[venom600]

I originally posted this over on another forum, but it bears repeating here. I am rather bored, so I am going to break this down. Yes, Apple probably doesn't want to take sales away from their own movie/TV store. That isn't the main reason. They won't do it for the same exact reasons Schiller stated; it would be too complicated. The VAST majority of people in this country get TV from cable or satellite providers. We are talking near Windows level market share (85%+).

For Apple to integrate a DVR, they would have to cover every possible method of television reception (over the air, satellite, cable) and incorporate methods to control a lot of set top boxes as well as full CableCard support as welll as including methods of connection for TVs that don't have DVI or VGA. That means a box full of cables and attachments (minimum 10) that most people wouldn't use and wouldn't understand how to set up. They would also need a real remote control (a TiVo-esque remote at the very least), not the 6 button design conscious remote they have now.

The point is that in order to make it work properly, for everyone (and not the 15% of us who use OTA, myself included), they would have do everything in a way that defies what the general Apple philosophy is. No matter what they did, it would not be easy for the common person who can't set the clock on their VCR. On top of that, if CableCard is involved it would actually require the cable company to come out and set it up.

EyeTV is nice as a novelty, but it will NEVER be the ideal solution because it won't work with encrypted digital cable and CableCard and it can't control set top boxes. You can't just get a peripheral certified for CC, you need to get the entire machine (including the cable card reader) certified, which means that Apple would have to do it.

Apple doesn't typically do things halfway, so if they entered the DVR market, they would have to either redefine what it is they want to be known for (ease of setup would pole vault out the window) or they would have to leave the vast majority of potential users out in the cold. I just don't see them doing that.

All of these things would raise the price on the Mini dramatically. I can't imagine CC certification is cheap, and all of the cables, larger packaging, and phone support for the users who can't figure out how to hook the MIni up to their 1984 Sony TV with RF video would add up big time. Would you still feel so great about a Mini DVR if it was $1000-1200?

[iBabo]

i agree. apple is changing the rules of the game. with tv shows and music and soon movies that you can just buy when you wanna watch.... the next version of frontrow will have the store built in. apple is gonna change the way we interact with the tv i think. and i wouldnt be surprised if a subscription model comes out for tv shows... because personally i dont want to own episodes of tv shows.. i wanna watch them once, and thats about it... but id like to own music and movies...

[eddiecatflap]

i agree too

with cable , satellite , terrestial digital and then add the pal/ntsc/secam stuff and no surprise apple are staying well away

elgato are doing an exc job of it anyway

and they need 7 seperate models !

[mduell]

Originally Posted by venom600

I originally posted this over on another forum, but it bears repeating here. I am rather bored, so I am going to break this down. Yes, Apple probably doesn't want to take sales away from their own movie/TV store. That isn't the main reason. They won't do it for the same exact reasons Schiller stated; it would be too complicated. The VAST majority of people in this country get TV from cable or satellite providers. We are talking near Windows level market share (85%+).

For Apple to integrate a DVR, they would have to cover every possible method of television reception (over the air, satellite, cable) and incorporate methods to control a lot of set top boxes as well as full CableCard support

What? No, they don't.
OTA and analog cable: Easy, basic tuner; you can do NTSC/PAL/SECAM with one cheap tuner.
Digital cable, satellite, TVoverIP, TVoverCu, TVoverFiber, whatever else: Here's your IR blaster and second DVI port (see below for adapters).
Bam, easy, done.

Originally Posted by venom600

as welll as including methods of connection for TVs that don't have DVI or VGA. That means a box full of cables and attachments (minimum 10)

What? No, they don't.
Put a DVI port (with HDCP support) on the computer.
Consumer needs HDMI, VGA, S-video, Composite, Component, SVDO, LVDS, ADD2, or DFP? Great, here's your $20 adapter (GMA950 already supports every one of those [except possibly DFP], so it's just a pin adapter and not a full-on converter).
Bam, easy, done just the way they do it today with VGA/s-video/component on all of their computers.

Originally Posted by venom600

that most people wouldn't use and wouldn't understand how to set up. They would also need a real remote control (a TiVo-esque remote at the very least), not the 6 button design conscious remote they have now.

Apple doesn't seem to have much of a problem designing good handheld interfaces (See also: iPod). Use the iPod nano case, replace the internals with a basic PCB and an IR port.
Bam, easy, done.

Originally Posted by venom600

On top of that, if CableCard is involved it would actually require the cable company to come out and set it up.

EyeTV is nice as a novelty, but it will NEVER be the ideal solution because it won't work with encrypted digital cable and CableCard and it can't control set top boxes. You can't just get a peripheral certified for CC, you need to get the entire machine (including the cable card reader) certified, which means that Apple would have to do it.

Save CableCard for revision 2. No one (using the term loosely) even has the opportunity to use CC right now.

Originally Posted by venom600

Apple doesn't typically do things halfway, so if they entered the DVR market, they would have to either redefine what it is they want to be known for (ease of setup would pole vault out the window)

What? Yes, they do.
FrontRow, Safari, and iWeb are still half baked applications. TV show downloads for limited series at low quality is still a half baked idea. Movie trailers are available, but no movies for download. Plenty of things done halfway.

Originally Posted by venom600

or they would have to leave the vast majority of potential users out in the cold.

With just analog cable and OTA you've got the majority of customers. With an IR blaster you've got the majority of cable/satellite boxes too.

Originally Posted by venom600

All of these things would raise the price on the Mini dramatically. I can't imagine CC certification is cheap, and all of the cables, larger packaging, and phone support for the users who can't figure out how to hook the MIni up to their 1984 Sony TV with RF video would add up big time. Would you still feel so great about a Mini DVR if it was $1000-1200?

Don't build it in, make it an addon (same footprint, thinner box, connect via the plethora of USB2 ports). The overlap of people who would buy such a box and RF-only TV owners is zero (and if one tries, resell RadioShack RF converters in white packaging).
A mini is $599, a great TV tuner is $299, and Apple could cover the software development with the massive number they would sell.


I think my post would have better conveyed the feeling I'm trying to get across if I threw in the f word a few random places. But I don't want to run amiss of forum rules.

[Gee4orce]

The original poster is correct, except in stating that EyeTV is a novelty. Elgato have products that cover most if not all TV connection possibilities,including those that require a subscription card. I have the EyeTV for DTT, and it's about the size of a matchbox - there's another product available now that's about the size of an iPod shuffle !

the only issues I have with EyeTV are that it's not very multi-user capable (I can only get it to work with one of the user accounts on my Mac), and that it needs an easy, FrontRow style one-touch-full screen ability. Oh, and it would be nice if the EPG was navigable with the remote.

[venom600]

mduell, I will respond to your assertions one at a time.

1. HDCP exists for the sole reason of disallowing functionality such as this. Apple would likely catch the ire of the MPAA and content providers if they (and only they) allowed analog capture at any resolutions greater then 480i. Excluding a couple of seriously expensive D-VHS recorders, no other consumer recorder on the market can capture from high definition sources, component or otherwise.

Analog television is on it's way out and analog cable is quickly being phased out. I can't even get analog cable in my area anymore for anything but the most basic channels (essentially only the channels you can get over the air). This would be a future facing product, not one tied to the past. As such, HD would undoubtedly be the focus of it.

2. This would be a consumer product. It is not a good business practice to tell consumers they have to buy an expensive product and then know exactly which adapters to use to get the best picture. We aren't talking about tech savvy people who have no problem knowing exactly what they need to buy here; we are talking about common people with no interest in this stuff that want it to just work out of the box. Relying on accessories sold separately (and the inherently unreliable sales people selling them) for something as fundamental as connecting to a display is ludicrous for a device like this.

3. I never did say that Apple couldn't design a great remote. I simply meant that after all the time they spent comparing their remote to media center remotes, it would smack of hypocrisy. You know, kind of like how the integrated video does now.

4. Just because you don't use cable card doesn't mean no one does. I know quite a few people who use it all over the country (the US anyway). The fact is that CableCard is the only way to easily record HD channels on cable without using a crappy cable company DVR. There is currently no way to record HD satellite programs without using their DVRs. Every aftermarket DVR and quite a few HDTVs coming out this year will have CableCard slots. Even my old Sony HD DVR has one.

5. I didn't say that they they never do, I said they don't typically, and not with something that would be this big. If this came to pass, it would be something on the order of ITMS magnitude.

6. See number 1. IR blasters are inelegant and complicated (you need to know codes, etc).

7. I didn't mean to suggest that CC be built in to the machine itself (could be a dongle like Dell is going to use), but that poses another problem. Either they include CC support out of the box (via an internal or external reader), or it cannot be certified, thus making it impossible to use in the future.

You make the assumption that this product would sell very well, but based on what? TiVo, the poster child of the DVR industry is in the same situation that Apple was 10 years ago. Cable and satellite companies are providing DVRs for nominal monthly fees. Less then 10% of households have DVRs right now, and most see no need. So I ask again, what basis do you have for believing that Apple would sell massive amounts? Yes, they could do to the DVR market what the iPod did to the portable music market, but what you described has more in common with the Pippin@World.

The product you described (analog and OTA only, accessories sold seprately, IR blasters, etc.) would be overpriced and underperforming with little chance of being able to use new technologies (CC) on top of requiring the consumer to have an inherent knowledge of exactly what they need and creating a rats nest of dongles behind the machine. Does a product that can output full HD to a screen but cannot tap into the vast majority of HD (cable/satellite) programming make any sense at all?

The original poster is correct, except in stating that EyeTV is a novelty. Elgato have products that cover most if not all TV connection possibilities,including those that require a subscription card. I have the EyeTV for DTT, and it's about the size of a matchbox - there's another product available now that's about the size of an iPod shuffle !

Sorry, I should have clarified that. We don't have access to anything like that here. EyeTV can't control cable boxes or satellite tuners, and it can only recieve OTA HD. At least here, it only works for a small market (those who don't expect it to easily work with a lot of sources), and thus, it is a novelty.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by venom600

mduell, I will respond to your assertions one at a time.

1. HDCP exists for the sole reason of disallowing functionality such as this. Apple would likely catch the ire of the MPAA and content providers if they (and only they) allowed analog capture at any resolutions greater then 480i. Excluding a couple of seriously expensive D-VHS recorders, no other consumer recorder on the market can capture from high definition sources, component or otherwise.

Analog television is on it's way out and analog cable is quickly being phased out. I can't even get analog cable in my area anymore for anything but the most basic channels (essentially only the channels you can get over the air). This would be a future facing product, not one tied to the past. As such, HD would undoubtedly be the focus of it.

Apple loves DRM. Require all content higher than 480p to have DRM added to the file. Allow burning 480p DVDs.

Originally Posted by venom600

2. This would be a consumer product. It is not a good business practice to tell consumers they have to buy an expensive product and then know exactly which adapters to use to get the best picture. We aren't talking about tech savvy people who have no problem knowing exactly what they need to buy here; we are talking about common people with no interest in this stuff that want it to just work out of the box. Relying on accessories sold separately (and the inherently unreliable sales people selling them) for something as fundamental as connecting to a display is ludicrous for a device like this.

Perhaps you should talk to the cable companies, DVD player companies, TV companies, etc. Most of them provide nothing or provide the lowest commmon denominator (composite). People have no problem going to an electronics store and being ripped off for Monster Cable.

Originally Posted by venom600

4. Just because you don't use cable card doesn't mean no one does. I know quite a few people who use it all over the country (the US anyway). The fact is that CableCard is the only way to easily record HD channels on cable without using a crappy cable company DVR. There is currently no way to record HD satellite programs without using their DVRs. Every aftermarket DVR and quite a few HDTVs coming out this year will have CableCard slots. Even my old Sony HD DVR has one.

AFAIK they just agreed on the standard for CableCard, so it's not as though it already has a significant installed base in the US.

Originally Posted by venom600

6. See number 1. IR blasters are inelegant and complicated (you need to know codes, etc).

Why would you need to know codes? "Please pick your television manufacturer and model from the dropdown list below."

Originally Posted by venom600

You make the assumption that this product would sell very well, but based on what? TiVo, the poster child of the DVR industry is in the same situation that Apple was 10 years ago. Cable and satellite companies are providing DVRs for nominal monthly fees. Less then 10% of households have DVRs right now, and most see no need. So I ask again, what basis do you have for believing that Apple would sell massive amounts? Yes, they could do to the DVR market what the iPod did to the portable music market, but what you described has more in common with the Pippin@World.

TiVo is hitting their users up for $13-17 every month, Apple wouldn't be.

Originally Posted by venom600

The product you described (analog and OTA only, accessories sold seprately, IR blasters, etc.) would be overpriced and underperforming with little chance of being able to use new technologies (CC) on top of requiring the consumer to have an inherent knowledge of exactly what they need and creating a rats nest of dongles behind the machine. Does a product that can output full HD to a screen but cannot tap into the vast majority of HD (cable/satellite) programming make any sense at all?

The product described would come in slightly above the average market price, and enable users to do more than they're doing today with an HTPC.
Rats nest of dongles? At most two for video and an IR blaster.
CableCard support is not a huge hurdle; products that require integration from multiple companies (Dell+MS+tuner company) will have support for it soon.