going to do that pretty soon regardless) but the cheapest DirecTV package is still $600/year.
It would take more work to really compare the numbers, as I would almost certainly still need to keep at least basic cable, and then work out what that costs + the $20/month or so monthly fee on the series 3 tivo for recording the things itunes doesn't have and also just random things like live news, sporting events, awards shows, etc. But, as much as part of me thinks it's ridiculous to pay $600 for tv shows piecemeal, I of course have to admit that depending on how much I reduce or eliminate a satellite/cable bill, it actually might still be a better deal.
Definitely something I will need to give further consideration too. I don't know if I would totally eliminate broadcast Tv in favor of downloading everything and paying for it piecemeal, but it doesn't seem to be as unaffordable a concept as I had thought initially.
Which makes me wonder why the hell anybody would want one. It doesn't play DVDs, it doesn't play DVDs, it doesn't offer any significant online service, and requires a computer to stream / cache from. What is the point of this thing? Who is insane enough to buy one of these just to be able to watch iTMS purchased movies on their TV. If you're going to fork out $300 + the price of a computer, I can think of much better ways to do it. An XBox 360 for example is more than capable of doing everything the iTV does AND it plays games, videos, DVDs. Or go a bit higher and you have the PS3 which does Blu-Ray and higher again Tivo Series 3 which is a PVR.
I simply see no point in this device.
Do you like money too? I think we should hang out.
/may be too subtle
$100 Media Extender Anyone, Anyone?
I understand why a person that has a considerable investment in iTunes content would want one of these devices, but beyond that or a new market is something this is not.
What scares me is that Media Extenders have been around for 4 or 5 years, cost about $100, and do everything this product does and more. Also considering a lot of the Media Extenders are UPnP and various other forms, they are not MS Media Center exclusive and I know people that use them with their *nix servers all the time.
So if you can buy a Media Extender that can watch live TV from your computers, watch recorded content, watch DVDs, watch downloaded content, listen to all your music, watch early forms of IPTV, why on earth you would you buy this product instead and lock yourself into iTunes or iTunes only converted content?
Want to play DIVX, WMV, just buy a Media Extender, even hooking it up to a freaking Windows Media Center computer or Vista will allow you to do all of this, and Vista Media Center Extenders natively support HD video out of the box, in a TRUE HD resolution, something Apple isn't even offering or planning to.
Media Extenders are silent, wireless or wired and can access every storage device, computer or computer based Tuner in your house.
As some have suggested, you would be smarter to spend the money on an XBox 360 which also gives you all these features and you can play a game on it once in a while as well. Again in real HD.
Why is it everyone has seen Media Extenders at Circuit City and Best Buy for years and years now, and when Apple tries to create their 'very closed' version of one, they are seen as doing something new?
How is their marketing team always smarter than the people buying this stuff?
Netflix $15/Mo * 12 Mo = 180/Yr
Cable $40/Mo * 12 = 480/Yr (I get some crazy package deal with cable and internet so I'm not sure if suddenly my internet bill will go up, worth considering.)
No Tivo
Total = 660/Year
Shows I watch regularly: Lost, Heroes, random junk
iTunes store: Lost = 34.99/Season
Heroes = 42.99/Season
Total = 78/Year
Leaving me with $582 to buy my iTV and random junk...
The OP has an interesting point. On the other hand it'd make it mighty hard for me to watch sports, CNN and other live programming only found on cable.
Well, they had "no word" about if Front Row plays DivX - and it does flawlessly after installing the codec.
Perhaps they just don't want to have the hassle of supporting other people's technology (and the subsequent lawsuits over IP even though they might use open variations, etc.)?
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
If you transcode the audio to AAC, you can mux it with H.264 video into an MPEG-4/QuickTime container. If you do that, though, you won't be able to pass it through to your receiver over S/PDIF.
I only transcode audio for mono & stereo sources. For multichannel audio, I leave it in AC3 and mux it with H.264 video into a Matroska container.
Creating an .mp4 file with H.264 & AAC looks something like this:
#!/bin/shd irect_pred=auto -oac copy -o /dev/null "${1}" && \d irect_pred=auto -oac copy -of rawvideo -o "${2}.264" "${1}" && \
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf harddup -ovc copy -oac faac -faacopts br=128:mpeg=4 -of rawaudio -o "${2}.aac" "${1}" && \
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf pullup,softskip,${3},harddup -ofps 24000/1001 -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=1400:pass=1:turbo=2:keyint=240:bframes=3:
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf pullup,softskip,${3},harddup -ofps 24000/1001 -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=1400:pass=2:turbo=2:keyint=240:bframes=3:
nice -n 18 MP4Box "${2}.mp4" -fps 23.976 -add "${2}.264" -add "${2}.aac" && \
rm "${2}.264" "${2}.aac"
Creating an .mkv file with H.264 & AC3 looks something like this:
#!/bin/shd irect_pred=auto -oac copy -o /dev/null "${1}" && \d irect_pred=auto -oac copy -of rawvideo -o "${2}.264" "${1}" && \
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf harddup -ovc copy -oac copy -of rawaudio -o "${2}.ac3" "${1}" && \
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf pullup,softskip,${3},harddup -ofps 24000/1001 -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=1400:pass=1:turbo=2:keyint=240:bframes=3:
nice -n 18 mencoder -vf pullup,softskip,${3},harddup -ofps 24000/1001 -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=1400:pass=2:turbo=2:keyint=240:bframes=3:
nice -n 18 MP4Box "${2}.mp4" -fps 23.976 -add "${2}.264" && \
nice -n 18 mkvmerge -o "${2}.mkv" "${2}.mp4" "${2}.ac3" && \
rm "${2}.264" "${2}.ac3" "${2}.mp4"
Both assume that the input is NTSC video that can be inverse-telecined to produce film-rate progressive-scan video. ${1} is the source file, ${2} is the destination file (without extension), and ${3} is a "crop=w:h:x:y" parameter to get rid of any black bars around the video. On a Gentoo box, you'll want to emerge mplayer gpac mkvtoolnix to get the necessary software.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.