What's *really* interesting about Apple TV
So, lots has been said about Apple TV that I won't repeat. What I will say is that it's very interesting that Apple decided to add a hdd to the unit and make it primarily about syncing instead of streaming.
By "primarily", I mean it's the model they put the most work into and really made work well. Streaming feels kind of wonky in ways they could easily have fixed. For example:
- You must be logged into you pc and running itunes to do it.
- Since itunes only runs for one user at a time on the computer, if my wife wants to listen to music on the pc while I listen in the living room, one of us is SOL.
- What if my wife and I both have music libraries? How do I listen to music without running back to my den to swap accounts?
The obvious fix would be a Windows "service" that runs 24/7 in the background, and that aggregates selected users' music into a single stream. But Apple didn't go that way.
Instead, they've made Apple TV into truly an iPod for your tv. If you've got under 40GB of content, this makes a lot of sense. Your network can be unreliable, you don't need your pc running 24/7 to access music, etc. The user model is also very familiar - users who are used to syncing to an iPod already know how to set up and use their Apple TV. I love their guts in making this decision. There are big drawbacks for those of us with (ahem) much larger collections, but that's a tiny % of the overall audience, and HDDs will grow over time.
Of course, it then begs me to ask the next question - how is an Apple TV really better than an iPod dock? You sync to your iPod, then bring the ipod into the living room and boot up and watch/listen. I mean, Apple TV is prettier and syncs wirelessly, but is that worth $300?
Adding codecs to Apple TV. Folks have figured out how to hack the apple TV to support divx, etc. This is a nice technical demo, but in fact it's not very meaningful unless they figure out how to get iTunes to support those codecs. Without that, it's very tough to get content onto the TV to watch it.
9 Comments:
I'm having a hard time myself getting into the right mind set to appricate Apple TV. I have an XBox 360 that I use for streaming and movie/tv purchasing as well as using it as a Media Center extender. The biggest road block to finding it useful though is the price. I can pick up a 360 Core system for the same price and have almost the same functionality.
Apple TV did a few things right though:
- Marketing. Average people in the consumer segment know about Apple TV whereas not many people know you can use a 360 as a media streamer. Most still think of the XBox as a "hardcore gaming system", regardless of all the great casual games out there.
- Interface. I'm actually not as impressed with the interface as I am by some of Apple's other efforts but what it does have is focus. You fire it up and you know exactly what you're doing, working with media. I think someone could actually use the 360 as strictly a media front-end yet the UI, which I do love, doesn't quite lend itself to that. A way to set a default blade or even a more IPTV/media-focused UI could help the non-gamer segment.
On the other hand the biggest hurdle I have with Apple TV is the fact that you have to leave your couch to purchase new content. The living room experience is completely destroyed when I have to go to my computer log in to iTunes, purchase new music or download a TV show, sync it, then walk back down to my living room.
I could be looking at it wrong though. I suppose the Apple TV isn't really trying to go head to head with Media Center, Tivo or any other more robust media playback solution. Like you say, it's really just a way to get your iTunes content off the computer and into your living room.
It's still not for me though :)
i can find lots of things i don't like about apple tv, not the least of which is that i don't get why i would get that instead of a dock for my ipod (if i still had one), but i do get people trying to open up whatever they are using to supporting more codecs. i also use my 360 to stream content to my tv, and i'm sick of converting everything. i was using tversity, a pretty nice app, but it's still buggy and uses too much processing power to be very useful for me. currently i do all my converting when i'm asleep, so i don't need to worry about my cpu usage at that time, but i'd rather not do it at all. right now i have several video clips from digital cameras, and they're all avi's. i think ms is really dropping the ball by forcing everyone to use wm files. i get the reasoning, but, as a consumer, it's really frustrating. it seems to me that ms would be better off trying to win the format war by delivering a large amount of great content in its own format rather than the direction it is currently taking. i could be wrong, but it seems like being able to proclaim that one of the features of the 360/zune/whatever-media-tool-ms-is-doing is large codec support would convince lots of people who are undecided on which way to go that ms has the superior product.
"Folks have figured out how to hack the apple TV to support divx, etc. This is a nice technical demo, but in fact it's not very meaningful unless they figure out how to get iTunes to support those codecs. Without that, it's very tough to get content onto the TV to watch it."
Seems to me you've got that backwards. It's easy to get this support in iTunes, they ARE currently supported in iTunes... any format with a QT codec can be played in iTunes. However, the AppleTV has basic checks for only a couple of formats requiring the hacks like reference files, etc...
"What I will say is that it's very interesting that Apple decided to add a hdd to the unit and make it primarily about syncing instead of streaming."
Don't know why it's interesting: it's obvious and compelling. (The more Zune people question certain Apple choices or praise others I think you guys seriously have no clue.)
"The obvious fix would be a Windows "service" that runs 24/7 in the background, and that aggregates selected users' music into a single stream."
Seems like a horrible solution. It would be nice if all libraries were always available but aggregating them into one is a bad idea. I want distinct libraries which AppleTV has. Again, I question Zune folks's judgment.
"If you've got under 40GB of content, this makes a lot of sense."
It makes sense no matter how large your library is. You can still get to the content.
"I love their guts in making this decision."
What guts? It's obvious.
"Of course, it then begs me to ask the next question - how is an Apple TV really better than an iPod dock?"
In several ways: larger resolutions, dedicated HW to decoding and UI, more advanced UI designed for TV, simple remote control, ability to connect to internet (though currently limited), ability to stream, ability to connect to other libraries, etc...
"I mean, Apple TV is prettier and syncs wirelessly, but is that worth $300?"
If you want to ignore the other advantages, maybe not. But are you likewise claiming that docking a Zune to an XBox is better than using the XBox as an MCE?
What you seem to miss is that this is neither gutsy nor interesting. What you miss is that being an iPod for the TV is a good thing. (What is wrong with that?) And that it still offers more than what you seem to be seeing.
Lets look at the hardware that makes up Apple TV...
40GB
802.11 b/g/n WIFI
USB 2.0
S/PDIF digital audio
IR & REMOTE
HDMI/Component
1Ghz Pentium-M
256MB
...is it really all that different from Zune's hardware. Sure it has HD outputs, faster WIFI and a more powerful CPU but Zune is probably adequate for more the majority of users. With the right software upgrade Zune good do alot more to directly compete with AppleTV. And if you want the full fledge HD experience go to a Media Center/XBox setup. Though I will say Microsoft has a ton of work to make that shopping & playback experience uniform all three platforms. We should be able to buy Music on XBox or Media Center too. We Should be able to buy Video via Zune software. Etc. And DRM & Media Storage needs to be centralized. Thats the hardwork Microsoft needs to do.
Too many typos in my previous comment...sorry
Anyway, I want to clarify I meant to compare Apple TV to Zune *with Docking Station*.
johncz, everything you list from the AppleTV is either completely missing (802.11n, S/PDIF digital audio, IR & REMOTE, HDMI/Component) or significantly better than the Zune's internals (40GB vs. 30GB, n vs. g WiFi, 1Ghz Dothan and GeForce Go 7300 vs. Freescale iMX31L)... the one shared feature spec you mention is USB 2.0.
What was your point?
anonymous, I didn't say they were the same specs. The way I look at..
Storage > 40GB > 30GB
Processor > 1Ghz > 500Mhz ARM
Memory > 256MB > 64MB
WIFI > 802.11b/g/n > 802.11b/g
USB 2.0 > disabled > enabled
TV OUT > HDMI/STD > STD w/Dock
REMOTE > yes > yes w/Dock
AUDIO OUT > Digital > Analog w/Dock
All I am saying is that Zune has all the pieces to be a *SIMPLE* extender. And using your imagination, some extra software could enable that experience further. I never suggested it would equal the same "Extender" experience as AppleTV or XBox 360.
We disagree, john, that's all. Your argument and evidence is based on every single component being substantially weaker or near equivalent. People complain about the AppleTV's capacity or its limitations in playback, but you think a Zune with just software could be similar with less than half the power.
Fine. That's typical, losing Zune strategy. Enjoy.
Post a Comment
<< Home