That's No Space Station

tech, humor, and nuance by David Chartiertech distiller, freelance writer, Macworld contributor, wrangler of Finer Things in Tech

Liked Posts

Apple’s upcoming iOS update to unlock full Bluetooth keyboard control for Apple TV | 9to5Mac

This is interesting, but it feels like we don’t have the full picture yet. Sure, typing on a TV with any kind of traditional remote (including and especially Apple’s) is a crummy experience, and while Apple’s Remote app for iPhone and iPad helps, keep in mind that not everyone has one of those.

I have a hard time believing most people do much searching on the Apple TV. It does a great job of showing what’s in your iTunes, Netflix, Hulu, and other catalogs, then showing a healthy selection of what’s new and popular.

There simply doesn’t feel like much of a reason to keep a keyboard sitting around the Apple TV. Yet.

iTunes 1080p video looks better, saves space using better H.264 compression - Ars Technica

Iljitsch van Beijnum did some digging into the iTunes ecosystem’s new support of 1080p video and uses a few screenshot comparisons to help you get an idea of the difference in detail:

The reason that the 1080p versions of the iTunes Store videos can be a good deal better without doubling the file size—or worse—can be found in the tech specs of the new AppleTV and the new iPad. The AppleTV now supports H.264 compression for 1920x1080 resolution video at 30 frames per second using High or Main Profile up to level 4.0, the iPad and the iPhone 4S the same up to level 4.1. The profile indicates what kind of decompression algorithms the H.264 decoder has on board—the “High” profile obviously has some tricks up its sleeve that the “Main” or “Baseline” profiles known to previous devices don’t support. The level value indicates how many blocks or bits per second a device can handle.

The really real problem with Google TV

Ian Betteridge:

The real problem, though is that “Internet on the TV” is not where TV watchers are going. Instead, most TV watching is trending towards being a two-screen experience: you watch the show on the big screen, and chat about it on Twitter or Facebook using a mobile, laptop or tablet. The idea that you do everything on the same screen is just too ’90s.

That’s one solid theory, but I wouldn’t completely discount doing more than one thing on your TV screen from ever happening. Before we get to that point, though, there are much bigger challenges to overcome.

A key problem right now is that living room interfaces are terrible, and Google isn’t anywhere near the the top 10 list of companies which have a chance at cracking that nut. No one wants a keyboard, a mouse, or this hideous Frankensteinian hybrid anywhere near their living room:

With how hot and flexible smartphones and tablets the iPad have become, people seem happier, at least by comparison, to use well-designed apps on those to control other devices in their living room. But the group of people who want to do that still seems to be pretty small.

The real problem with “internet on the TV”—besides dual screens or bad hardware and software interfaces—is one of chickens versus eggs and content out of context.

Few devices and services have achieved anything that you could call success in this space—the Apple TV, Roku, Xbox 360, and maybe PS3 top this short list. But even then, look at their success in the category of “internet on the TV”: it’s all packaged, proprietary services like Netflix, Hulu, and the iTunes Store.

The Boxee Box is probably the one decent “internet on the TV” device that preceded Google TV and gotten anywhere, but even it hasn’t gone very far. Again, its best highlights are prepackaged services which Boxee had to cut deals for—Netflix, MLB TV, some Vudu movie service, and Pandora.

The internet was never designed for the living room, so scraping its content for a device it was never meant to be displayed on has so far proven to be extremely difficult at best, but generally futile. If the content is barely there to attract users, businesses don’t have much motivation to listen to that one guy down in the design department screaming “experience matters!”

'Apple could do an HDTV' speculation still doesn't answer the real question

I’ve seen articles like this one from Dan Frommer at SplatF come and go for at least five years. They all toss out a bunch of great ideas for services that Apple and TV providers could offer, or different ways existing services could be packaged or changed.

But I have yet to see a piece that tackles the real question: why would all these great service and product ideas require Apple to produce a full HDTV set instead of the very capable $99 box it sells right now?

The original Apple TV existed in… 1996? Randall Bennett:

This is Apple’s original AppleTV, from circa 1996. Rob Gould, who works on the AOL HD project with my company, Castfire, sent me these awesome pics from his time back at Bell Atlantic (now Verizon) when they had access to this box.

Buggy Apple TV wish list reordering feature is buggy.

We turned our Apple TV off last night at the wish list screen, and this is how it woke up today. Note that Apple TV 2 lets you hold the selection button to rearrange your wish list (like tap-and-hold on iPhone to arrange apps). But the selection can wander away from the jiggling film to be moved.