×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Third-Generation Apple TV Lands With a Thud

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the that-dog's-not-so-shaggy dept.

Media 222

DeviceGuru writes "Although generally overshadowed by the iPad 3 debut, Apple also introduced the third incarnation of its Apple TV streaming media players this week. Sporting a revamped icon-based UI, the third-generation Apple TV doesn't add much to its predecessor beyond a truly-HD 1080p video output mode. Although Apple TV is still not supported by an Apple Apps Store plug-in apps ecosystem, its new UI (available as a free update for 2nd-generation Apple TVs) does seem to imply that this capability is coming soon. Meanwhile, Roku is gearing up for a $50M IPO, so this cord-cutting story is far from over."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

222 comments

Dear Apple... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310387)

Give it an app store so I can have Plex just like on my iPhone and iPad.

I promise to buy like 3 of them minimum.

Why the negative headlines? (5, Insightful)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310389)

It seems like all the headlines since CmdrTaco left have been really negative, misleading headlines. Do negative headlines really bring in that much more traffic? I stopped reading boing boing because of their terrible headlines, and it looks like Slashdot is headed down that route too.
 
I used to come here for my daily dose of news and interesting topics, now all the headlines are used to cast doubt on company's futures, failed products and missed deadlines.
 
I don't mind hearing about "Your Rights Online" and the negative aspects of SOPA, etc, but it's gotten to the point where slashdot is no longer that shining beacon of interesting, exciting NEWs. Why would you spin a minor product improvement (720p->1080p) as a negative headline? What do your readers get out of it? Does it really improve traffic that much? Slashdot goes from being interesting and standing out as a good source of news, to just another "me too" BoingBoing style blog. Please don't do that.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310417)

Weird ... the "Stories you'd like to read" I get with this article are :

  • Why Distributing Music As 24-bit/192kHz Downloads Is Pointless : not particularly negative, as it implies that what we have now is actually pretty good
  • Tapeheads and the Quiet Return of VHS : sounds like a positive article on a new kind of otakus
  • VLC 2.0 'Twoflower' Released For Windows & Mac : neutral, about a widespread FOSS product release
  • Your Next TV Interface Will Be a Tablet : the headline in itself is quite neutral too. Subjectively I would actually rate this positively
  • XBMC Running On Raspberry Pi : positive headline, verging on the ecstatic
  • Submission: Third-generation Apple TV Lands With a Thud : yeah .. quite negative. Might have something to do that it is about a company known for marketing minor improvements as "game changers" and "magical" ...

Ritual bashing on slashdot seems much more prevalent to me than negative headlines. Maybe you're feeling sad that the "new iPad" is kind of a let down and that Apple TV is lackluster. Probably what happens when the reality distortion field fades off.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311475)

How is the new iPad a let down? It's the single biggest update since the device was launched, and sets it quite aways ahead of any of the competition in terms of display quality and LTE battery life....

Oh you're a corporate cheerleader who plays for another team, my bad, carry on.

-- Android tablet owner, somehow still an objective human being

Re:Why the negative headlines? (2, Insightful)

robably (1044462) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310427)

But it's the readers who supply the stories and write the headlines - if you think there's a bias and want to see a change then start submitting stories with cheerier headlines.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (3, Insightful)

Thorhs (794130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310465)

It doesn't matter how many positive articles get submitted if the editors never accept them, now does it?

Re:Why the negative headlines? (3, Insightful)

robably (1044462) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310949)

Wait until you've actually tried to make a change before damning the editors for something they might not be doing, though. Again, it's the readers who influence which stories get published by voting them up or down on the firehose. If you want to see a change, start there.

start with the first link in the chain? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310989)

it's the readers who influence which stories get published by voting them up or down on the firehose. If you want to see a change, start there.

The chain starts with the editors, so doesn't it make more sense to start there?
Slashdot s a moderately popular site, so probably has numerous stories submitted every day, and some of them will be cheery. If they are not getting past the editors then writing more will not help.

Or perhaps the editors are innocent. Is data available for what gets submitted, what gets posted, and what is then more likely to be voted up?

Re:Why the negative headlines? (4, Informative)

phayes (202222) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311373)

I agree with Hadlock. The editors are choosing the articles with negative spin more often. The same subject is often submitted multiple times by different people with different slants, yet the editors are picking out the negative articles more often than the positive ones even when the positive ones come out first.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (1)

robably (1044462) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311593)

Although of course what we want is no spin at all, positive or negative. Just report the facts. One step in the right direction would be for the submission form to say something like "Submissions which put a spin on the facts will be rejected." and for the editors to enforce it.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (5, Insightful)

Sepultura (150245) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310533)

It's an attempt at appealing to the smug, baseless superiority that everyone seems to want to get in on these days. And it's not all negative - stories about things that are "in" with the crowd but that others don't understand/get, like the Raspberry Pi, are being fawned over.

This attitude, then, leads to 2 basic themes that I've noticed: "We're better than everyone else because what they like we hate for various esoteric reasons, and we are always right", and "We're better than everyone else because we know about stuff that they don't, even though our own estimation of our knowledge is blown up out of proportion". Neither of these viewpoints tends to be based on logic.

And this isn't new. Slashdot's been going this way for years, well before Rob left. It's just more blatant now. Personally, I think it coincides with the rise of social media, with everyone thinking the world must hear and respect their opinions about even the most mundane things. But I have only anecdotal evidence to support that theory...

Re:Why the negative headlines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310563)

Nah,slashdot was shit while he was here, it's just continuing the fine tradition of continuing to be shit.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (3, Interesting)

Blaskowicz (634489) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310581)

apple bashing is fine. this is a website with a freaking Borg icon for bill gates and a slant against other entities perceived to be against freedom (SCO, oracle etc.). crappy groupthink maybe but we're all intelligent and know to exercise critical judgement, and comments often show respect towards our "enemies". it's on slashdot that I learnt how much technically advanced and well integrated microsoft solutions are, or how apple succeeds by mostly giving their customers what they fucking want.

I didn't thought the headline was negative really. but that's because I didn't know what a "thud" was. so I'm pissed at the editor for using a very rare anglo-saxon word I've never seen anywhere :D.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (1, Interesting)

jcr (53032) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310601)

this is a website with a freaking Borg icon for bill gates

That is a bit of an anachronism, but it was entirely appropriate when it was made. We had no idea ten years ago that the Window monopoly was going to be breaking up within our lifetimes.

-jcr

Re:Why the negative headlines? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311071)

That is a bit of an anachronism, but it was entirely appropriate when it was made. We had no idea ten years ago that the Window monopoly was going to be breaking up within our lifetimes.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss", first it was IBM, then Microsoft, now it's Apple. Don't get me wrong, I think Apple makes some pretty damn good products that have contributed hugely to progress, but they're just as much control freaks as the old boss. The only real change I believe in is that now there's Android which is open source, even though many lock it down there'll at least be an open platform for the mobile. As has been reported here, there'll be no dual booting/migrating a Windows ARM phone/tablet and there's no Boot Camp for iOS devices so all the other doors are closed. Honestly, those that think Apple will be better than Microsoft just think the grass is greener on the other side, it's a 30% cut and they're not interested in 30% of $0. If they get the chance they'll lock you in and bleed you dry just like Microsoft and IBM did.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (2)

bsane (148894) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311243)

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss", first it was IBM, then Microsoft, now it's Apple. Don't get me wrong, I think Apple makes some pretty damn good products that have contributed hugely to progress, but they're just as much control freaks as the old boss. The only real change I believe in is that now there's Android which is open source

The difference is: there's no longer a iron fist monopoly on the pc world. I can get a Mac as my computer at a significant percentage of employers- up from 0 ten years ago. Software companies have actually started writing osx apps. Windows may have lost mindshare, but it's in no way comparable to the situation I've dealt with for 25 years as a Mac user.

Mobile devices- apple doesn't even come close to having a monopoly. Android is very successful, and iProducts are better off for it.

Basically it sounds Ike you have no idea what its like to be on the losing side of a monopoly.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (1)

Lussarn (105276) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310689)

I don't understand why there are shiny new massmarket hardware stories on slashdot at all. And the resulting flamy discussion about market shares, so bloddy boring...

Re:Why the negative headlines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310917)

Shut up you fucking whiner.

Cmdrtaco was as crappy as the next "editor", maybe more so.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311317)

What's really funny is that the Apple TV sold out a full 24 hours faster than the iPad. Yeah, sure, they made less Apple TVs, but still an interesting counter to this negative headline. It wasn't a dud.

Re:Why the negative headlines? (1)

Shahv (2592571) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311503)

Yeah...even I was wondering about the negative headline...
Maybe iPad takes up so much of our thoughts, that this glamorous gadget just makes discussions on other gadgets look boring and ordinary. Anyway, I just came across this review on latest iPad on Yahoo! [yahoo.com]

Regards,
V. Shah

Meh ... (0)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310391)

Seems to offer less than the competition does, but at least it's a nice try.

Re:Meh ... (3, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310995)

And yet all they need to do is allow third party development, and in no time there will be 100s of thousands of apps for it. At $99 that would be a hell of a value proposition.

There seems to be no reason that they wouldn't do that. I suspect that they they wanted to get the new icon based interface out first, just in case the blogosphere decided to be critical about it. Let opinions about it die done... in a few months everyone will just accept it as the norm. Then announce 3rd party apps. At that stage, no one can spin it as a bad thing, it would be all good.

What? (5, Insightful)

romanval (556418) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310415)

Apple never pushed or stated that the Apple TV was anything revolutionary; Especially compared to their Phone, Tablets, and Laptops, they consider it a hobby.

Revolutionary ? (-1, Troll)

bug1 (96678) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310681)

Apple distortion field detected !!!

Was the smartphone, or tablet, or laptop, or music player revolutionary when apple released it, or was it the device they copied from that was revolutionary.

Apple distortion field detected !!!

Re:Revolutionary ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310813)

The Powerbook 100 series was absolutely revolutionary. Everything in the laptop line but the plastic toilet seat have been excellent or brilliant.

Re:Revolutionary ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310851)

uh, did you just skip ahead to the word revolutionary and skip the rest? parent said apple never said the apple tv was revolutionary.

Re:Revolutionary ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310861)

It's not the class of device per se that that's revolutionary, it's the device themselves and how they're marketed. Doesn't mean that the devices are technically more advanced or ever "better" than their predecessors, but something certainly is different enough to get consumers buying them.

Would chicken not be revolutionary if I managed to find some way to cause a large number of vegetarians to eat it? Even though my version of chicken may be quite mundane, I have done something revolutionary that no-one else has managed.

Re:Revolutionary ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310959)

Everything comes from somewhere else. By the definition of revolutionary that you're hinting at, nothing is revolutionary.

Re:Revolutionary ? (4, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311049)

Was the smartphone, or tablet, or laptop, or music player revolutionary when apple released it, or was it the device they copied from that was revolutionary.

Take the iPad as an example, yes it was revolutionary. Microsoft and others had been trying tablet concepts since the late 1980s. Sometimes calling them tablets, sometimes slates, sometimes pads. Every last one of them was a flop.

Apple launched their iPad and it was an instant success.

Using the political connotation of revolution, this is the difference between a few people grumbling, and having a revolution that takes over the country, transforming politics from then on.

Apple didn't copy any of the previous tablets, why would they? They were all flops. Since Apple's iPad revolution, every tablet manufacturer now bases their tablet designs on the iPad though.

The intelligent person doesn't deny that a revolution took place, it clearly did. They work out what it was about Apple's design that struck a chord with the public. That made it a phenomenal success where all before had been failures.

Re:Revolutionary ? (5, Insightful)

turb (5673) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311353)

or more simply put:

Asking if Apple is responsible for the "revolutionary" devices like the iPad, iPod, iPhone vs the first devices in the class is like suggesting George Washington wasn't responsible for a good portion of the American revolution but instead it was all some guy in a bar who was bitching about the British before everyone else was.

Re:Revolutionary ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311613)

That's a dumb analogy. Please stick to cars.

The iPad is an evolution of the iPhone (2, Insightful)

Bananenrepublik (49759) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311615)

The iPad wasn't a revolution, it was an evolution of the iPhone. Without the iPhone and its apps the iPad wouldn't have been the success it has been. Apple's genius was recognizing that they could extend the striving ecosphere of the iPhone to another device, and thereby kickstart its adoption. That's the major advantage they've had over other people trying to launch tablets, and it's an advantage that they created, so I'm not belittling it. The device in itself wasn't revolutionary.

Re:The iPad is an evolution of the iPhone (5, Informative)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311833)

Well, a revolution in one place can inspire a revolution in another, as we saw in the Arab Spring.

You make a good point. But Apple's planning in this is even stronger than you state. In fact Apple had the iPad in development before they even started on the development of the iPhone. It appears Jobs realised that they stood a far bigger chance of success with a new touch based device in the established mobile phone category, than starting in the up to then unsuccessful tablet category. So they ended up doing the phone first, knowing full well that the long game was the tablet.

In a way the two are all part of the same revolution. A revolution against the PC monopoly of computing.

Re:Revolutionary ? (1)

tgibbs (83782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311309)

Was the smartphone, or tablet, or laptop, or music player revolutionary when apple released it, or was it the device they copied from that was revolutionary.

In the sense that previous attempts at such devices did not in fact create a revolution, while Apple's did, it seems that the answer is obvious.

What many people find difficult to grasp is that Apple creates a product revolution, not by being the first to make a device of a particular type, but by being the first to do it really well. And they do it over and over again. They don't invent the mousetrap, they invent the better mousetrap.

Re:Revolutionary ? (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311575)

Was the smartphone, or tablet, or laptop, or music player revolutionary when apple released it, or was it the device they copied from that was revolutionary.

In the sense that previous attempts at such devices did not in fact create a revolution, while Apple's did, it seems that the answer is obvious.

What many people find difficult to grasp is that Apple creates a product revolution, not by being the first to make a device of a particular type, but by being the first to do it really well. And they do it over and over again. They don't invent the mousetrap, they invent the better mousetrap.

I thought they invented the mouse!!! But hey look how smart they are, now they make mouses as well as mousetraps, but isn't the mighty mouse too smart to get trapped? Does this mean we get a MousetrAppStore as well?

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310835)

They only say it's a hhttp://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/03/10/0757257/third-generation-apple-tv-lands-with-a-thud?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Slashdot%2Fslashdot+%28Slashdot%29#obby because it's a dismal failure. You can bet it if was selling hotcakes then you'd hear a different pitch from Apple HQ.

Re:What? (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310859)

More to the point, Apple doesn't need the Apple TV to be revolutionary. What they need is a way to get their content onto your TV. They're selling these iPads and iPhones with all this ability to play media, and they're also selling the media to play on them. If there were no easy way to get that media onto your TV, that would be a gaping hole in their product lineup.

Besides, if there's an upcoming revolutionary change in TV, I don't tank it'll be a new technology or device, but instead a service. If someone can get a new distribution method in place which effectively replaces cable TV providers with an Internet service, providing access to first-run TV shows and sporting events, it has the potential to change the entire industry.

New Obscure Linux Trojan (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310483)

Linux Trojan: Linux/Bckdr-RKC 02-2012

"It's definitely interesting and although not unexpected, you get the feeling of why was this not detected in a different form a some time ago.

That is the code shows that the person who wrote the code is very far from being inexperianced. Such experiance comes in only two ways,

1, Trial and error
2, Highly specific education

And if the second the "ability" of the teachers works it's way back to the trial and error aproach, which all mankinds "hard" knowledge in science and engineering is ultimatly derived from (even theoretical physics is based on the work of experimental physicists as Newton knew well).

Now this raises the question of where and when the learning experiments were carried out...

This could have only been in one of two places,

1, In Public.
2, In Private.

If in public you would expect such experiments to have kicked one or two tripewires and set off other alarms. Such events generaly produce "noise" in one form or another which would have attracted a crowd who would "spread the news" in one form or another. Thus if there is no noise recognisably linked to it, it raises questions as to why not.

But what if the experiments were "in private" what are the implications of this?

Well there are many but one is large well funded resources which has implications as to the size and nature of the backing organisation.

Which is where we have to tread very carefully on the analysis. Ken appears to have made a jump off of the deep end and that has coloured his thinking.

The finding of the Chinese language tag does not mean anything more that somebody set it at some point for some reason.

Ken has chosen to believe that it means the person speaks Chinese. Whilst this may be true it might also be there for other reasons including those of "false flag" operations.

The following on to the "China Town owend cleaning business" again does not of necesity mean anything (it's nebulous at best) but then again it could well be a smoking gun to a foreign intel operation or a false flag operation...

Which brings us around to the response of the AV companies. Is it simply that they have set it at a low priority for economic reasons or have they been "warned off" in some way...

And if it is "warned off" (unlikely but not impossible) is it by an intel organisation to stop their false flag op being blown or by an LEA trying to stop it's investigation into foreign espionage or organised crime activity being blown... and how do you tell the difference?

When you enter into a world of shadows, smoke and mirrors you have to tread with care lest your mind deceives you and sets your feet upon the wrong path.

One of the reasons investigating human activity is difficult is they often chose to veil their activities either to stop discovery or such that others will be blaimed.

Another is arguing back from effect to cause is at best problemetical, the clasic example being a positive swab for nitrates from your hand, does it mean you've been handeling explosives or does it mean you cooked bacon for breakfast or played cards with an old pack of cards the night before (an innocent man died in jail in the UK because of this very issue)?

It's why forensic activities although involving science are not science just the art of making threads that investigators and prosecuters can weave into a tapestry to hold up before a collection of lay persons to decide another persons fate...

And at the moment I'm treating the Chinese language tag as not even circumstantial evidence because importantly we have no knowledge of what it relates to.

As the hunt goes on that knowledge may become known and it may be indicative of Chinese Backers state or criminal or it may be indicative of somebody using somebody elses code or false flag activities."

Posted by: Clive Robinson at March 10, 2012 3:33 AM

- https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/03/friday_squid_bl_317.html#comments [schneier.com]
- http://pastebin.com/DwtX9dMd [pastebin.com]
- http://caffeinesecurity.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Apple TV is an iPad accessory (5, Insightful)

Coward Anonymous (110649) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310525)

The iPad now has all the technical bits in place to become the household computing center for most people. It has built in e-mail, web, video consumption, photo and video management, music, basic document creation and, critically, built in always available cheap broadband internet connectivity (via LTE).
The final nail for the iPad is to get decent dependable TV and movie programming. Once that is in place, iPad covers most people's media needs and the Apple TV is an accessory for the iPad like the Camera Connection Kit but for displaying content on a traditional TV.

Assuming Apple gets its programming, the cable (and DSL) companies are going to get wiped out without ever realizing what hit them.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310577)

It still doesn't have a USB port

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310931)

Nor a SCART. Therefore it sucks.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (3, Insightful)

Traiano (1044954) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310941)

Remind me again, what is USB for? I remember it did something back before every device in my home came with built-in wireless Ethernet.

solipsism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311055)

every device in my home came with built-in wireless Ethernet.

Perhaps people exist outside your home?

While solipsism is a perfectly defendable position, it is also possible that a wider world does exist, and contains people with different needs (and different hardware) than your own..

Ya I certianly have nothing that uses USB (5, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311241)

Except my smartphone. And my calculator. And my keyboard, mouse, controller, blood pressure meter, AHCHD camera, calibrator, flash drive, remote, headphone amp, and so on. No nothing at all.

These by the way are just devices laying around my house I can think of. There's more, and more at work as well. USB is kinda of used by, well, damn near everything that likes to plug in to a computer which is damn near everything. As I said, even my blood pressure monitor has USB (so you can download the history of your BP).

But hey if you want to add to the cost and complexity of every device, and reduce the battery life, as well as require an AP for them to work, sure let's go all 802.11.

Re:Ya I certianly have nothing that uses USB (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311487)

This is a job for Bluetooth, not 802.11.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310997)

Not to mention the fact that my favorite porn is only available in flash format.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311111)

You are right. It has a microusb port, numbnits

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311283)

Plays from USB - no. Retard

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311263)

And what use would that be except to make the iPad bigger with less battery life? The first iMac didn't have RS-232 either.

Seriously. That point is almost as lame as complaining that iPad can't play flash games.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (3, Interesting)

pknoll (215959) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311301)

It still doesn't have a USB port

Why do you need one? That's a serious question.

With the exception of charging the battery, everything I do with my iPad I do wirelessly. Connecting a cable to it for any reason seems like a step backward.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310591)

I think the following quote is in order:

In the game of chess you can never let your opponent see your pieces

But I also think this next quote really sums it up nicely:

The quickest way to a girl's bed is through her parents. Have sex with them and you're in.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310983)

The final nail for the iPad is to get decent dependable TV and movie programming.

Mine does... I installed XBMC. It's nice having all the TVs and devices using the same platform...

It's a shame it's only available for jail broken devices...

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (1)

marcop (205587) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311307)

Yup. No xvid support on the Apple device is a no go either. Funny how I have been streaming movies from a NAS to XBMC (on orig. Xbox) for about 7-8 years now and no device (maybe the WD Live Streaming device) offers something as flexible.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311579)

Once jailbroken, this thing will make a pretty nice XBMC box. $99 for a 1080p-capable device with a working remote out-of-box...not a bad deal.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (1)

marcop (205587) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311625)

Yeah. Thinking about doing this. But then again, the WD device does this out of the box so I also get Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc, and I don't have to worry about software updates breaking this functionality.

I do like the UI of XBMC better however.

Re:Apple TV is an iPad accessory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311387)

That is the last and hardest nut to crack, programming/content. Hollywood and the broadcasters/cable/sat people are seriously worried about Apple/Amazon/Netflix/Google and there move to liberate the content. Barring live events like sports and news, everything else is recorded. That makes it a video file that can me moved around and consumed at anytime. You don't even need a DVR if you have access to the Archives.

People who create content need to be paid for that creation, enough to make a living or people will stop creating. Consumers want to watch what they want, when they want, on what ever device they want. Neither of these 2 concepts are unreasonable. The Internet is the killer of middlemen. Who are the middlemen in this scenario? How do we get content to the consumers, fairly, without middlemen or with less middlemen?

Once this is solved, we will see a shift in how we consume video based entertainment.

so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310557)

looks like the Apple TV 2 was 720p so that the next one would bring 1080p as an incentive for adopters to upgrade or buy a second one.

really? who would believe being limited to 720p was a real technical limitation? I guess you would have no trouble getting 1080p output from a graphics card made in 1999. that said it's a cheap and tiny computer with an ethernet port. it's tempting to get, but does it support the standards (DLNA, samba shares etc.) or is it locked into iTunes, I don't know.

Re:so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310791)

Of course it's locked silly, this is apple.
Do you have to ask?

Re:so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310921)

Who would believe that 720p was a technical limitation? How about anyone that has jailbroken one and tried using 1080p output on it, only to have frames drop because the hardware can't handle it?

New processor, with new GPU = new video capabilities. It's not like they are going to drop a software update that all of a sudden enables perfect 1080p. Believe it or not, there might actually be a reason for product limitations beyond "we want to sell the AppleTV n+1"

Re:so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311063)

Yup, but not solely for upgrade purposes. Have you looked at the file size differences that Apple would have needed to stream for a marginal to negligible difference on a 40" or so screen? The value:spec ratio wasn't therein Apple's assessment (and I agree). Now they've implemented a more capable compression profile to keep the file sizes manageable.

Re:so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (1)

tgibbs (83782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311337)

looks like the Apple TV 2 was 720p so that the next one would bring 1080p as an incentive for adopters to upgrade or buy a second one.

More likely, the Apple TV2 was 720p because that was the capability of the processor that made it possible for Apple to achieve its price and design goals, and since all of the content then available from Apple and Netflix was 720p, there was no disadvantage. Apple's newer processors now make it possible to bump up to 1080p, using a level of compression that prevents an excessive load on the user's network connection.

I'm not sure that I would have bought the new model just for this; the difference between 720p and 1080p is pretty subtle with my TV size and viewing distance. And in general, I tend to upgrade Apple products every 2nd generation or so. But $100 is not a lot of money, and I want to give my Apple TV2 to my sister, because she recently bought an iPad2, and being able to send video to the TV is a very nice feature.

Re:so the previous one was 720p only on purpose? (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311631)

it's tempting to get, but does it support the standards (DLNA, samba shares etc.) or is it locked into iTunes, I don't know.

It would after putting XBMC on it ;)

You're missing the key feature. (0)

jcr (53032) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310593)

We can stream video and audio via Wi-Fi to an TV from any other iOS device. I can now play Keynote presentations on any TV that has an HDMI port, without even having to plug the iPad into it.

-jcr

Re:You're missing the key feature. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310763)

"Gather round the TV, kids; honey, can you dim the lights? It's time for my Keynote about the JCR family vacation!"

Re:You're missing the key feature. (0)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311325)

Or you could just buy a tablet or laptop from virtually any other vendor which comes with VGA or HDMI ports built in and plug that in to your TV without buying an extra component.

But don't tell Apple afficianados that. Apple can do no wrong while they're fleecing you for "accessories" that other companies call "standard features."

Re:You're missing the key feature. (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311443)

Apple users are clearly willing to pay hundreds and hundreds of dollars to avoid having to use an unsightly cable. It's pretty funny, actually.

Re:You're missing the key feature. (1)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311649)

Some people don't want their living room to look like a scene from Brazil. $100 is a small price to pay.

Re:You're missing the key feature. (4, Informative)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311681)

Well except for people like me... I take the train home from work. I'm watching a movie on my iPhone, and it's all over.. all except for the last 15-20 minutes of it. So I get off the train, put on my headphones so I can listen to music from my iPhone/Pandora while walking to my car. When I get to my car, I take off my head phones half way through a song I like, plug in my iPhone to my car stereo, and listen to it on my way home through my car stereo (Kenwood KDC-BY948HD btw). When I get home, I pull into the driveway. Half way through another song, I unplug my iPhone, hit the airplay button and switch the output to my Pioneer VSX-1121 receiver, and now that song picks up exactly where it was only now it's playing in my house. I make make dinner, then sit down in the living room to eat it. I hit the video button, select the movie I was watching on the train, hit airplay, and select "Living Room Apple TV", the receiver stops playing music and the TV starts playing the last 15-20 minutes of the movie I was watching on the train in 7.2 surround sound. If/when that movie is over, I pick another one using the Apple TV remote to stream one directly from my PC in the office.

Could I do that with a laptop/another vendors tablet? Perhaps, I could come up with some bastardization of hardware/software combo that would come close, but nothing I've ever seen comes even close to the simplicity and ease of use, nor one that has a half way decent UI. The Apple TV UI is the best I've seen for a DNLA type player, and I've looked at quite a few.

Meanwhile, Roku is still useless (1)

FrkyD (545855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310607)

for people outside of the U.S. (I guess the U.K. works now too). Although I live in a country that is well behind on licensing agreements, I can at least use the AppleTV to view legally purchased or rented movies from the iTunes stores (one of the only functioning alternatives in Austria), stream from my media server, and mirror my iDevices displays.

With the Roku I can use plex.

I'm even less impressed by the Roku than the new AppleTV.

Re:Meanwhile, Roku is still useless (1)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311223)

I've had a Roku XS for a couple of months now. I bought it specifically to be an unobtrusive way for me to consume media I already have (either using USB storage or over my local network)....a cheap media jukebox if you will. It's OK for that, but the interface is quite slow and not particularly intuitive to use. Once you've actually found what you want to consume, it's a capable player and has a tiny (think hockey puck) footprint.

As far as streaming goes, I tried it since I can get a lot of content free as an Amazon prime member. Would I pay extra for the privilege of streaming content? Nope.

And there's that gaming aspect. It came with Angry Birds. The kids played with it for a day or two and then forgot about it. Would I pay for games on my Roku? Nope.

Poster does not understand "lands with a thud" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310693)

The expression "lands with a thud" implies poor a poor market reception and poor sales. There has been no time whatsoever to gauge the new Apple TV's market success or lack thereof, and neither the poster nor the linked articles add a lick of information. The headline is as stupid as a headline "Third-Generation Apple TV Destroys All Competition!" would be.

Want eyeballs? Just put "Apple" in a negative headline. Mission accomplished; no time wasted on actual thought.

A Thud huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310735)

Then why are they sold out everywhere?

I love it when Apple Haters write the submissions, they like to ignore reality.

Ipad is outselling all other tablets hard. HARD. and even at $100 more than the high end Android tablets. I wonder why.

I was messing with a Samsung Galaxy most of last week, it's a great tablet. But the failure is where I expected it, the apps. There is a dearth of tablet apps for android compared to iPad.

And the google Tv is a complete joke compared to even the AppleTV 1. so there is ZERO competition there. (Roku is nice but will not run XBMC, which makes it a fail in my book, I'll take 5 if they add in a fast XBMC install or unlock it so people can hack it.)

Re:A Thud huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310895)

Can I plug a USB harddrive into an AppleTV yet? No? I'll stick with my WDTV thanks.

Re:A Thud huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310945)

Ipad is outselling all other tablets hard. HARD

That's nice, but tablets are shit. All of them. Without exception. So you're excited because Apple have managed to produce the least shit piece of shit when you compare it to all the other pieces of shit? Well done.

Truly HD? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310755)

720p format is "truly-HD" according to the ATSC broadcast standard. Furthermore, it's very hard for most people to even perceive any visual difference between the 720-line and 1080-line formats. You'd have to be sitting very close to a very large display to even have a chance. 1080p is sort of like the camera Megapixel Wars: a way to slap a bigger-and-better sounding number on your product while the main practical effect is to waste bandwidth and storage.

Re:Truly HD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310889)

Yes, but do you realize how many Slasdot/Gizmodo Apple haters that complained about the lack of 1080p on the Apple TV 2nd Gen? It seems your the hate never ends, even with 1080p.

Re:Truly HD? (1)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311775)

Well I complained, but to be fair, it was more about the 2nd Gen not being able to play 1080p encoded .m4vs than it was about outputting in 1080p. I don't like to have to have a different encoded video for each device. I'd prefer to have one single version - 1080p with 7.1 DTS-HD, and let each device play it as best it can. The 2nd Gen would choke on most 1080p videos, and those it wouldn't were lower-bit rate than I'd prefer. It also took a long time to "buffer" enough to start playing, and the fast forward/skip was painfully slow (fast forward at 1.1x was about all you'd get while maintaining any picture any more and the bar would move with no picture at all). The skip, where you hit the down button, and you get pictures of the movie for each chapter taking like 15-30 seconds was annoying as hell.

Disclaimer: I have a 3rd Gen on pre-order.

Re:Truly HD? (2)

brokeninside (34168) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310955)

You're off your rocker. I have a 720p television set. My brother in law has a 1080p set of the same size. The difference is pretty noticeable given the same source.

Now, it is true that not all digital content is 1080p. Watching content that is 720p is not going to be noticeably different on a 1080p television set. Moreover, not all digital content is even 720p. One thing I noticed when I cut my cable subscription was that the "HD" local channels from my cable provider had a lesser resolution than the over the air (OTA) broadcasts from those same local channels.

Re:Truly HD? (1)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311789)

People who say there is no difference typically are comparing their 720p set to the cheapest 1080i (notice the i) set they can find. I think most people would have no problem picking out a 720p vs 1080p screen sitting side by side -- given they are of similar quality.

Re:Truly HD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311285)

There is a stron difference between these resolutions. While our eyes don't perceive it well with normal motion video, if you're browsing the web or reading anything that really needs definition, you will see that 720p just won't cut it. I suspect apple bumping to 1080p is more for the eventuality of apps on the appletv than just a bullet point.

Re:Truly HD? (1)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311821)

Lol, yes. Just take their laptop/desktop that set to run 1920x1080 and set it to run at 1027x768 and tell them it's ok, there's really no perceivable difference and watch them start crying.

Re:Truly HD? (1)

KingMotley (944240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311835)

That was supposed to be 1024x768, although since that's a 4:3 resolution, 1280x720 would be a better choice if their video card supports it.

So that's why they sold out in under 8 hours? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39310913)

Pre orders sold out less than 8 hours after its announcement. Just because a few tech geeks can't twist the hardware to perform all their desires doesn't mean it still isn't a popular consumer good with a much larger buying public. You can't please everyone, and Apple runs a business so they please the largest buying group first.

Re:So that's why they sold out in under 8 hours? (1)

Smurf (7981) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311265)

Pre orders sold out less than 8 hours after its announcement. Just because a few tech geeks can't twist the hardware to perform all their desires doesn't mean it still isn't a popular consumer good with a much larger buying public. You can't please everyone, and Apple runs a business so they please the largest buying group first.

Yup. Hours after the announcement [macrumors.com] the shipping estimate for the Apple TV slipped from "Delivers on March 16" to "1-2 weeks".

What Apple TV lacks: ATSC tuners and storage space (1)

brokeninside (34168) | more than 2 years ago | (#39310973)

A few months after I quite cable, I bought a Roku box. It's pretty nifty. AppleTV doesn't do much beyond what the Roku box does. Should Apple bring their app store to the Apple TV, that will help that. But Roku already has apps. Granted, they don't have very many. But my device came with Angry Birds and there are other apps out there. I suppose what the Apple TV would offer is the whole world of iPad and iPhone apps ready to go. That would be a decided advantage.

But, aside from the premium content, the one thing that I really miss from having cable is the set top box that doubled as a DVR. The ability to pausing live TV is really a killer feature. The ability to record shows and watch them later is also a killer feature. I also really miss nodding off during a drama and being able to rewind to the point where I fell asleep. Or beng able to the REC button to grab the last fifteen minutes of a movie while I'm off to eat dinner or go out with my family. If an Apple TV allowed me to do that, I would buy one in a heartbeat. Instead, my next AV equipment purchase is probably going to be a Channel Master DVR with dual ATSC tuners that costs three times as much as an Apple TV.

I can understand why Apple is taking this approach. They're playing the long game. I suspect that it is only a matter of time before most over the air (OTA) broadcasts are also streamed. At such time OTA tuners will be obsolete equipement. Unfortunately, I suspect that such a development is 5 to 10 years down the road. For the present, you can have my ATSC tuner when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

Simple solution (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311293)

Buy Roku. ( and any other major competitor ) It works for other huge companions with billions in the bank. Instant customer base.

Still looking for a major upgrade (1)

tgibbs (83782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311379)

Clearly, the killer feature for the AppleTV would be access to the App store. But doing it right is not trivial. Ideally, the AppleTV would run most iPhone apps, with the capacity to use a separate iPhone or iPad as a touch (and voice for iPhone 4s) controller (or a separate extra-cost hand-held version of the Magic iPad for those without an Apple touch-enabled device). Specially enabled apps would run simultaneously on AppleTV and iPhone/iPad, providing a dual display.

Maybe with the next generation of AppleTV...

Apple Doesn't Care (1)

Kenshin (43036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311551)

Apple doesn't care if this device gets much fanfare. It's user-subsidized research for them. You pay Apple $99, and they put a little media box on your shelf that studies how you use it. This is just a way for them to do a mass-study on how to best go about tackling the TV project. Better to get it right first on a cheap, tiny box than jump straight into selling a big, expensive TV.

The new "app" layout and the fact that Netflix can bill directly to your iTunes account is a pretty clear sign that they're now gearing up to allow more third party content providers on it.

That said, I've got a 2nd gen one, and I like it. Sure, it's not full of features, but it does a better job at Netflix than my PS3 and I love streaming music on it to my big stereo system.

I still don't get it (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | more than 2 years ago | (#39311705)

What's the point of e.g. a YouTube channel if all you have to navigate with is the minimalist Apple Remote? And no Bluetooth or USB so you can't connect a keyboard for doing text searches.

Basically, you need an iPad for this to be useful, and then why bother with the AppleTV Youtube channel at all? Just find what you want on the iPad and use AirPlay.

Thud? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311795)

Come on people. The word THUD does not even appear in the linked article. Are you making up headlines now?

Popcorn Hour is better than iTV and Roku (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39311797)

The Linux-based set-top-box Popcorn Hour has been available for years now, and from its first version to its current third version, it has always been superior to Apple's product and the new Roku. So why no Slashdot hype for the Popcorn Hour? It plays almost every media format, supports almost every audio/video cable type, supports true HD, etc.. It even comes with a built in bittorrent client, and the chasis is just large enough to fit an inexpensive high capacity SATA drive:
http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=catalog&mainItemId=45

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...