New AppleTV

I’m not an Apple insider nor have I actually used the new AppleTV which was revealed today by Steve Jobs. What I am though is an avid user of multimedia devices on my Home Theater. My current toy of choice is the spectacular Western Digital TV Live!, which literally plays everything*.

So I was a bit excited today to hear that Apple was rolling out a new model of their somewhat lame duck that is AppleTV. What they delivered was a big, fat, floppy turd on the chest of everyone at the conference. I was let down during the demonstration and even more let down after actually reading the technical specifications posted to Apple’s site.

And on that note, I present my Six Reasons why the new AppleTV is a Floppy Turd.

6. Apple has apparently missed the 1080p Wagon

Since the release of Quicktime 7 Apple has really been focusing it’s media efforts on HD content. Even Trailers posted to Apple’s site occasionally come in HD formats (470/720/1080p) and they look FANTASTIC! Anyone with a 1080p capable display can attest to this.  Then why, OH WHY has Apple decided that for an set top box which is supposed to deliver the “HD content people want”, would Apple limit the output to 720p @ 30fps?! In the age of 1080p Blu-Ray content and 3D television, Apple has apparently taken the path of “good enough” for it’s hobby device.

5. Only supports up to H.264 Level 3.1

This one really blows me away and also plays into my previous point. The standard accepted H.264 level for consoles is 4.0 (if not 4.1), which supports the Blu-Ray standard of 1080p @ 24fps in a decent bit-rate. Devices such as Western Digital TV Live! cost $99 as well, but support these advanced H.264 profiles. Why Apple?

4. Apple still has a hard-on for MP4 container

I’d expect in a device released in the year 2010 to support more container formats than just MP4, but alas, we’re dealing with Apple. And honestly, we’re dealing with a two headed monster. First, the Mp4 format is standard so most every console supports it. Even Microsoft has it’s weight behind the MP4 container due to it’s formalized standards, despite it’s technical shortcomings. The second is that other superior container formats, such as Matroska (MKV) aren’t exactly “standardized”, so major hardware manufacturers are hesitant to adopt it as a supported format. Not to say it HASN’T been adopted by anyone, there’s a good number of devices and set top boxes that DO support Matroska in glorious fashion.

3. Apple just used parts it already had

From a cost perspective, I can understand this choice… but it’s still a complete disappointment. From the looks of it, the new AppleTV is no more than an iPod Touch with an HDMI output adapter. It uses the same A4 Processor that is now in almost all Apple devices and I’m fairly sure will share the same PCB as the iPod Touch or possibly even the new iPod Nano. What grinds my gears on this is that even the HTC EVO 4G supports 1080p output of video (using the HDMI adapter), so how on earth does Apple reconcile that it’s new AppleTV, a media-playback-centric box, has less media capability than a mobile device?

2. You can stream to it, right?!

I guess. One of the features touted at the conference was that you’d be able to play movies from your iPad and watch them on your TV. But does it have to be YOUR iPad (tied to your account), or can your buddy bring over HIS iPad and watch one of HIS movies on YOUR AppleTV? I’m guessing no. Apple isn’t huge on content sharing.

My guess is the only time this will come in handy is when your wife leaves for work, you can finish watching the porn on your TV.

1. So then what is it good for?

It’s good for Apple to make money. It pumps up the sales volume and market penetration of their A4 platform which would otherwise only be moving out of their warehouses via mobile devices. It also acts as a point of sale for additional sales through iTunes. Sure, it’s only 99 Cents per show, but the only networks that are signed on are available in HD Over-The-Air (OTA) for free. So sure, you can say that AppleTV might save you money by using it versus having Cable, but as it stands right now, just watching the same shows OTA for free would be the cheapest solution.

I find it disappointing that Apple didn’t take this opportunity to strike into the HTPC market that they struck out on during the first release of AppleTV. Windows Media Center Edition is such a great platform for media playback and is being installed on smaller and smaller devices powered by Intel’s Atom platform.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m far from an Apple hater. I enjoy my iPhone4 and MacBook Pro as much as the next Apple Fanboi… I can just smell shit when I see it

*Does not, in fact, play everything… but supports a heck of a lot more than AppleTV!

ME TOO AND IT WAS DRIVING ME UP THE FUCKING WALL!

After I updated my 15-inch Macbook Pro to 10.5.8 I noticed right away that my wireless performance was in the crapper. Ping times to Google jumped up to an AVERAGE of 300ms, sometimes as high at 1,500ms! Any other wireless device in the house? 40-50ms! So it was obvious, after pulling my hair out thinking it was an issue with my Airport Extreme base stations or Verizon FIOS.

Luckily my friend Joe (who has been suffering the same issue), pointed me towards a link on Apple Support that not only admits that the 10.5.8 update breaks “some” Intel based laptops, but they also released a fix! What was their fix?

It basically rolls back your wireless drivers to 10.5.7!

http://support.apple.com/downloads/AirPort_Client_Update_for_MacBook_and_MacBook_Pro

I hope this helps out anyone else who thought they were losing their mind!

Cheers!

It was then announced that the official iPhone SDK which runs natively on the iPhone will be released later this month. So soon you’ll have a host of local applications which will most likely include 3rd party media players. It then dawned on me, if a user could use WWWinamp from the iPhone with an interface that interacted nicely on the iPhone, then someone’s iPhone could act as a remote control from ANYWHERE allowing them access to their home media library.

Well, this is just a heads up that I’m currently working on a skin for WWWinamp that will let it work on the iPhone (better)! Soon you all will be able to control your media center or home copy of WWWinamp from anywhere using your Apple iPhone!

I’m still working on the organizing the data on the screen in a manner that makes sense and is easy to use. All the functionality that comes with the default skin will be included in the iPhone version, including cover art and all the Winamp Playlist functions.

It’s actually pretty sweet controlling Winamp from an Apple iPhone and I hope I can polish this up and put out a beta version this weekend. I’m still trying to fish up some resources on the WebKit API and the WebKit specific tags to make things integrate nicely.

Keep your browsers posted here for updates in the coming days!

A little background from my point of reference.? My wife is currently using a 2.2Ghz Black MacBook with 1GB RAM and my personal laptop is an ‘ancient’ 17″ Titanium PowerBook with a 1.33Ghz G4 processor and 1GB RAM. Both are currently running the latest version of Leopard (10.5.1). So these are the benchmarks I’ll use when comparing the speed of the new MacBook Air.

The model I was testing was the ‘top of the line’ 1.8Ghz model with 2GB of RAM and a 64GB solid state drive (SSD). I verified that it was in fact the 64GB SSD because the system preferences labeled the available disk space after format as 55.35GB and the serial number was that of the listed 64GB SSD model.

Our first test was to just see how fast iTunes opens as this usually takes even a couple seconds on my wife’s MacBook. Even on a machine only clocking in at 1.8Ghz, iTunes literally took only a SECOND (we timed it) to open and be ready to use. I was floored! Other applications such as iMovie or Garage Band only took a second or two to open as well.

It’s obvious that performing every day operations will be much, much faster on the new MacBook Air with the additional ($999 additional as well) solid state drive. The benefit here is the seek time for non-cached data has dropped from milliseconds to NANOSECONDS. That alone greatly increases the load time of data, regardless of actual transfer rates once the data is accessed. Operations such as saving or opening large sequential files might seem a little slower on an SSD drive compared to traditional disk drives, but honestly, I feel the benefits far outweigh the draw backs.

What excites me is now we’ll have storage devices that can finally feed our fast data hungry CPU’s information at a rate that will actually make then earn their keep Even when booting Windows XP while watching the CPU monitor, you’ll notice that it’s not the CPU that’s the limiting factor in boot time. It’s the disk I/O that’s causing things to slow down. The hard drive has to trash around all over the disk loading information and god forbid you don’t defrag regularly

For additional reading, you can check out the benchmarks posted over at MacRumors where users in their forums are posting actual MacBook Air SSD Benchmark information using such programs as Xbench.

Cheers!

I was looking through the features and was somewhat interested. It seemed like a media extender for iTunes, which was fine if that was what you were in the market for. Built in WiFi was a big plus as was the built in hard drive. It had HDMI output and was setup on an HD LCD TV, so I decided to poke around the UI looking for some video content. The Apple store had pre-loaded it with a couple TV shows, movie clips and trailers. The content looked very pixelated and low quality. I assumed it was due to the Apple store not loading any HD content onto the Apple TV but after asking the ‘Genius’ at the Apple store what was up, I was informed that there was no HD content available for Apple TV or iTunes.

Say what? Apple built a media extender with HDMI and video playback capability rated at 720p and then decided not to release any HD content for it? Are they retarded?

I then let Apple TV slip into the back of my head as another hardware endeavor destined to fail, along with WebTV and the Apple Interactive Television Box.

This brings us to last week while watching Steve Jobs’ keynote speech at MacWorld 2008. Apple has completely revamped the UI and transformed the Apple TV into a media playing, HD streaming, video renting machine! Is this a good thing? I think it depends on how you handle your media.

Over the last couple years I was a big purchaser of DVD movies. Not only as a fan of cinema but also as a collector. I don’t want to think about how much money I’ve spent on movies as I’m sure it’d be both depressing and staggering. But as I sit here and look at the monolith that is my DVD collection, I look through the titles and think how often I actually watch them. The most I’ve ever watched a title is about once or twice a year, if it’s a movie I really enjoy. Some movies, I’m ashamed to say, are still in their original shrink wrap packaging.

So while watching Mr. Jobs’ speech, I began to wonder, is electronic delivery and rental the next step in my movie watching? At first I rebuffed the idea of buying an Apple TV for $229 because it seemed silly. I mean, $229 for a device that lets me rent movies? That’s like buying a golf cart you only drive to your local Blockbuster Video. But then I started crunching the numbers in my head comparing the upgrade of my home theater to a new HD format, say, Blu-Ray vs. getting an Apple TV.

Let’s assume I’m purchasing a player and movies that I’ll watch once a year. The numbers add up like this for an average of 20 new movies per year for the first year:

Blu-Ray:

• Player: $399
• New Releases (such as Superbad, or Simpsons Movie): $28.99
• Library Release (such as Blazing Saddles): $14.99

Apple TV:

• Player: $229
• New Releases: $4.99
• Library Releases: $3.99

Now if we assume that of those twenty HD movies I’m going to watch are only 75% new releases, our numbers add up to (for the first year):

• Blu-Ray: $908.80
• Apple TV: $332.80

The cost of Apple TV for the first year of ownership is almost ONE THIRD OF THE PRICE of Blu-Ray and most likely HDDVD, which probably won’t be around much longer with the departure of Warner Brothers to the Blu-Ray camp.

The reason I’m comparing PURCHASING Blu-Ray titles vs. RENTING iTunes titles is because there isn’t a Blockbuster or other video rental store within 15 minutes of my home (as they seem to be disappearing), so in order for Blu-Ray to have the same accessibility, it’ll need to be on hand. Unfair? Perhaps, but as I said before, this is MY interpretation of the matter at hand and how it’ll hit MY pocket book

“BUT ERIC,” you say, “BLU-RAY IS 1080P AND APPLE TV ONLY SUPPORTS 720P! YOU n00b!” – Probably You

Alas, I can’t deny the truth. But then, what does science have to say about the relevance of that argument? I point you over to this very good article at Audioholics.com titled “1080p and the Acuity of Human Vision“. If you have some time I do suggest you go read the entire article, but for those not in the mood for some math and reading I’ll quote directly from the article:

“Put bluntly, from 8 feet away while watching a 50 inch plasma TV, the human eye is generally incapable of reliably distinguishing any detail finer than that shown on a true 720p display!”

I’m not an Apple fan boy, far from it. I have just as many PC’s in my house as I do Apple computers. But personally, for MY own reasons and number crunching, it seems that Apple TV is a pretty sweet deal and is in a position to give Sony a run in the upcoming format DELIVERY wars, which will be streaming vs. physical media

I ran across a kit that is being sold by Briel Computers called the Replica 1. The Replica 1 is a software compatible clone of the original Apple 1 which was created by Steve Wozniak back in 1976. The Replica 1 kit starts at $159 for the unassembled version.
The Replica 1 has the same specs as the very first Apple 1:

• MOS Technology 6502 CPU
• 32K RAM
• 8KB EEPROM
• Support for APPLE 1 Expansion Cards

In addition to the original specs of the Apple 1, the Replica 1 also adds a Serial Port for programming, an RCA TV Output Port and an optional USB Interface (USB Replica 1 kit costs $184). Power can be provided by one of three methods. The first is ATX power provided by a modern ATX power supply. Second is a port for an external 5V DC Power Supply. The third option is to power the Replica 1 via power supplied from the USB port when plugged into a computer.

When I purchased my kit, I opted for the USB version that wasn’t pre-assembled. You CAN purchase the unit pre-assembled, but I think that takes away from the fun of ordering a kit computer. My order was included in the June 1st batch and was shipped exactly on June 1st. My hats off to Briel Computers for a very quick turn around.

The Replica 1 arrives in a well packed USPS box. Inside the box is a large zip lock bag which contains the Printed Circuit Board, a smaller plastic bag containing all the capacitors, resistors, diodes, connectors and whatnot. Also included in the large zip lock bag is four IC tubes which include the IC sockets and the IC’s. The CPU included in the kit was actually a 65C02, which is an updated version of the MOS 6502 that includes several bug fixes and errors that existed in the original 6502.

The Printed Circuit Board is very well laid out and the silk screen is very, very well done. Makes installing the sockets and diodes very easy by clearly identifying which direction the parts are to be installed.

All the parts included in the kit seem to be ordered from the Jameco catalog. This is a handy thing to know in case you run into any issues where you’ll need to order a replacement part.

I started earlier today beginning to put together the Replica 1. I was able to lay down the sockets as well as several of the other electronic parts. Some of the solder points on the Replica 1 are very close to other debug point and ground points, so please be careful when soldering the Replica 1 together as you can very easily ground out or fry a circuit. There are several safe guards in place in the form of glass diodes to protect the Replica 1 from issues with the power sources.

I’m still in the process of assembling the Replica 1, but so far, so good! I’ll continue my review of the Replica 1 as I progress with it’s assembly.

Picture 1 — The Replica 1 on my workbench being assembled. (Sorry about the picture quality, I had to use my Blackberry as my Canon is out on loan)