Posts: 32,462
Threads: 3,127
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
RAMd®d wrote:
The only reason I don't have an AppleTV yet is because my 25" and 32" XBRs are all composite and RF, not HDMI or component.
It can be done with a temporary TV connection (don't need to open the ATV or do any software hacks), http://wiki.awkwardtv.org/wiki/Composite
As for this debate, I'd be tempted to see how my mini (or other spare Mac ...) fairs when connected to the TV, but I don't have any spare Macs.
But would I prefer it? If my main computer was in the TV room anyway and there wasn't a conflict with TV viewing vs. computer use, sure. Still, Hulu would be the biggest draw here, because it's about the best "TV-like" thing on the web.
Most of you overlook the significantly cheaper price and dedicated functionality ATV brings. Characterizing ATV as a Mac with missing features is inaccurate. Think about what makes a TV a TV --- it's an appliance. As beerman said, you put your Mom in front of it and she knows pretty much what to do. You turn it on and you get TV. Computers can be configured to be easy to use, dedicated solutions but NONE of them are that seamless to run or maintain.
Posts: 1,318
Threads: 353
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Maybe it is a matter of what you need. I think the mini is a great solution but it does far more than what I need. I want the no brainer, inexpensive, not a computer, box that works. That's the ATV for $200 refurb.
If you want all the other stuff, then pay more and get the mini. Two sets of consumers.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 175
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Filliam:
1) I said NOT needing another computer to stream files from. *You have dodged answering the point, why is why I made the comment about you not being serious.*
And I answered, but you apparently missed it so I'll try again:
The Apple TV does not need another computer to stream files from. In fact, in can be used effectively by those who do not own a computer at all.
2) See *. And how many does the ATV support out of the box, 2 or 3?
Perhaps I'm being too subtle here. My point is, which of the 62 would you like Apple TV to support? Do you think everyone agrees with your choices? What do you want Apple to do?
3) See *. My $40 gigabit switch enabled my home network to support it. I think many people would find it acceptable to start a 1080/24p movie downloading early in the AM or while they are at work, so they could watch it that night.
And I think few would expend the mental energy required for that kind of forward planning. And fewer still would be willing to pay for a 10-12 GB download on a regular basis.
Current HD rentals can be watched within a few minutes after commencing download even on a moderately fast (6 Mbps) Internet connection. Which commercial services offer 1080p24 downloads?
4) See *. It is UPSCALING 720p, not native 1080i format support. I would have to rip a Blu-Ray movie and encode it at 720p, then play it through a computer for the ATV to display it. Too much work.
- Yes, it upscales 720p24
- Why would you rip a Blu-ray movie?
- No, you don't have to play it through a computer. See *
- Yes indeed, your contrived and silly straw man example would be too much work
Sheesh.
5) See *. So what is your personal experience with having an EyeTV hooked to the ATV to watch TV shows?
Similar to that of guitarist. BTW, the EyeTV is not hooked up to Apple TV. I bet you knew that.
6) See *. Something like a full version of Safari.
I still don't understand. Do you want to use your HDTV as a computer monitor?
7) See *. More internal storage, eg. not needing another computer to stream from. It that really such a hard concept to understand? It has been mentioned in other ATV threads several times before.
See *. You do not need another computer to stream from. You don't need a computer at all.
8) I do not think I am mistaken, otherwise the ATV would do more out of the box.
See my post above.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 175
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
sekker wrote:
I'm not trying to bash the AppleTV, I am still genuinely puzzled how it fits in when a real mac does so much more.
See my post above with the bullet point list.
Posts: 2,956
Threads: 653
Joined: Feb 2024
beerman wrote:
I'm late to the party but I'll chime in and say that I also love my ATV. I currently have over 2800 tv episodes and over 550 movies available to it in addition to my music and photos. My biggest challenge is storage. My first 1tb drive is full and the second is filling quickly.
beerman, I strongly suggest you initiate some kind of backup procedure. I'm using a Mac Mini with EyeTV and have a large number of recordings. Not long after I started building my collection my external hard drive died. I got a free replacement for the drive but the movies were gone forever. So I bought a second drive. After a short time I realized that doing complete backups was very time consuming so now I make two copies of each recording and put one on each drive. That works for me; maybe you can come up with a better plan.
Posts: 1,318
Threads: 353
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Right now I have a 1tb drive labeled "TV Shows" and a 1tb drive labeled "Movies". In addition I have a 1tb drive labeled "tv shows backup". I don't have a backup disc for the movies yet but I plan to add one soon.
How to handle this large volume of data affordably is a big problem. I recently solicited opinions of the Drobo which is something of a hardware raid box. Unfortunately it is $450 just for the box and you add drives to it. I have also looked at the dual drive boxes offered from OWC but if memory serves me correctly they only support drives up to 1.5tb. Sooo, I'm not really sure what I'll do next besides cross my fingers.
I will interject an opinion on one point of Article Accelerator and Filliam's love fest. The ATV only supports playback of h264 and mpeg4 video files in it's stock format. Since 99% of downloadable video on the internet is in the divx format, and osx plays back divx files perfectly, we have to assume apple is distancing itself from illegal downloads by purposely not supporting divx. I think this is a mistake and has hurt their widespread adoption. If they supported divx I say they would 10x their sales.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 175
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
beerman wrote:
I will interject an opinion on one point of Article Accelerator and Filliam's love fest. The ATV only supports playback of h264 and mpeg4 video files in it's stock format. Since 99% of downloadable video on the internet is in the divx format, and osx plays back divx files perfectly, we have to assume apple is distancing itself from illegal downloads by purposely not supporting divx. I think this is a mistake and has hurt their widespread adoption. If they supported divx I say they would 10x their sales.
I think Apple will not do this for several reasons:
- at best, DivX is a de facto standard, not a real standard; Apple isn't into de facto standards
- Apple considers H.264 to be a superior codec
- no commercial download services encode in DivX
- DivX is most popular among geeks and hobbyists; Apple is interested in a much larger market
Posts: 7,301
Threads: 463
Joined: Jan 2022
Reputation:
0
Since 99% of downloadable video on the internet is in the divx format...
99%, really? (a better guess might be, around 40-50%, and that's generous) Since that statement is blatantly misleading, it's hard to know where to start. To speculate that Apple would increase their ATV sales by a factor of "10x" is a very peculiar fantasy. The views expressed here about DivX are subjective, not realistic. One can only assume that a person making such claims has invested countless hours collecting or formatting video in DivX, and doesn't want to admit that the investment was pointless or unwise.
On my Oppo player, in my office, connected to a small LDC, I have an HD connected with batches of movies formatted this way (only because DVD players like this only recognizes AVIs and VOB files in storage connected via the USB port) and when I want to watch a movie with a good image but poor sound, I'll watch a DivX AVI. It's a secondary format, inferior to more advanced codecs like H.264.
DivX has its benefits (compression, file size, bandwidth, internet convenience on a computer screen) its great for delivering an acceptable picture while saving hard drive space. But has no serious role in the future of Home Theater. Apple TV is essentially a Home Theater device. DivX's audio limitations alone (dual channel mediocre mp3 encoding) exclude it from a surround-sound Home Theater environment. There's not exactly a gold rush toward the bright future of DivX. It's just there because it's there.
One of the great benefits of the Apple TV is that it's not a computer, it's not a geek toy, it's not part of computing. It uses the technology, but it's purely an appliance, an entertainment appliance for a Home Theater. But this isn't a Stereo forum, or a Home Theater forum, is it?
Posts: 5,015
Threads: 283
Joined: Jul 2024
Reputation:
0
Wow. Almost 70 posts of arguing and bitching. I'll never know why something like a dumbed down computer box causes so much divisiveness.
Just buy one, or don't.
Posts: 7,301
Threads: 463
Joined: Jan 2022
Reputation:
0
DRR wrote:
Wow. Almost 70 posts of arguing and bitching. I'll never know why something like a dumbed down computer box causes so much divisiveness.
A good debate is too unpleasant for you?
Just read a topic, or don't.
Your analogy is about right. It's a dumbed down computer box about like a modern automobile is a dumbed down horse.
|
