Is There Hope for the Apple TV?
The Apple TV, after garnering some initially positive press, has faded into obscurity. Apple won't even release sales numbers for the tiny device, and Steve Jobs recently dismissed it as a "hobby."
So what happened? Apple usually has unprecedented success with its consumer electronics, and has a knack for creating a market where one didn't previously exist. But the Apple TV did not find much of an audience beyond die-hard Apple fanatics and the hacker/tinkerer crowd.
The failure of the Apple TV can be attributed to a number of decisions by the boys in Cupertino:
Poor Marketing
It's not that Apple didn't push the product, but more that they didn't explain it properly. The Apple TV is not a proper set-top box or a smaller Mac Mini. Essentially, it's a stationary video iPod with a hefty set of restrictions.
Apple TV didn't come with cable to connect to your TV.
It may seem like an odd complaint, but Apple is known for shipping products that work right out of the box. If you have to buy a $30 HDMI cable to make the thing work, it's betraying Apple's "it just works" ethos.
Apple TV requires an HDTV.
While HD is invading American homes at an incredible rate, Hi-Def sets are far from ubiquitous, limiting the device's appeal from the outset.
Apple TV lacks media support.
Sure, you can load up just about any audio file (other than Ogg or WMA) or photos of your choice, but the Apple TV's main selling point was its video capabilities -- where it undeniably fell short. The Apple TV is limited to lower-resolution MPEG 4 and H.264 video files such as those available through the iTunes store. These formats are nowhere near a high enough resolution to look passable on the fancy HDTV required to use the box. No DivX, no Xvid, no WMV. In fact, the Apple TV isn't even capable of handling the HD trailers hosted on the Apple Movie Trailers web site. Basically if you didn't buy shows and movies on iTunes and don't want to watch YouTube videos blown up to 1280x720, you probably have no reason to purchase the Apple TV.
A small community of intrepid hackers managed to add support for more formats, add USB storage expansion (a must on the original 40 Gigabyte model), and force the diminutive box to run both OS X and Linux, but homebrew enthusiasts alone cannot float an entire market segment.
Is there hope for the Apple TV? Probably not. At least not in its current iteration. Dropping the HD requirements would be a start, but simply building a more open and capable streamer is the only way to reinvigorate interest in the device. The Apple TV might be significantly cheaper, but we'd strongly recommend you drop the extra couple hundred bucks on a Mac Mini and an adapter for your TV -- you'll be much happier with the results.
From DailyTech
Related links:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Shongololo @ Nov 27th 2007 5:06PM
I have owned an Apple TV for 6 months and used it to replace my cable box in B&O media system, so I found the issues listed (except for resolution and media support) to be irrelevant. I have found that for daily use,the following issues are highly relevant:
1) Usability is awful. pre-1980's
2) It cannot wake-up iTunes media sources, so this means frequent trips upstairs to the the relevant computer to wake it up.
3) You cannot use Apple-TV to browse or purchase content from the iTunes store. This means more trips upstairs to a computer to order content.
4) The YouTube support is a very small subset of YouTube content and the search interface is awful. You have to use the remote to navigate a keyboard and there are no suggested completions on search.
5) You cannot synchronize more than one iTunes media source nor can you be connected to more than one source.
6) If you are using synchronization, then when you download new content, your network will be saturated by two downloads - it would be nice if you could direct it to download to the Apple TV
7) When you download a TV series, they are not sorted chronologically on the display and the entire title is not displayed so you have to hunt for the next episode.
8) I purchased an Airport Express so that I could attach a hard drive for my media. However, Apple-TV has to go through one of my computers to get at the content, it would be nice if it would work against the attached storage, but I suspect that means the Airport express would need to run iTunes.
9) Media support - I watch a lot of DRM'd content and converting this to iTunes to run on apple-TV is a royal pain.
10) it would be great if it could run iChat in my media room.
After looking at all these issues, I realized I should rather have purchased a Mac Mini for my media room and then attach my network drives to it to use it as a media server.
steve ballmer @ Nov 28th 2007 10:17PM
In a word NO!
Peter @ Nov 28th 2007 11:44PM
Apple TV didn't come with cable to connect to your TV.
Just what we do not need more cables that end up in land fill, People need different lengths and types of cables. And other people already have them.
I love my apple TV.
Also who knows what the future will hold - will the Apple TV be the next hit / i-Pod in 5 to 10 years time ? It could be.
peter @ Nov 28th 2007 11:51PM
Since my wife discovered You-Tube on the Apple TV she is using it allot. We both do. We use it with EYE-TV for recorded TV. i-Tunes for music / Video It's fantastic.
I will buy the Next Gen Apple-TV2 when it's out.
Paul Schneider @ Nov 29th 2007 5:12PM
The biggest challenge faced by AppleTV and other third-party devices that can bring Web content to the television is what BusinessWeek accurately called “set-top fatigue” several weeks ago. Buying and integrating another box simply is too daunting for most consumers. What is needed to successfully bring Web video to the television is a seamless approach like the one being deployed by Grande Communications in Texas, where Web-based interfaces and video streams are being processed in the network and are delivered to the set-top box through the existing cable plant.
McDave @ Dec 7th 2007 5:29AM
Just to point out the howling error in Terrence's story. Firstly H.264, DivX & XviD are all flavours of MPEG4 and all formats are capable of high quality video - H.264 is the de facto industry standard for HiDef as used in Blu-ray, HD-DVD and the newer HD Satellite & Cable services. He is right about the poor quality of iTunes video purchases but they are iPod resolution, no ApppleTV versions are available yet.
As DivX & XviD weren't used by any legitimate download service I assume he's referring to illegal downloads in which case just download the increasing amount of H.264 torrents - most work without conversion & look great (the other formats can be converted within iTunes anyway)
The real problem with AppleTV is that it was launched 12 months too early and is in need of a 1st birthday present.
McD
Shongololo @ Dec 28th 2007 7:48PM
After reading MediaJunky1966's excellent comments, I realized that I need to clarify my comment with respect to playing DRM'd content on Apple TV. I purchased a subscription to download video of the 2007 World Cup Rugby. This content would only play on a PC using Windows Media Player 10. I looked into what it would take to convert the video to play on my Apple TV. The answer is it is possible, but really not worth the effort.
MediaJunky1966 @ Dec 31st 2007 3:29PM
I also have lived with an Apple TV, after having pre-ordered one to go with our plasma in the family room.
First, I would like to correct one of Terrence's remarks concerning video quality.
Using H.264 you are actually able to get full 720p, and the file size is still quite reasonable for those with the 40Gb model. This video format is arguably better than DivX, Xvid or WMV for high definition content, and is currently being utilized by most of the satellite providers for beaming their HD content. Transcoding content to either of the two supported formats is easy and painless, even for novice users. Though ultimately I do agree that greater format support should have been included out of the box.
Citing the lack of cables is pure nit-picking. If you can afford an Apple TV and an HD display, then you most likely will be able to afford your own cables. Personally, I would have found both a stereo RCA and HDMI cable to be useless, as I use fiber for my surround system and component for the display. Apple would have needed to ship four cables, two of which would have been shelved immediately by every owner.
As for comments made by Shongololo, I disagree with points 1, 4 and 9:
1) The interface is not antiquainted. Simplistic perhaps, making something easy should not be an indication of poor quality. Most, if not all, of the best designs come from distilling the core functionality to the barest essentials.
4) YouTube content, when announced, was clearly going to be an ongoing process of converting all of the content to H.264. At one point, it was true that not all content had been converted, but that conversion has either completed, or will soon.
9) Converting DRM content *should* be a pain in the ass by definition. Those controls are in place because the federal government has not yet stepped to the plate and mandated reasonable fair-use legislation regarding digital content. This is something we will likely have to live with for another 5-10 years.
As for my own complaints of the system, I agree with the other points brought up by Shongololo, and would also add:
11) Lack of organization for Movie, TV Show, and Podcast content. Every piece of content ends up in a big bucket, co-mingling with the others, making it hard to organize things by genre. I would have preferred to organize my toddler's movies in a separate place from my sci-fi, and my wife's drama content.
12) Lack of cover flow interface. It would be a thing of beauty if I could navigate through my 200+ movies, or 1000+ albums by cover.
13) Lack of a page up/down button. With the amount of content I have, it would be nice if I could scan more quickly than what's currently offered.