Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Future technology growth: What happens when...

Future technology growth: What happens when...
Thread Tools
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 10:39 PM
 
Everyone who can afford a smartphone has one, and everyone who can afford a tablet has one? We've seen what's happened to PC OEMs when they hit the ceiling in terms of market penetration: they pretty much tank. Smartphones now are a majority in the marketplace. We've seen companies like HTC proliferate the market with a massive amount of products and start to see sales decline. Samsung sales figures for FY2011 aren't out yet, but I'm guessing that there will be an overall decline as well. The only company that continues to break sales figures quarter-after-quarter is Apple, and I don't think that can last forever either. I get the feeling that tech giants are riding a bubble that will eventually start to deflate, and deflate quickly. I won't say burst, because I don't think it'll be that disastrous.

The problem that I think may be on the way is this: We have a mobile marketplace essentially dominated by three major powers: Samsung, LG, and Apple. Why LG? Because they're a major supplier to other major OEMs. Samsung obviously is a popular worldwide brand, but they're also a supplier to other brands as well. Thus if a brand like HTC or Apple were to start losing traction, Samsung and LG would suffer as well. And brands like Samsung (as a handset maker, not OEM), HTC, and Apple are supported by such huge economies of scale that it seems like if any one of them falls, it will leave a huge ripple effect on the rest of the industry.

If this ripple effect happens, there can only be two results, IMO: Brands will either be forced to innovate, or they'll just slowly whittle away their own markets, much like RIM. I don't doubt Apple's ability to continue to create high-quality products, but little they've made lately is truly as innovative as something like the 128k, Bondi iMac, 2001 iPod, etc. From a design standpoint, there's really only been one new Apple design philosophy since 2007: the iPhone and iOS. And unfortunately, other OEMs haven't really done anything super innovative either, at least on the same successful level. Windows Phone 7 does things differently, and is a very well-put together OS with some unique devices (Dell Venue Pro), but for some reason has failed to gain significant momentum in the marketplace. Android has obviously been successful, but mainly because the market has simply been flooded with Android-powered devices at pretty much every price point, and operates basically the same now as it did in 2008 when the original Droid came out. So in the past 4 years or so, innovation seems to have really come to a slow. The iPhone was a major force in the industry, but after everyone played catch up, it seems like we're waiting for the next big thing.

Am I the only one who feels like this, or am I just crazy?
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 10:48 PM
 
We all go a little mad sometimes.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 10:53 PM
 
True.

It came to mind today when I had a Galaxy S II (unlocked EU version) and Galaxy Nexus on my desk. The Galaxy Nexus supposedly represents a paradigm shift for Android, and it is quite different than previous versions of Android, but it's still basically the same mobile OS that shipped with the G1. And the SGSII is one of the most popular phones in the world, yet I can't see an quantifiable innovation either within the OS or hardware. Just incremental improvements.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 11:24 PM
 
What happens when smartphones and tablets reach market saturation? Prices will drop to match demand. Apple will exit both fields rather than drop their prices.

The next hot thing will be the replicator wars (3D printers) racing to replicate useful objects before the copyright people can make them all illegal.

     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 11:26 PM
 
Prices have already dropped dramatically on the mid and low-end. And pretty much every high-end Android phone is on sale within weeks of introduction.

You think that Apple will exit the mobile market? That's an interesting thought.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 11:35 PM
 
They'll sell to the wealthiest 10%, for the margins, and move into OLED smart TVs and HT peripherals.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2011, 11:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
They'll sell to the wealthiest 10%, for the margins, and move into OLED smart TVs and HT peripherals.
What do you mean by that? Like very high-end smartphones in higher price points then we see now?
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 02:17 AM
 
No: they'll continue to cater to the same market segment as now.

Also, smartphones are a very different market from PCs: t most of them are replaced every two years.

I also believe you're underestimating Siri.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 06:14 AM
 
^^^This.

Siri is the next big thing. What we have now is the tip of the iceberg. It will get better and better at what it does over the coming months and sooner or later Apple will open up APIs for third parties and this will change the game all over again.

I really don't know why you would be surprised about a lack of innovation from Samsung or a lack of popularity for Win Phone 7. The Galaxy X5002S4.7IceCreamCheeseSandwichWithMustardAndAnUmb rellaInIt was never going to be anything more than we have seen from Samsung, Nokia, LG or others in recent years which is basically an iPhone with some theoretically better specs and a sh*ttier OS on it. The only company not doing this even now is RIM who are just doing what they always did (though they tried this and flopped with the Playbook) making big ugly phones with too many buttons on them and they are already in pretty bad shape as a result.
Win Phone 7 might be one of the best things M$ has ever done but really its just a slightly different way of doing the same thing. Even if its better than iOS in every respect, its not significantly better and if it weren't for Xbox Live would probably be dead already no? They were too little, too late to the party and while they might creep up over the next couple of years in terms of market share, they'll be taking it from Android for the most part. They have also publicly come out and missed the point yet again by trash talking Siri. Three years from now when Siri is no longer in beta and has tens of thousands of apps wired into it, M$ will release their imitation of it. Too late again.

Innovation is a potentially treacherous word to be thinking about here anyway. Where exactly is the innovation anyway? I don't doubt there are many, many innovations in all our pockets in terms of engineering innovation. The unibody process for building laptops is one we know about, but what about the ones where a chip engineer shaves those vital few milliwatts of consumption from the 3G chipset giving us an extra hour of battery life. The modified location services algorithm that doesn't bother checking your location again until sustained vibrations of the accelerometer tells it you might have actually moved somewhere (I may have just invented that one, pay attention Apple!). These are innovations that companies will never tell us about. Until they start fighting over the patents of course.

The temptation is to give the credit for innovation to the concept, not the execution. The iPhone/iPad after all didn't really invent anything new. Apple took existing tech and bundled it up nicely so it worked and it made a massive difference as everyone else is still copying it. So Steve Jobs gets the innovation credit for green lighting the iPhone/iPad? Jonny Ive for designing what it looked like? Maybe it should go to the makers of Star Trek the Next Generation who had the iPad concept decades earlier? Most modern tech concepts come from SF writers really no? iPhone/iPad was something we all knew would happen sooner or later because of Star Trek and probably others before it. The tech was already, Apple just realised this and did it right when they put it together. Its like a flying car. We all know it will happen, we all know it will change the world quite a lot. We all know much of the tech is already there. Plenty have tried it though and none have got it right yet.

People call Apple innovative because they change the way things are done. They change they way they do business, the way everyone else does business, the way we compute/make phone calls/etc. They make big changes to the world no doubt. I'm not convinced innovation is really the right word at least for the things people are talking about when they tend to use it. The real innovations are coming from the engineers, designers, logistics people, manufacturing experts etc and most of us never know they are there. Its more like a combination of vision and excellence of execution, rather than innovation, but you are right, Apple are the only ones who really have it.

As for hitting a wall with iPhones/iOS, I think you have to look at the iPod rather than the Mac. Apple had to do things differently when they were market leader to they way they did things as a minority player. The iPod took the lead but when the high-margin, high-cost products started to stagnate, they diversified the product line and now we have Nanos and Shuffles. As costs fall and profits fall Apple will do the same thing with iPhone and iPad but certainly not until the profits fall. That is the mistake that other companies have made, though most never have those great margins to begin with.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 09:11 AM
 
When you are at the top, the only way is down.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 09:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
When you are at the top, the only way is down.
The point is that nobody knows where the "top" is. Apple's further up than everybody else, but I think they have a ways to go until they hit the peak.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
When you are at the top, the only way is down.
Maybe, but if you own the top of the mountain this doesn't mean you have to relinquish it in order to conquer some of the lower slopes.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
What do you mean by that? Like very high-end smartphones in higher price points then we see now?
They're going to keep selling at the current price points, or perhaps slightly lower, while everyone else continues to slash prices and scrambles for tiny margins. They'll sell a smaller amount of high profit phones and tablets, just like they do with computers. If you want the higher quality "Apple experience" in a mobile device you'll have to pay 2-3x more than a Samsung or Motorola. That will shut out 90% of buyers.

Next up is the home entertainment segment, and I'm looking forward to getting a 65" voice-navigated OLED iTV for my family room.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Next up is the home entertainment segment, and I'm looking forward to getting a 65" voice-navigated OLED iTV for my family room.
This. Siri and Apple's slow move into the entertainment hub is what has me truly excited. If I can sit back and say "scroll music library" and "pick ISIS" and "play Panopticon"......and then "stop music, play movie True Romance"....I mean...we don't even know how awesome that would be. We don't even know.

(Now if Apple would only stop arbitrarily hamstringing their products....no hi-def music output from the ATV2? Sigh.)
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
No: they'll continue to cater to the same market segment as now.

Also, smartphones are a very different market from PCs: t most of them are replaced every two years.

I also believe you're underestimating Siri.
Yes, they are replaced every two years, however, technology seems to have slowed to a pace where you don't need to replace your phone every two years. I know quite a few people, for example, who bought a 3GS when it came out and don't feel the need to buy the 4S.

I don't like Siri very much, to be honest. I don't see the point of voice navigation. I'd rather just do it myself. And her voice is too robotic for my tastes.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
(Now if Apple would only stop arbitrarily hamstringing their products....no hi-def music output from the ATV2? Sigh.)
96 kHz, you mean?
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Yes, they are replaced every two years, however, technology seems to have slowed to a pace where you don't need to replace your phone every two years. I know quite a few people, for example, who bought a 3GS when it came out and don't feel the need to buy the 4S.
The new one comes for free/less than €100 with the contract extension you were getting anyway. The only people I know on older iPhones are using hand-me-downs/used purchases, or are on cheap pre-paid contracts, or have just waited out the new generation (a friend just dumped his 3G after almost three years).

The market may be different here from in the U.S., though.

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
I don't like Siri very much, to be honest. I don't see the point of voice navigation. I'd rather just do it myself. And her voice is too robotic for my tastes.
I don't see the point of voice navigation, either.

But the point of Siri is not voice navigation, so, that's okay.
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 10:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I really don't know why you would be surprised about a lack of innovation from Samsung or a lack of popularity for Win Phone 7. The Galaxy X5002S4.7IceCreamCheeseSandwichWithMustardAndAnUmb rellaInIt was never going to be anything more than we have seen from Samsung, Nokia, LG or others in recent years which is basically an iPhone with some theoretically better specs and a sh*ttier OS on it. The only company not doing this even now is RIM who are just doing what they always did (though they tried this and flopped with the Playbook) making big ugly phones with too many buttons on them and they are already in pretty bad shape as a result.
I'm not necessarily surprised with the lack of innovation from Samsung. I'm disappointed. A company as large as Samsung has the technical know-how to build the next Big Thing, yet they don't. They've gotten themselves stuck in a rut where they pretty much copy and paste Apple design. And Samsung's products are very technically impressive. The Galaxy S II is a very impressive phone. The screen is stunningly gorgeous, it's very fast, and the camera seems to be on the same level as the 4S for stills, but 1080p seems smoother. But when I look at the device, and just the device itself, it's hard to get excited about it. When I first saw the iPhone 4, for example, I thought the design looked stunning. I had a render of the iPhone 4 as my desktop background because I thought it looked so nice. But there hasn't been a product from any other company that has really struck me in the same was as Apple's products do. The only exception perhaps would be Bang & Olufsen and, in another segment, the Audi A7.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 11:03 AM
 
Siri will take some time for people to get used to it. Some never will, much like there are people now who don't use computers at all or who prefer non-smartphones etc etc.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 11:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
I'm not necessarily surprised with the lack of innovation from Samsung. I'm disappointed. A company as large as Samsung has the technical know-how to build the next Big Thing, yet they don't. They've gotten themselves stuck in a rut where they pretty much copy and paste Apple design. And Samsung's products are very technically impressive. The Galaxy S II is a very impressive phone. The screen is stunningly gorgeous, it's very fast, and the camera seems to be on the same level as the 4S for stills, but 1080p seems smoother. But when I look at the device, and just the device itself, it's hard to get excited about it. When I first saw the iPhone 4, for example, I thought the design looked stunning. I had a render of the iPhone 4 as my desktop background because I thought it looked so nice. But there hasn't been a product from any other company that has really struck me in the same was as Apple's products do. The only exception perhaps would be Bang & Olufsen and, in another segment, the Audi A7.
This is hardly a new development though. Scores of companies have been copying Apple for years and missing the point all the way. If Samsung has improved in certain areas to get ahead of its competitors, there is a good chance its because of tech they have access to from Apple for a start but there is still a cultural difference between Apple and everyone else. Design by committee. Of accountants. There is also the issue of taste. They are still too keen on making everything look gadgety, rather than beautiful. Still too many LEDs etc.
Also too many different products and all of them have silly names, which you may have already noticed me mocking.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 11:51 AM
 
Yes, it certainly ins't a new thing. It's just disappointing when you have a huge company that could certainly create a killer product, yet, like you say, they'd rather fill little niches that exist because their accountants tell them it does.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 12:26 PM
 
Its easy to see why this happens though. The principles they are working on seem like no-brainers. Why not take millions from Intel to put a sticker on the side? Why not build a device with the widest possible appeal? Why not add that feature to it if its only going to cost $0.005 per unit? The only odd part is that no matter how many times Apple shows them the error of their ways, they can't get past these decisions.

Its partly because other companies have never had the overbearing know-it-all tyrant figure of a Steve Jobs in place. Its been said all too often, but his real value as a businessman was the things he said no to.

For all the Apple copying that goes on, no-one has yet made a good fist of copying their process and until they realise that, they will fail every time. Even that may not be enough, because to copy the Apple model entirely would mean competing with them directly and they've been doing things that way for decades, and playing the long game in the process. For another company to succeed in a similar way, they might need to adjust that process a bit in order to go for a different market segment, otherwise, you have Hyundai trying to operate like Mercedes.

There is no reason Samsung couldn't come in at the bottom of the market and make something cheaper and simpler. Amazon seem to be having some success with this idea already. They have basically made an iPad Nano. The difference is that Amazon is losing cash on it, whereas Apple would have been making $65 a unit @ $200 retail.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 12:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
96 kHz, you mean?
My understanding is that ATV2 output from optical/HDMI is 16-bit, 44.1KHz. Anything in 24-bit, 88KHz/96/192/etc is downsampled. My own ear tests tell me this is true; if I'm wrong, well, then, I'm throwing everything in the garbage in embarrassment.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 12:55 PM
 
if DVRs advanced to the point where, I could say, "Set Season Pass for all TV Shows starring Nathan Fillion" without having to fiddle with one-by-one letter selection oops I hit the wrong letter better start over... well then. That's a big deal.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:10 PM
 
But what happens when the ad for Siri says "Set Season Pass for all TV Shows starring Nathan Fillion"? Does your TV hear itself and do it?

For me voice control is a non-starter. There are some people that like to yell at the TV but I'm not one of them. Even if with no technical challenges (there was a paid native english speaking butler in the room doing what I tell them in a normal tone and ignoring what I say to other people), I would rather be using my fingers than my voicebox. Talking is a poor medium of communication. It's slow and takes more effort.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:17 PM
 
I want TV companies to stop trying to turn the TV into a computer. Leave it alone. Leave it as a TV. If I want a computer, I'll buy one and connect it to the damn TV. I don't want Android of iOS on my TV. That last thing I need is for some schmuck to write a virus and brick my TV.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
My understanding is that ATV2 output from optical/HDMI is 16-bit, 44.1KHz. Anything in 24-bit, 88KHz/96/192/etc is downsampled. My own ear tests tell me this is true; if I'm wrong, well, then, I'm throwing everything in the garbage in embarrassment.
i haven't found any definite info on 24-bit vs. 16-bit, but it does seem that the 2nd-generation Apple TV only supports 44.1 kHz. Which is odd, considering that most video defaults to 48 kHz.

So yeah, it would have to convert the 48 to a 44.1-kHz sample rate. OS X's built-in SRC is top-notch, but it still surprises me.

The lack of 24-bit support would be surprising, although I expect that keeping the box under $100 at regular margins was the #1 priority, and using slightly cheaper chips probably helped quite a bit. Also, I have to wonder how many TV sets out there, if any, actually support 24-bit audio.

None of the Samsung models, nor any of the LG models, make any mention at all of sample rates and bit rates.

Given that, I have to assume that no Samsung or LG models support anything higher than 44/16 (or possibly 48/16), so there's no reason for Apple to support it in Apple TV, either (given the product's focus and pricing).
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
For me voice control is a non-starter. There are some people that like to yell at the TV but I'm not one of them. Even if with no technical challenges (there was a paid native english speaking butler in the room doing what I tell them in a normal tone and ignoring what I say to other people), I would rather be using my fingers than my voicebox. Talking is a poor medium of communication. It's slow and takes more effort.
This seems a rather short-sighted generalisation.

Some things are less efficient by voice, others are not. For example if you decide you want to watch some basketball, you'd have to trawl through your channel list to find the various sports channels and then see whats on each one. Miami Vs Orlando. Is that basketball? Maybe its not quite on yet, so you have to check now, next and maybe a little after that as well. Much easier to just say "Find me some basketball to watch" and have Siri tell you which games are on now, which are on in the next hour, what is live, what is highlights or if it happens to be the case "There is no basketball on any time soon" which saves you several minutes of searching the EPG for something which isn't there.

As for the TV listening to itself, I expect there is some clever noise cancellation that could be done there.

The issue with this is that the best use of Siri on a TV is going to require Apple having some access to the content or at least the EPG. In the case of most cable or satellite providers I know, they make their own boxes which spit out a video signal and that is that. Its one way traffic which means Apple would have to buy or build a worldwide EPG for every channel in the world or find another way of providing its own content. not impossible but not ideal either.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
I want TV companies to stop trying to turn the TV into a computer. Leave it alone. Leave it as a TV. If I want a computer, I'll buy one and connect it to the damn TV. I don't want Android of iOS on my TV. That last thing I need is for some schmuck to write a virus and brick my TV.
The worst part has already happened. We have all gone from an upgrade cycle that potentially lasted nearly 80 years to having to replace our TVs every 5 years or so whenever they crank up the resolution.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:37 PM
 
I'm not sure. TV growth seems to be fairly slow. I've heard no mention at all of a 4K resolution on the way for a TV set, and we've been at the max of 1080p for a while now. My 5-year old Sony has pretty much the exact same features right now as the comparative middle-priced Sony on sale today. Yes, there are "smart" TVs, but I get the same functionality from my Blu Ray player as well as my 360. Smart TVs don't do anything new, they just put the stuff on the actual TV instead of a box.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 01:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
i haven't found any definite info on 24-bit vs. 16-bit, but it does seem that the 2nd-generation Apple TV only supports 44.1 kHz. Which is odd, considering that most video defaults to 48 kHz.

So yeah, it would have to convert the 48 to a 44.1-kHz sample rate. OS X's built-in SRC is top-notch, but it still surprises me.

The lack of 24-bit support would be surprising, although I expect that keeping the box under $100 at regular margins was the #1 priority, and using slightly cheaper chips probably helped quite a bit. Also, I have to wonder how many TV sets out there, if any, actually support 24-bit audio.

None of the Samsung models, nor any of the LG models, make any mention at all of sample rates and bit rates.

Given that, I have to assume that no Samsung or LG models support anything higher than 44/16 (or possibly 48/16), so there's no reason for Apple to support it in Apple TV, either (given the product's focus and pricing).
I've been hearing it's actually a software problem with Airport Express and the way iTunes streams information - it always downsamples to 16/44.1. I recently noticed that Firecore - the maker of a popular jailbroken ATV2 browser/media player/etc has indicated on their forums that they hope to get hi-res FLAC files working via their media player, so it seems at least an indication that the hardware might support it.

The Logitech Squeezebox gets pretty good reviews as a hi-res wireless provider, but of course it doesn't offer the benefits of the ATV2. I don't know...it just think the ATV2 would be a hugely popular alternative for the hi-res "audiophile" crowd if this was supported.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
This seems a rather short-sighted generalisation.

Some things are less efficient by voice, others are not. For example if you decide you want to watch some basketball, you'd have to trawl through your channel list to find the various sports channels and then see whats on each one. Miami Vs Orlando. Is that basketball? Maybe its not quite on yet, so you have to check now, next and maybe a little after that as well. Much easier to just say "Find me some basketball to watch" and have Siri tell you which games are on now, which are on in the next hour, what is live, what is highlights or if it happens to be the case "There is no basketball on any time soon" which saves you several minutes of searching the EPG for something which isn't there.
The search terms and the medium of entering those terms are two different and independent questions. A powerful search paired with voice is indeed better than a dumb search paired with finger-input, but a powerful search paired with finger-input is better than both of those (for me). Especially since an obvious feature of a powerful search is saved searches, so instead of voicing "find me some basketball" (likely more than once) you would hit the "7" key on your presets list or remote (like a phone speed-dial), after having earlier typed "b-a-s" and then selecting "basketball" from the type-ahead function, and then assigning that search to a pre-set list. This would be significantly easier and faster for me than voice command.

As for the TV listening to itself, I expect there is some clever noise cancellation that could be done there.
But as of now, it is still an unsolved problem.

The issue with this is that the best use of Siri on a TV is going to require Apple having some access to the content or at least the EPG. In the case of most cable or satellite providers I know, they make their own boxes which spit out a video signal and that is that. Its one way traffic which means Apple would have to buy or build a worldwide EPG for every channel in the world or find another way of providing its own content. not impossible but not ideal either.
MS already has this and gives it for free in Media Center. I pay $25/year to use a similar service with MythTV. I don't see this being any kind of obstacle for Apple.
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 02:32 PM
 
I agree with Uncle on this. My friend always asks Siri about the weather, but it takes just as many button presses to get out of whatever app you're in an open a weather app. What's the point? The best use of Siri, IMO, is to reply to text messages while driving.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 02:39 PM
 
Siri is good for checking your calendar and setting reminders too. Often its quicker for searching the web for more than one-word searches.

As for weather, you know you can get to that even quicker using the pull down notifications centre right?

Does M$ media Centre and/or Myth TV work with Sky in the UK? I doubt it....
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 02:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
But as of now, it is still an unsolved problem.
Big red button on remote: SIRI.

Voila, tv only listens when you are intentionally talking to it. Good enough for Picard. Not sure we need these buttons on our shirts though.
     
imitchellg5  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 03:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
As for weather, you know you can get to that even quicker using the pull down notifications centre right?
Right...

I've only used iOS 5 on the iPhone a few times. For some reason, the iPad doesn't have weather in the notifications menu. Or at least mine doesn't.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 03:49 PM
 
I haven't seen iOS 5 on iPad yet tbh.

Going back to the voice controlled TV listening to itself, I think the tech is already out there to have a system that could virtually listen to the audio output and use it to destructively interfere with the mic input.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Does M$ media Centre and/or Myth TV work with Sky in the UK? I doubt it....
According to this and this, it seems to work. But I have no first-hand experience. Is there a reason in particular you expect it not to work? Is Sky especially complicated or ornery?
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Big red button on remote: SIRI.

Voila, tv only listens when you are intentionally talking to it. Good enough for Picard. Not sure we need these buttons on our shirts though.
Yeah I was thinking about that too, we've got tablets, communicators and (mentioned in this thread) replicators from star trek. Maybe Apple should be focusing on inventing the tricorder or phaser
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2011, 06:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
According to this and this, it seems to work. But I have no first-hand experience. Is there a reason in particular you expect it not to work? Is Sky especially complicated or ornery?
Maybe I didn't think it through too well.
Sky works with sling boxes now I think of it but Apple is going to end up having a certain amount of control over the content. If you ask Siri to find you an episode of CSI to watch, its in Apple's interest to refer you to iTunes rather than whatever channel might be playing an episode at the time. If they start doing that sort of thing, then cable providers will start making it more difficult for them.
There is a conflict of interest. Apple would sell more TVs if it had features to help you avoid ads but again the content providers would go berserk. Apple could even detect ads and run their own in place of them. Imagine the outrage there.

Perhaps the answer is to extend iTunes match to TV episodes. Subscribe to a show and you can watch it as much as you want streamed from iCloud. Networks would never go for it would they?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2011, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
But what happens when the ad for Siri says "Set Season Pass for all TV Shows starring Nathan Fillion"? Does your TV hear itself and do it?

For me voice control is a non-starter. There are some people that like to yell at the TV but I'm not one of them. Even if with no technical challenges (there was a paid native english speaking butler in the room doing what I tell them in a normal tone and ignoring what I say to other people), I would rather be using my fingers than my voicebox. Talking is a poor medium of communication. It's slow and takes more effort.
I am mostly like you on the voice control. But I do find one aspect of SIRI that shines for me and thats appointments and notes. I like being able to tell the phone to make a appointment with so and so for what time. That part of it shines. And telling SIRI to make a reminder for me for what ever day, time or place. I think Siri as a personal assistant is working wonderful. When it comes to app navigation and interaction I prefer my fingers.

In a TV i can see myself using Siri to say record show at whatever time, but using a remote to flip through channels and adjusting volume.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:24 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,