Slashdot Mirror
Apple vs. Google TVs
This SFGate article begins,
"Apple and Google just kicked off the first round of their battle for the living room. Based on what we've seen so far, Apple is in the lead. It's still early, and this could change, but it looks like Apple is making an all-around smarter bet than Google." I haven't tried out the Google device yet. The Apple unit is decent, but it's so focused on TV rental that it makes it difficult to work with an existing library of media; between the transcoding, and tedious menu navigation... well, it's a good thing it's only $99. It's a dang cheap way to get your stuff on your bigger screens, provided you're willing to jump through the necessary hoops.
It's a dang cheap way to get your stuff on your bigger screens, provided you're willing to jump through the necessary hoops.
Roku Box or WDTV, anyone? No hoops to jump through there...or, if you have an Xbox 360 or PS3, TVersity is a FANTASTIC solution.
Living With a Nerd
The author already had his mind made up even before he compared them.
- There is some rambling about input 1 and 2 and I'm not quite sure what he is getting at with that but the conclusion was Apple uses input 2 and that made it easier and therefore better. His criteria for "easier therefore better" gets lost when he talks about the Sony with built in Goolge functionality. With that, there is no external input 2 or what ever needed at all, it is built in! You can't get any more easier to hook up and use than that but somehow that simplicity gets no mention.
- He mentions that an official "Apps store" is in the works for the G device but Apple hackers will probably have something unoffical as well. So Apple hackers making an unoffical app store is a postivie or a negative? He did not clarify but was leaning toward a positive. I'm sure that unofficial app store will be seemless and easy to use for all of those people that bought the Apple device because it was simplar because the Google device using input 1 was too hard for them to figure out.
Bottom line... He cherry picked things and used different criteria to compare them. There is no technical content and no specs or options are even considered in his comparison of which is better. It was a useless and biased article from start to finish and 30 seconds of my life i will never get back. It is similar to a paid advertisement "editorial".
He was right on the cost, the Apple device appears to be $200 cheaper. We all know Apple made it's inroads from being cheaper.
Here's a thought, check out some already available embedded devices for home entertainment. They have some decent features, they are cheap and some can stream netflix, youtube, rss feeds, audio feeds, and even PPV movies from the large distributors like Paramount.
Don't forget that if we're talking about set-top boxes to access network content, the Xbox 360 is in the lead, followed by the PS3. Way behind them are the Apple and Google TV's.
The ______ Agenda
I'm just talking in install numbers and cultural penetration. The PS3 is a great media device, though it would be nice if Netflix didn't require a disk.
The ______ Agenda
My understanding is that it can't. I believe you need to have your content in an iTunes library on your computer. Furthermore, I have read that an Apple TV won't stream content on a NAS that can otherwise host an iTunes library; the library actually needs to be on a computer.
This is a myth that Apple themselves have been perpetuating. I don't know why they make it so hard to find this information on their website but it is there.
The Apple TV can subscribe to video podcast channels and happily stream your media library from anything that can run a basic Apache installation. Just dump your media library information into an XML file (as described in the above link) and point your Apple TV at it.
I find it absolutely amazing that the actual Apple TV section of their website makes no mention of this feature. You do not need to submit it to iTunes for review/approval. You just host it on your own home network.
About two weeks ago I installed Netflix on a PS3, directly from the "app store" or whatever Sony calls it. Small download, installed it, logged into my Netflix.ca account and watched a few minutes of some movies to check out the quality.
For the Wii, however, it still requires a disc.
They are actually in the lead in internet set top boxes right now, at least for internet streaming. If you haven't heard of them or haven't checked them lately (I thought until recently that they were only Netflix boxes), they start at $60 for similar features to the new Apple TV, they already have 75+ apps/channels available (including Netflix, Amazon VOD, Pandora, MLB, NBA, NHL, etc), expected to increase to 100 by the end of the year, DLNA local media streaming feature is coming soon, Hulu+ also coming soon. It's really thriving and unquestionably the best deal for this type of device right now.
Oh, since this is Slashdot, you may also like to know that anyone can develop an app for it, with free tools in Windows/Mac/Linux, according to their developer page: http://www.roku.com/developer
Unfortunately, Apple's marketing might and fanboy army are probably going to crush them in the marketplace. Google probably won't be far behind either. Roku are also not helped by (to my understanding) not being available at brick and mortar retail stores, but you can get them at their own website, at Amazon.com and probably at other online retailers as well.
No, there was nothing *illegal* about modifying your XBOX. It's against Microsoft's plans for the intended use of said box, but no, it's not illegal.