4God
Sep 5, 08:23 AM
Well, the Apple Store Online U.S. is down. Could be something, could be nothing.
Macnoviz
Sep 19, 02:54 PM
Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Analog Kid
Apr 20, 01:15 PM
Wow, this is really, really bad. I've no idea how any company would think this was acceptable. There's no way this was simply an oversight.
Absolutely unacceptable.
Absolutely unacceptable.
McGiord
Mar 29, 01:15 PM
CMD-X does NOT cut a file and let you move it. I am in SL right now. DOESN'T work.
Well...well
The whole cut and paste concept, as it was initially implemented, was based on how in real life one was handling documents and folders, while working on your desk. You do not cut a document to move it to another folder. In real life you move it, you drag and drop.
The undo was the most nicely implemented feature of all OS.
And yes, it was MacOS.
Well...well
The whole cut and paste concept, as it was initially implemented, was based on how in real life one was handling documents and folders, while working on your desk. You do not cut a document to move it to another folder. In real life you move it, you drag and drop.
The undo was the most nicely implemented feature of all OS.
And yes, it was MacOS.
ClemyNX
Apr 22, 04:30 AM
We are talking about master copies of a digital file, something that could be copied a billion times with nearly no cost. This isn't progress, this is capitalism at its worst.
kodek
Apr 13, 08:42 PM
Seriously. Most of us don't care. Take it to a different thread, please.
KingYaba
Apr 11, 12:52 AM
You also need to add in the ball and chain that is suburban/exurban hell. Some people are chained to their five acres willingly, but many are chained to suburbia due to poor planning caused by cheap oil. The added expense of owning two or three vehicles and maintaining a suburban home on a suburban sized lot, means a lot less money for other things. People bought into the false promises of suburbia and are now paying the price.
All those monthly bills add up. I'm glad I never bought an iPhone, for example, when they first came out. I've saved a ton of money not buying the required data plan that goes comes with it. I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like our priorities are all wrong and I agree.
All those monthly bills add up. I'm glad I never bought an iPhone, for example, when they first came out. I've saved a ton of money not buying the required data plan that goes comes with it. I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like our priorities are all wrong and I agree.
Deflorator
Apr 30, 03:30 PM
Because that huge base of thunderbolt based devices is overwhelming! :p
Who else should break this infinite loop than someone from Infinite Loop?
Who else should break this infinite loop than someone from Infinite Loop?
direzz
Oct 12, 04:27 PM
I hope somehow apple creates forum software with spotlight search so as soon as I start typing something it searches through 500 pages of posts and on the right side of the screen will show similar comments, who posted it, and on what pages similar comments are/where posted.
:rolleyes: buddy, this forum was designed on a pc.
:rolleyes: buddy, this forum was designed on a pc.
thejadedmonkey
Sep 4, 08:54 PM
Maybe I'm not doing this math right, but I'm not sure that's true. I can download a 4.7GB movie in about 2-3 hours over my internet connection (average speeds of 500Kb/sec). A 802.11a or g router transfers data at a max rate of 54Mbps or about 6.75MB/sec. That's about 12 times as fast, meaning that transmitting full DVD-quality video can occur in realtime, with plenty of bandwidth to spare to other functions while watching your movies. By the time HD video recording becomes standard, the Apple video airport express can be upgraded to 802.11n to provide even more bandwidth.
Do I have those figures wrong?
802.11g average transfer is 1/2 of it's max (on average). I'm too tired to do any math, but that would mean you'd only have 6 time as much speed, not 12.
Do I have those figures wrong?
802.11g average transfer is 1/2 of it's max (on average). I'm too tired to do any math, but that would mean you'd only have 6 time as much speed, not 12.
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:49 PM
I'm not missing the point. You are. They have a right to determine how their trademarks are to be used and if they did not vigourously defend them, you would see MSFT stealing even icons from OS X.
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
kurtsayin
Oct 12, 12:52 PM
I would love to have a red iPod, but I don't know why we would ever give money to help fight AIDS on a continent where the people take NO precautions to prevent themselves from getting AIDS... I mean, sure many children are born with it in Africa, but for soooo many adults, they could prevent the spread if they would just be monogamous.
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
Intarweb
Apr 20, 11:06 AM
All I've seen is one paragraph claiming that. Until someone shows data from when location services was turned off it's hard to run with it.
Applogist? Jesus, that's such a sad bastardization of words. I'm trying to apply reasoning to this and have people understand that they've likely agreed to something because they don't read the ToS or SLA.
I'm sorry it was harsh to call you and appologist. From your posting you're not like the typical robot running around here.
Mine has always been off. When I get home I'll try the program and will have first had knowledge of if it does or doesn't track with it switched off.
Applogist? Jesus, that's such a sad bastardization of words. I'm trying to apply reasoning to this and have people understand that they've likely agreed to something because they don't read the ToS or SLA.
I'm sorry it was harsh to call you and appologist. From your posting you're not like the typical robot running around here.
Mine has always been off. When I get home I'll try the program and will have first had knowledge of if it does or doesn't track with it switched off.
combatcolin
Oct 27, 09:56 AM
Liked the short advert.
Did make me laugh.
Apple should rip out all there roofing at there HQ and replace it with Solar Panels and replace the heating systems with CHRP systems.
That would help a lot.
Did make me laugh.
Apple should rip out all there roofing at there HQ and replace it with Solar Panels and replace the heating systems with CHRP systems.
That would help a lot.
ArcaneDevice
Mar 23, 04:40 PM
Besides...who the h*ll is the government to tell Apple what they can and cannot do with their business? Regulations are one thing...such as safety regs and such...those are needed, but Christ...this is over the line.
The government tells Apple what they can and can't do all the time. That's why Jobs gets deposed, the FCC regulate their cell phones and Apple can't knock down your house to build an Apple Store on top of it or irradiate small Chinese kids to make the products for it.
If thousands can ask Apple to take down an anti-gay app then why not a few officials asking them to take down an app that gives drunken dicks an advantage?
If it was just 150,000 regular people asking Apple to take it down (MADD for example) would you have a problem with it?
The government tells Apple what they can and can't do all the time. That's why Jobs gets deposed, the FCC regulate their cell phones and Apple can't knock down your house to build an Apple Store on top of it or irradiate small Chinese kids to make the products for it.
If thousands can ask Apple to take down an anti-gay app then why not a few officials asking them to take down an app that gives drunken dicks an advantage?
If it was just 150,000 regular people asking Apple to take it down (MADD for example) would you have a problem with it?
BoyBach
Aug 28, 12:27 PM
I expect to see a speed bump across the entire range (excluding the Mac Pro) within the coming weeks.
Evangelion
Sep 6, 01:47 AM
I'm also not sure about the bittorrent thing. It's nice in theory, but even with bittorrent, movies will take a while to download. The problem with that is that you can't watch a bittorrent movie until the whole thing has downloaded, whereas with traditional quicktime downloads, you can start watching as soon as you have a decent enough buffer. And iTMS is all about instant gratification.
Well, the good thing (as far as Apple is concerned) with Bittorrent is that it makes it easier and cheaper to distribute content, the fact that it can make RECEIVING the said content faster is just a nice bonus. And who is to say that they couldn't combine the good parts of Quicktime (instant-on) with the good parts of Bittorrent (distributed distribution).
Well, the good thing (as far as Apple is concerned) with Bittorrent is that it makes it easier and cheaper to distribute content, the fact that it can make RECEIVING the said content faster is just a nice bonus. And who is to say that they couldn't combine the good parts of Quicktime (instant-on) with the good parts of Bittorrent (distributed distribution).
hondaboy945
Sep 15, 07:05 PM
Cram 1GB? Have you seen the 8GB iPod Nano? What are you talking about? Isn't flash memory capable of being used for running processes, or is it too slow?
thats whatI was thinking. But we could both be wrong.
thats whatI was thinking. But we could both be wrong.
dime21
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
Do any of these suits ever actually get resolved?
no, they languish in the courts for years, what with all the appeals and what not. eventually, after 6 or 7 years have gone by, and all the products and technologies involved have lost their relevance and been obsoleted, and all the people involved has either left the company, or forgotten the details, the two sides will reach a settlement agreement, usually involving some kind of stock swap, licensing agreement, or other shady shenanigans instead of real actual money. welcome to the world of corporate law.
no, they languish in the courts for years, what with all the appeals and what not. eventually, after 6 or 7 years have gone by, and all the products and technologies involved have lost their relevance and been obsoleted, and all the people involved has either left the company, or forgotten the details, the two sides will reach a settlement agreement, usually involving some kind of stock swap, licensing agreement, or other shady shenanigans instead of real actual money. welcome to the world of corporate law.
rileyes
Mar 29, 03:47 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
jddar
Mar 22, 01:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wish I could afford to buy a 27-inch one. I got a refund after returning several of the 2009 model for various display issues. I still lust after that computer--aside from those issues, it was by far the best computer I ever owned. I just ordered a new iPad 2. So, I'll likely have to wait for the next incarnation of the iMac. Definitely, soon, I will get another iMac. The iMac and iPad are the perfect combination for my needs.
Wish I could afford to buy a 27-inch one. I got a refund after returning several of the 2009 model for various display issues. I still lust after that computer--aside from those issues, it was by far the best computer I ever owned. I just ordered a new iPad 2. So, I'll likely have to wait for the next incarnation of the iMac. Definitely, soon, I will get another iMac. The iMac and iPad are the perfect combination for my needs.
Nomadski
Apr 13, 07:07 AM
MagnusVonMagnum -
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
bikertwin
Sep 14, 12:52 PM
I doubt Apple will introduce new hardware at this photography show. OK maybe a C2D MBP but that is a minor upgrade, basically just a speed bump. You don't send out invetations to a "special event" and then anounce a "speed bump"
I think it will be software. First will be Aperture 2.0 that addresses same of the issues. Remember months ago when Apple disbanded the Aperture software team? What we will see on the 24th is the work done so far by the new development team. I expect to see some new ideas, better performance and better RAW processing.
But a special event just for one version release? They will have to have something else. A "One more thing..." item. My gues is a new software package. A l photo editor. I doubt Apple will try and compete with Adobe's CS2 or CS3 but they could take on Adobe's "Elements". or more narowly, PSE's editing abilty. There is room for a pixel editor that has a better user interfacethan Adobe. Apple could have looked at Nikon's "Cature NX" and how it uses "control point" and does not destructive editing.
Apple could also do something to make color managment simpler and easier. Wouldn't it be realy nice if the ACD had a built-in color measurement ability. Self monitoring. Or maybe an abient light color measurement so it would "know" if the room was lit with window light or flourecent. This kind of thinng would give people a reason to by ACD rather then Dell or whatever is cheaper. It wuld be revolutionary and worth of a "special event"
Thank you. Finally, a voice of reason among all the detritus in this thread.
I seriously hope you are right about a Photoshop Elements killer. That would be a perfect plug-in or part of Aperture 2.0.
I think it will be software. First will be Aperture 2.0 that addresses same of the issues. Remember months ago when Apple disbanded the Aperture software team? What we will see on the 24th is the work done so far by the new development team. I expect to see some new ideas, better performance and better RAW processing.
But a special event just for one version release? They will have to have something else. A "One more thing..." item. My gues is a new software package. A l photo editor. I doubt Apple will try and compete with Adobe's CS2 or CS3 but they could take on Adobe's "Elements". or more narowly, PSE's editing abilty. There is room for a pixel editor that has a better user interfacethan Adobe. Apple could have looked at Nikon's "Cature NX" and how it uses "control point" and does not destructive editing.
Apple could also do something to make color managment simpler and easier. Wouldn't it be realy nice if the ACD had a built-in color measurement ability. Self monitoring. Or maybe an abient light color measurement so it would "know" if the room was lit with window light or flourecent. This kind of thinng would give people a reason to by ACD rather then Dell or whatever is cheaper. It wuld be revolutionary and worth of a "special event"
Thank you. Finally, a voice of reason among all the detritus in this thread.
I seriously hope you are right about a Photoshop Elements killer. That would be a perfect plug-in or part of Aperture 2.0.
Platform
Sep 26, 07:35 AM
Leopard and iPhone....hmm...should be good, but I hope the phone comes out world wide ;)