Analyst: Apple to "take over your living room"
In addition to $5 game downloads for your iPod, Apple announced a new set-top box yesterday that lets PC and Mac users wirelessly stream movies and music to their TVs. The hardware, code-named iTV, will sell for $299 in the first quarter of 2007.
In response to the device, one analyst with investment bank Piper Jaffray said, "The big theme today was, Apple announced its intentions to take over your living room." Like Microsoft's Media Center and Xbox strategies before it, will Apple see video games as part of their living room plans? The company has released a gaming platform before, but with the direction of where iTV is headed maybe another dedicated console isn't needed; streaming PC and Mac games might suffice.
So can we expect gaming via iTV in the near future? Not so fast. Upon announcing the living room device, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said, "We think [iTV] completes the picture here," (emphasis added) and Apple Computer never enters new markets. Just ask Apple Records. Oh wait...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
bv @ Sep 13th 2006 3:36PM
I see no reason why apple could not enter the home console market. When i saw that iTV yesterday, the first thing that came to mind was a home console system. Apple engineers are brilliant when it comes to balancing looks with power and I wouldn't be suprised if they announced a gaming system built on intel chips in the next couple of years. Although I'm not a mac fan myself, I can only imagine how awesome a mac os dashboard on a video game console would be.
Deadgood @ Sep 13th 2006 3:41PM
This is certain to create much consumer confusion in the UK, where our television channel 3 is also called ITV. Hopefully Apple's distinctive 'lower-case i' will help to distinguish them from the competition.
aZn_1080p @ Sep 13th 2006 3:42PM
This thing is lame. So long as the movies cost $10-15 USD, there is no reason to ever buy it, just buy the damn DVDs in far better quality than apple's download service.
C. Grant @ Sep 13th 2006 3:42PM
Pippin: "Costing US$599 on launch, and touted as a cheap computer, the system, in reality, was commonly identified as a video-game console. As such, its price was considered too expensive in comparison to its contemporaries."
minus_273 @ Sep 13th 2006 3:45PM
#3
or you could just have it stream your xvid files you got off bittorrent.
Jay @ Sep 13th 2006 3:47PM
tee hee. aZn_1080p missed out the part that said iTV will output a HD signal. Sure the films aren't out now, but neither is this machine. And seeing Apple already have 480-1080p trailers on their sites, it's the natural progression.
You also clearly miss the point of this.
Say I'm at home. nothing is on TV again. it's late. I'd love to watch a film, so I buy one from the iTunes store and stream it to my TV. lovely! Talk about great convenience.
The name! Not a fan myself. I'm currently using my iMac with 30" ACD as my TV with EyeTV. With another product called EyeTV I doubt that iTV will remain the name. AirVideo? Nah. But it will have a new name.
Pyronite @ Sep 13th 2006 3:49PM
Or, you can buy an Xbox 360 plus wireless adapter (or just go plain ole' Cat5) and get streaming music, pictures, and movies (when Vista is released) for about the same price.
rhork. @ Sep 13th 2006 3:49PM
speaking of the iTV alone- It's hot, there's potential, but at $299... It's simply nothing more than a novelty for the technogeeks that Need Everything. The most iTV will do for apple is establishing the platform to enter the living room. Novelty right now- of course- but a necessary step for what seems to be everyone's goal these days- home entertainment dominance.
For now- I'll choose stringing my 50foot rca/svideo cables around the house and torrenting my tv shows.
Rask @ Sep 13th 2006 3:56PM
I use Vista and my 360 now with a Wired network. Works like a charm. The upshot, when I'm playing the 360, my wife was still watch tv on the 19" LCD on Vista.
Sam_Max @ Sep 13th 2006 3:59PM
Apple could probably pull it off. It could be a Gamecube slapped with a solid white housing and the Apple logo and the lemmings would gladly shell out the $400 for it or whatever ridiculously overpriced amount Apple decides to charge for it.
Pikachelsea @ Sep 13th 2006 4:00PM
The iTV doesn't interest me personally. $299 dollars will buy quite a few DVDs, which are a lot more convenient and portable than anything bought on iTunes, a.k.a. DRMville USA.
DBX00 @ Sep 13th 2006 4:01PM
#5
You're making the assumption this thing will stream xvid files. I would assume if you can't run it in Quicktime natively, then you're out of luck.
#6
It's called Movies on Demand; you never have to get off your sofa
Lekko @ Sep 13th 2006 4:01PM
This device isn't aimed at us. If we want streamed video on our TVs, we could build something ourselves far cheaper, or far more versatile.
This is aimed at parents that ask their children what "lol" stands for. Their logic must be: hey, people love our simple iTunes system, they know it and understand it. Let's try to do the same thing for TV!. Seeing how much an iPod costs, one would think that this would be in the same rough pricerange. with iPods having video now, it's not too much of a jump for them to try.
As far as gaming? I don't know.. if it DOES have games, I wouldn't expect it to have much beyond bejewled.
Pixelantes Anonymous @ Sep 13th 2006 4:03PM
Gaming is not what I'd want in this device. If it had HD inputs and DVR capability for the price they announced, I'd pre-order one right now. But since it can only do video files downloaded from the Internet, I'm not interested in the least.
Robotic House Plant @ Sep 13th 2006 4:11PM
Didn't Disney try this not long ago? They had set-top box and a service called Moviebeam that was offer in limited areas?
It's an interesting idea, and I'd like to see it happen, but does anyone really want ANOTHER box on their TV? I'd much rather have this functionality built into my TIVO or existing cable box.
There's also going to be competition for existing on demand services.
I question how successful this will be. Maybe I'm under estimating Apple. Again, I'd like to see the technology catch on, but at the time time, I'd like it to catch on using something I already have.
Dasgooch @ Sep 13th 2006 4:18PM
The key point Apple is missing out on with this device is DVR functionality. If you can't use it as an Extender like Media Center supports what is the point of using this other than to add to your iDevice line up from his mighty Steve-ness.
Currently with my MCE/360 solution I can do everything this box might do (no one know what formats it will support yet) plus Timeshifting, DVR, Online Content, MCE Games and Xbox 360 games. Really what is the point?
jc @ Sep 13th 2006 4:18PM
All of my CDs are stored though iTunes (lossless), and I have access to my music from both of my computers (PC and Mac), iPod, Airport Express and my X360.
When Apple lets me store my DVDs (store bought) on a back up drive that my Mac, PC and iTV can access... this thing is mine.
Bloo @ Sep 13th 2006 4:21PM
"This thing is lame. So long as the movies cost $10-15 USD, there is no reason to ever buy it, just buy the damn DVDs in far better quality than apple's download service."
I'm thinking this is just smoke and mirrors for all your PS3isGOD/Xbot1.5 posts. If you had read anything about the iTV you would see that DVDs are only have about 12.5% resolution. This is not even taking into account the iTV movies use the better mpeg4 compression. This is also not taking into account that the iTV does a lot more than downloadable movies.
Mike B @ Sep 13th 2006 4:34PM
Apple will NOT enter the gaming market because it realizes that while games are a niche (sorry, you know it's true) most everyone digs music, movies and TV.
Rhork said: "At $299... It's simply nothing more than a novelty for the technogeeks that Need Everything."
Same could easily have been said in 2001 when the iPod came out, no? The whole appeal of the iPod and iTunes and now, iTV (BTW Jobs said that name will change) is that it's EASY and seamless. A caveman could do it, as the insurance commercials say. Using a 360 and Vista and all that might seem seamless to us, but you guys forget -- we're nerds, we know all this stuff. Check out this story from Wired about why it's the UI, not the hardware, that matters: http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,71774-0.html?tw=wn_index_1
This device IS going to take off, thought not right away. It'll build momentum, like iPod. It's a bit expensive, but the price will come down, like the iPod.
But Apple won't get into consoles, because that space is already crowded, and frankly, they just don't need games to help them take over the living room.
Kip Beatty @ Sep 13th 2006 4:42PM
This device has the potential to dramatically alter the way we handle our media. If it works as simply and elegantly as the iPod for example, it would overcome a lot of the barriers to the living room that Microsoft has run into. Let's face it, the average housewife or non technical person is not messing around with a windows media PC to play a movie or television show in the living room.
From what I've seen of the iTV, anyone can use it, and use it immediately. Also, look for the resolution of the media available from iTunes to increase from 480p as bandwidth limitations are overcome.
Oh...and Tetris on my iPod is a blast. But I'll be back to cappin' fools in Saints Row when I get home from the office.
ill trooper @ Sep 13th 2006 4:42PM
Steve Jobs said that this device was coming early next year and that the 'iTV' was the internal working name, and mentioned something like 'we need to come up with a name for when it goes to market."
DBX00: You can convert Xvid, etc. to several formats with the many utilities available. If you know how to handle a torrent, you're likely aware of converting the files to mpegs or quicktime formats.
This thing is a similar concept to the Airport Express, that is, send a signal to your remote stereo. Apple had limited it to only receiving audio from iTunes, so you were limited to mp3s, AACs, AiFFs, WAVs, whatever, but it had to be played by iTunes. However, third parties once again came to the rescue and wrote utilities that would allow any audio generated on the computer to be sent, like from an audio editing program or whatever.
If Apple limits it to only iTunes again, which wouldn't really be that big of a deal as it supports so many formats anyway, someone might just make a VLC player plug-in to send video out to it...
And Lekko, I don't know, I'm pretty technical and I love this idea - I'm not entirely sure you can put together a 'far cheaper, far mor versatile' option for $299: this thing is designed for wireless HD, HDMI out, has ethernet-in if you want to run wires, remote control, component out, digital optical audio out as well as good-ol' left/right RCA audio out, and is completly supported by the ubiquitous iTunes, which a lot of folks use, and is a very powerful program under the hood. So I don't know, that's a pretty good deal for $299, if this is what you're looking for.
The only thing that's missing, and we all know why, is that they aren't able to officially carry the 'buy a CD, rip it, put it on your iPod' system over to video - there's no official 'Buy a DVD, rip it, put it on your iPod" but we all know how to rip DVDs and add them to iTunes anyway.
Pyronite: "Or, you can buy an Xbox 360 plus wireless adapter (or just go plain ole' Cat5) and get streaming music, pictures, and movies (when Vista is released) for about the same price."
?
So, now $399 plus the $90 wireless adaptor, plus the cost of Vista ($116 upgrade) is the same price as $299? Then why are people so mad about the cost of the PS3 compared to the cost of a 360? Those are "about the same price" using your math...
Rootbeer @ Sep 13th 2006 4:45PM
If you had read anything about the iTV you would see that DVDs are only have about 12.5% resolution.
16:9 anamorphic DVD resolution is 720x480 = 345600 oblong pixels.
Staying within the new iPod's resolution limits, 16:9 non-anamorphic video would be 640x360 = 230400 square pixels.
So Apple Video would be 2/3 of DVD resolution. Where did you get that 12.5% figure from?
=[`] @ Sep 13th 2006 4:46PM
iTV is just a 'codeword' as Jobs called it, so with any luck it will be named something different.
Otherwise it will do my head in.
I would also imagine that ITV have some sort of hold over that term here in the UK.
I have to question the analyst that presumes that because Apple are making an effort in the Home Entertainment market that they will be successful. Their current efforts haven't made much impact & if Microsoft can't make much headway then I think it will take Apple that much longer - despite their links to the film & music industries; TV is a different matter.
minus_273 @ Sep 13th 2006 4:47PM
#12
Xvid, divx etc are all just MPEG4
AirIntake @ Sep 13th 2006 4:50PM
So it's roughly the price of a 360 and doesn't play games? The point of it is? If it can't play DivX (and not DivX for embedded or whatever it's called, I mean the latest greatest DivX PC version) then it's just as useless as my 360 is for playing videos. The only stuff I can watch are things in WMV or MPEG2. If this thing can only do QT and MPEG2 it will be even more useless because it can't play GRAW or Halo 3 on it.
ill trooper @ Sep 13th 2006 4:58PM
While I'm a bit confused by the "12%" myself, Rootbeer, that's a 16:9 signal you're referring to when you say "640x360..."
The Apple res for 4:3 is now 640x480, up from the 320x240 they introduced last year for the iPod downloads.
In an annoying side note, you aren't given the new resolution version of the same program you purchased last year. You need to buy it again.
WamBam @ Sep 13th 2006 5:05PM
I basically put something like this together on my own and I think that most people that are truly interested in this technology have done so as well.
I've come to think of Apple as the Elvis of the technological world. They might not have invented certain technologies, but they popularize it in such a way that it certainly seems like they have. One has to admit that it was iPod and iTunes that brought mp3's and downloadable music to the masses even if Napster or other programs and devices paved the way.
We'll first have to see how successful the downloading service is. I'm will to bet it will become popular among those people who use their laptops as their primary DVD players. Then iTV could be that technology that allows people to transition from laptops to TV's.
Dasgooch @ Sep 13th 2006 5:08PM
Last I checked you could get an Xbox for $299, unless it has been discontinued in the last 5 minutes. Granted this doesn't have the HD but neither does the iTV. True it doesn't have wireless but it can be added but I don't know if you've tried streaming HD content over a 802.11g connection get ready for a nice slideshow. Anyone that is serious about using this as a true media center will want a hardwired solution. So lets compare the $299 xbox with the $299 iTV. Xbox gets you DVD playback, Games, DVR functionality through MCE, and will playback all of my content from Xvid to TS. iTV will give me No DVD playback, no games, no DVR, and right now the file support is up in the air. What it does have over the Xbox is built in Wifi and a small footprint. Xbox 360 wins hands down for me.
Also as far as the comment saying a Media Center PC is difficult to setup with an extender (360). If my wife can do it without a single question asked I'm sure most people should be able to figure this out. The problem Microsoft has had thus far with MCE market penitration is that up until about a year ago it was difficult to find a MCE computer from anyone but specialty PC builders. Once Windows Vista launches in Jan 07 everyone will have access to a MCE pc with almost every system sold.
32_footsteps @ Sep 13th 2006 5:10PM
"I see no reason why apple could not enter the home console market."
Does Blake have to quote the complete history of the Apple Pippin to disprove this?
Sigh... putting aside the utter and complete failure of Apple's first (and so far only) attempt to make a video game system, look at it this way:
Apple already has hardware that very few people want to develop games for. What makes anyone think that it'll be a good idea to Apple to make more hardware for the purposes of software they can't attract already?
Part of why the iPod works is because it works with a format that was already popular before the hardware launches.
Bloo @ Sep 13th 2006 5:11PM
"Staying within the new iPod's resolution limits, 16:9 non-anamorphic video would be 640x360 = 230400 square pixels."
Who cares about the new iPod's resolution limits, that's not what the movies' resolution are when downloaded.
ill trooper @ Sep 13th 2006 5:12PM
Elvis never had a hand in creating or being first to market with firewire, quicktime, the first trackpad on a laptop, stylus-input text on a device, or a 30" monitor, but yeah, I get what you mean.
bye buy @ Sep 13th 2006 5:14PM
ill trooper
You say that you can just convert and that's true, but do you realize the time that goes into converting?
Why not just convert everything to DVD then?
The smaller format codecs are there so we can fit an entire season of some shows on 1 DVD instead of using 6.
And batch conversion can be even worse if a glitch happens part way through.
Seriously I am tired of the "just convert it" argument. We like this format and don't want to convert. Why not "just include the codecs"?
darryl @ Sep 13th 2006 5:17PM
By the time this comes to market, I'll already have one, except it will be called Playstation 3 and do a hell of a lot more than this gadget.
ill trooper @ Sep 13th 2006 5:29PM
"Seriously I am tired of the "just convert it" argument. We like this format and don't want to convert. Why not "just include the codecs"?"
Hey man, I am with you on this. I was simply saying there is a path available if you must take it, but I agree, direct support would be great. We all know these companies love their licensing and proprietary formats.
However, if you buy a DVD, rip it to a quicktime format, iTunes will play it, and subsequently, this thing will play it. So really what you're talking about is formats frequently found online, formats used for pirated movies. I am not against this, but rather, just bringing it up to point out that no company, Apple, Microsoft, Wonderbread, etc. can come out and say publicly "Play that copy of 'Underworld2' you got from BitTorrent, Yay, FTW!"
So, it's like buying a bong: if you go in the store and talk about smoking pot with it, they'll act like they don't know what you're talking about.
"This, kind sir, is a PIPE. Smoke with it what you will."
Jaerock @ Sep 13th 2006 5:32PM
I think the main reason this will find it so hard to become successful is because the main stream just isn't that tech savvy. They're not the ones buying this kind of thing. Eventually digital distribution will be common place... but not for a while.
Microsoft has a better game plan IMO by using the 360 as a vechical to get people into digital distribution. The XBOX will have 10 million units sold by the end of the year. The people buying aren't buying it for downloadable movies, music, etc... they buy it to play games off a DVD. But, after playing around with it they discover "Hey, I can DL TV shows and movies" then you already have millions ready to do it instead of trying to get people to understand it a make a purchase for ONLY that reason.
Also, cable has a better shot with ondemand... if they could enhance it to be more current it'll be way better and have tons more market penetration.
Begbie @ Sep 13th 2006 5:40PM
It's surprising that Mac users who always talk about superior Mac quality would actually support and buy inferior iTune products. 128k mp3 is so tragic that even some P2P sites don't allow it. In the age of HD why would anyone want to buy heavily compressed video with subpar sound. Might as well go back to VHS.
I took my old PC and stuffed it inside a HTPC case and added two 300g HD for under $300 and connected that to my TV. I ripped all my DVDs and CDs and now have all high quality media. When I buy a HDTV all I need to upgrade is a HD/BR optical drive and a video card with DVI output.
AirIntake @ Sep 13th 2006 5:44PM
Dasgooch:
You can play Xvid etc with your MCE/360????? How, I always get a 'This format is not supported' or similar. I have the proper codecs on my PC to play Xvid/DivX files so I'm not sure how you are doing this. Please tell!
KoolAidMan @ Sep 13th 2006 5:49PM
#28 - iTV does stream HD. They streamed HD footage from The Incredibles at the presentation yesterday.
Dan @ Sep 13th 2006 5:53PM
@4: Funny--am I the only other person that caught the similarities in the PS3/Pippin pitch?
dsub @ Sep 13th 2006 6:20PM
knowing apple, this thing will only play certain movie files encrypted with DRM out the ass. You can kiss ripping your DVD collection goodbye. Even still, the 360 can do everything this device can do better...and play games.
Psaakyrn @ Sep 13th 2006 6:22PM
Random thoughts:
Chances of partnership between game company and Apple, assuming such does happen:
Microst/XBox 360: Very low considering Xune.
Sony/PS3: So-so, but making a hybrid console with both this and the PS3 would be highly expensive... but it would also be practically the complete home entertainment experience.
Nintendo/Wii: Better than 50%. Nintendo has partnered with another company before to make a hybrid system ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panasonic_Q ) though granted that was due to existing agreements. It also has been noted many times how they're similar..
(additional bonus: this + Wii would still likely be smaller than PS3 or XBox 360, and generate less heat (afaik Wii doesn't have a power-brick either). Chances of someone making a mod which combines both: greater than 50% in my opinion, if only to show it still being smaller than XBox 360 or PS3)
The Hague @ Sep 13th 2006 6:29PM
If you have children...keeping media on your Mac and streaming it to the TV...incredible difference from keeping track of DVDs, etc. You'll be able to back up videos, etc, without worrying about fingerprints on disks.
Of course, more enterprising techy types can do all this and more right now, but this is a product for a narrow market. Rich peoplez...
Just like it took 2-3 revisions for iPhoto to really hum, it will take time for this product to be fully realized.
I'm willing to give Apple some time. They have never disappointed me before...
...'cept for .mac - which is SHIT.
doubtful @ Sep 13th 2006 6:44PM
Apple's last board meeting:
Q: How can we capitalize on everyone's ginormous porn collections?
A: Stream them from iTunes to HDTVs?
Exactly.
The ZeroCorpse @ Sep 13th 2006 7:06PM
@ Begbie
128k MP3? Where? Everything I ever downloaded from iTunes Store is 128kbps AAC, which is MP4. There's a HUGE difference. MP3 is a 12-year-old technology, while MP4/AAC was developed by the MPEG group to replace it. A 128kbps AAC/MP4 is FAR, FAR better than a 128kbps MP3. It's more like a 256kbps MP3, or even higher in some cases.
AAC is also proven to have superior quality compression to WMA & OGG.
. . .So perhaps you should do a little research before slamming an entire segment of people and technology, mmkay?
Oh, and by the time you add all the cards you need to your homemade PC box, you'll be way over the price of a Mac mini Intel Core Duo, which comes with all that (DVI native support), a wireless remote control, built-in WiFi & Bluetooth, and is geared toward HD video and high quality music right out of the box.
Again, a little research would serve you well, instead of the ill-informed, dogmatic hatred for all things Apple.
Have a nice day.
GTgamer @ Sep 13th 2006 7:28PM
There's already a ~$300 device that already has this functionality. It's called an Xbox 360. Even better, you can use it to play kick ass games too! You know, something else to do during the 30 minutes a day when you're not pumping it in front of your plasma.
Joking aside, if MS would add more codecs into the 360 OS (mainly DivX) or native on-the-fly conversion and streaming on the host box with buffered support for some rewind and ffwd, the 360's Media Center integration would be extremely awesome.
The Media Encoder is a slick patch for non-extender-native codecs, but it's still an annoying pain in the ass...
Start encoding
Start playback
Miss a key scene due to a minor distraction
Try to rewind
Remember you can't rewind
Yell expletives
Throw controller
Kick the cat
Realize you don't have a cat
Stop encoding
Go back to playing Uno
...it's really all more complicated than it needs to be.
Begbie @ Sep 13th 2006 7:45PM
@zerocorpes
However, a straight CD rip, which I have in my HD, is superior to any compressed music file (except for FLAC).
And how is your Mac mini gonna play HDDVD or BR? Do you have one installed already? When/if Apple decides to sell one with a HDDVD/BR you will have to buy a brand new mini for perhaps $800-$1000. An upgrade (card + optical drive) will probably cost me around $400 and I'll be able to use it as a PVR.
HD or BR movie is going to be around 25-30g. Are you gonna download that and how much HD space is in your Mini. I can hold over a terabyte in my set up if I wish.
I don't have a hatred of all thing Apples.I have an iPod and might buy a Macbook (if the price is right). In fact, I have no loyalty for any corporation and will buy whatever is the best bang for the dollar. 99 cents for a DRM compressed song is terrible! I admit that Apple OS is superior than Windows but Mac hardware option is god awful. I can upgrade my PC part by part as new technology rolls out. To upgrade to a Core 2 Duo, all I have to buy is a mobo+CPU. To get a C2D Mac I have to buy a brand new fully loaded computer.
Dogma = blind faith in one religion, one view, one political outlook, one company.
Are you saying that your computer company is perfect?
Dasgooch @ Sep 13th 2006 8:43PM
AitIntake:
All you need to know
http://runtime360.com/blog/
2slick @ Sep 13th 2006 9:17PM
all this does is stream stuff off ur pc or mac?
i guess i'm just ahead of the mac. followers if this is right, as i'm already doing this, it's called vga, works nicely.
beta @ Sep 14th 2006 12:22AM
As long as I have XBMC and its functionality, no "htpc" type device can come close to my TV. I doubt any business is interested in actually providing the flexiblity that XBMC provides, they are too worried about controlling what I see so the are going to be fighting a losing battle in my living room :)
Oh and sorry, the 360 (which I also have) does not provide the same flexibility either. Its still nice though as a side feature.
fafafoofly @ Sep 14th 2006 5:56AM
I like the guy who thinks 128kb AAC is equivalent to 256k MP3 (and in same cases more!). Multiple bouble blind tests by Hydrogen Audio prove this to be a fallacy by corporate tools. Basically AAC is superior when dealing with bitrates of 96k or less. At 128k, AAC, Lame MP3, WMA, Ogg are all the same.
Don't feed a corporate tool. Audio tests and results are out there for all to see to make your own opinion.