Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iBox - Apple Set Top Box?

dukemeiser

dukemeiser

macrumors 6502a
Dec 17, 2002
529
0
Iowa
First off, I would buy one. But it would need to have these things:

TiVo like functions; recording video to a hard drive.

iTunes streaming music to my stereo

iPhoto streaming photos to my TV

Wireless connection via Airport.

Apple uses the term "digital hub" a lot, but so far they've only touched on one spoke of that hub: music.
 
K

Kent Laugen

macrumors newbie
Dec 31, 2003
5
0
Red Wing, MN
Component video

Specs say s-video. Isn't component really the new standard. My next tv and dvd player will have to have at least component video. Any experts out there on this issue?
 
J

jettredmont

macrumors 68030
Jul 25, 2002
2,731
328
Originally posted by dukemeiser
First off, I would buy one. But it would need to have these things:

TiVo like functions; recording video to a hard drive.

iTunes streaming music to my stereo

iPhoto streaming photos to my TV

Wireless connection via Airport.

Apple uses the term "digital hub" a lot, but so far they've only touched on one spoke of that hub: music.
Click to expand...

Um, if you read the rumor, each of these are mentioned as features.
 
D

Dstreelm

macrumors member
Dec 29, 2003
47
0
Blacksburg during school and Philadelphia during s
yeah, component video does offer higher quality video than s-video, but you cannot abandon s-video because so many tv's out there have it. think about the roll-over on tv's, my parents have had the same magnavox tv for 7 years, ive had mine for 5, and i dont plan on gettin another one until this one crapps out. so yeah they should put component video outputs(inputs too??) but they also need to support s-video because you dont want people to have to buy another piece of hardware just so they can view the video content(i assume that theres component video to s-video converters out there)
 
E

edgar_is_good

macrumors member
Jun 17, 2003
72
0
Seattle, WA
Re: Component video

Originally posted by Kent Laugen
Specs say s-video. Isn't component really the new standard. My next tv and dvd player will have to have at least component video. Any experts out there on this issue?
Click to expand...

don't know anything 'cept that my powerbook came with a 3inch s-video to component adapter. Don't think it's a big deal.
 
K

Kent Laugen

macrumors newbie
Dec 31, 2003
5
0
Red Wing, MN
Component video

I agree, can't abandon s-video yet, I should have added that to my post. Unit should have both.

=====================

I was told s-video to component adapter doesn't give a component quality signal, it just allows connection to component. Is this true?
 
C

cuby

macrumors newbie
Mar 12, 2003
2
0
Something's wrong here...

MacOSX.com describes the box as follows:

"The iBox has a small, sleek encasement that is about 10 inches long, 6 inches wide and 1 - 1 1/2 inches thick"

That's about the size of an external 5.25" drive enclosure. I can't see how Apple is going to fit a slot-in DVD-RW drive (a slim form factor notebook DVD writer will be too expensive, so this is probably a standard half-height IDE device), a 120 GB IDE hard disk (which has to be a 3.5" drive as the biggest 2.5" HDs are about 80GB) and a G3-based mainboard into a box that small.

Nevertheless, I'd probably buy one ;)
 
K

Kent Laugen

macrumors newbie
Dec 31, 2003
5
0
Red Wing, MN
Re: component video

I love Apple, but the decision to not include component reminds me of when Apple first introduced i-mac with only 28.8k internal modems when 56k were solidly already in the market. They caught heat for that one and quickly upgraded to 56k.
 
R

rog

macrumors 6502
Apr 9, 2003
422
107
Kalapana, HI
I think it's far more likely that Apple will re-introduce the BeBox and announce that they've purchased what was left of Be Inc. From PalmOne. Hell 75MHz PPC 603!
 
D

Dstreelm

macrumors member
Dec 29, 2003
47
0
Blacksburg during school and Philadelphia during s
Re: Re: component video

Originally posted by Kent Laugen
I love Apple, but the decision to not include component reminds me of when Apple first introduced i-mac with only 28.8k internal modems when 56k were solidly already in the market. They caught heat for that one and quickly upgraded to 56k.
Click to expand...

don't rule out them including component video in this thing (if they release it) this guy just had one version of the thing. im almost positive he didnt have the last version, apple would only supply that to its QA dept.
 
E

edgar_is_good

macrumors member
Jun 17, 2003
72
0
Seattle, WA
Re: Re: component video

Originally posted by Kent Laugen
I love Apple, but the decision to not include component reminds me of when Apple first introduced i-mac with only 28.8k internal modems when 56k were solidly already in the market. They caught heat for that one and quickly upgraded to 56k.
Click to expand...

Here's a question: are these photos of the black prototype boxes of the same dimensions as described in the rumor? Or different?
 
R

rubbergorilla

macrumors newbie
Dec 31, 2003
8
0
don't know anything 'cept that my powerbook came with a 3inch s-video to component adapter. Don't think it's a big deal.

You're confusing component with composite.

Component is three connectors per wire, one for red, green and blue.

The adapter that came with your PowerBook is composite, one single end.
 
B

beowolf

macrumors newbie
Feb 28, 2003
10
0
isn't a G4 needed?

I distinctly remember Steve Jobs saying during the introduction of the iLamp iMac that a G4 processor was needed for the use of a superdrive (G3 doesn't have the ooomph for the encoding that is needed if I remember right). Somebody correct me if I am wrong.
 
R

rubbergorilla

macrumors newbie
Dec 31, 2003
8
0
He said something along those lines, but it simply isn't true. Just look at the minimum requirements for a Lacie DVD burner. A G3 or higher with FireWire.

'nuff said.
 
dongmin

dongmin

macrumors 68000
Jan 3, 2002
1,709
5
Originally posted by dukemeiser
First off, I would buy one. But it would need to have these things:

TiVo like functions; recording video to a hard drive.

iTunes streaming music to my stereo

iPhoto streaming photos to my TV

Wireless connection via Airport.

Apple uses the term "digital hub" a lot, but so far they've only touched on one spoke of that hub: music.
Click to expand...
So what's new? TiVo does all this and more, and for cheaper. Seems to me all Apple needs to do is just work more closely with TiVo to get better integration.

edit:
1. What's so great about streaming photos to your TV, whne your computer is a room away?
2. What's the point of wireless if this box is just gonna sit on top of your TV?
 
D

Dstreelm

macrumors member
Dec 29, 2003
47
0
Blacksburg during school and Philadelphia during s
Re: isn't a G4 needed?

Originally posted by beowolf
I distinctly remember Steve Jobs saying during the introduction of the iLamp iMac that a G4 processor was needed for the use of a superdrive (G3 doesn't have the ooomph for the encoding that is needed if I remember right). Somebody correct me if I am wrong.
Click to expand...

apple introduced a ilamp a while ago, im sure they've made some revisions to the superdrive since then...also, the processor in the ilamp also has to run a full operating system and all the the system processes and stuff, from what i understand from the article, it doesnt have a super extensive interface, just the versions of iphoto, itunes and idvd, not a full osx operating system so maybe the G3 in the ibox can be more dedicatedto encoding the video
 
Flowbee

Flowbee

macrumors 68030
Dec 27, 2002
2,943
0
Alameda, CA
Originally posted by dongmin

1. What's so great about streaming photos to your TV, whne your computer is a room away?
Click to expand...

When you've got friends and family over, it's nice not to have to crowd them all into the spare bedroom/office to look at your photos. Reminds me of the good old slide projector days (without the set-up and upside-down pictures).
 
J

jettredmont

macrumors 68030
Jul 25, 2002
2,731
328
Re: Re: Component video

Originally posted by Dstreelm
yeah, it just changes the delivery method, not the content. you cant(cheaply) up-res video content
Click to expand...

Last I checked, Component Video was not higher resolution than S-Video. I may be mistaken, but I believe that both the luminosity and chrominance signals have the same horizontal and vertical frequency in the two formats.

The primary difference between SVideo and Component is wire cross-talk during transmission, and a (slight) cramping of the signal in SVideo (which is lost irreversibly, but IMHO is all but undetectable to my eyes). Contrast this to Composite (RCA jacks) vs SVideo, or RF (cable jack-style) vs Composite, in both cases of which the cramping is significant and noticeable.

Using a near-source SV-to-Component break out gets 90% of the Component benefit with SV flexibility for the 80%+ of users who don't have component video inputs (while, granted, doing nothing for the 40-50% who have nothing but RF jacks ...)

HDTV is a completely different story, of course, but for that you wouldn't be using component either ...
 
J

jettredmont

macrumors 68030
Jul 25, 2002
2,731
328
Originally posted by dongmin
So what's new? TiVo does all this and more, and for cheaper. Seems to me all Apple needs to do is just work more closely with TiVo to get better integration.
Click to expand...

Tivo doesn't do all that the rumor says Apple's device will do. Read the source.


edit:
1. What's so great about streaming photos to your TV, whne your computer is a room away?
Click to expand...

Yeah, and why have a DVD player on your big-screen TV when there's a DVD-ROM built into your eMac?

Um ... maybe because displaying pictures and videos to more than two people (including yourself) at a time is incredibly cumbersome on a PC, and easy and natural on a living room display? Perhaps so that you can have, for instance, a slide show of your kids' soccer season playing on the TV while your end-of-season soccer party guests are milling about?


2. What's the point of wireless if this box is just gonna sit on top of your TV?
Click to expand...

Maybe because >90% of houses don't have an ethernet jack behind their TV sets? Ya think?
 
G

G4DoobieDoobieD

macrumors newbie
Jan 1, 2004
5
0
Tampa
1995 Box

This box was a prototype created by Steve Pearlman when he worked for Apple. Apple was not interested so Steve Pearlman created WebTV and was later purchased by Microsoft (Pearlman was then ejected from the company once the merger was completed) and is now known as MSNTV. It is just an internet appliance.
 
J

jettredmont

macrumors 68030
Jul 25, 2002
2,731
328
Re: 1995 Box

Originally posted by G4DoobieDoobieD
This box was a prototype created by Steve Pearlman when he worked for Apple. Apple was not interested so Steve Pearlman created WebTV and was later purchased by Microsoft (Pearlman was then ejected from the company once the merger was completed) and is now known as MSNTV. It is just an internet appliance.
Click to expand...

Except that it contains a processor and features which didn't exist in 1995 ... if it is an evolution of the WebTV prototype, it has gotten a fair amount of recent attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom