Apple Unveils Front Row, and iYawn...

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/oct/12imac.html' target='_blank'>http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/oct/12imac.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Apple’s breakthrough Front Row media experience uses the bundled Apple Remote to let users enjoy the content they have on their iMac—including songs from their iTunes music library, slideshows of their photo albums in iPhoto®, videos including Podcasts, iMovies and DVDs, and popular movie trailers streamed from apple.com—all from up to 30 feet away. And with iTunes 6, users can now purchase and download music videos, Pixar short films and hit TV shows such as “Desperate Housewives” and “Lost” from the iTunes Music Store and watch them on their iMac using Front Row. Front Row is easily controlled using the Apple Remote, which has only six buttons, compared to remote controls for Microsoft’s Media Center which typically have over 40 buttons."</i><br /><br />If you're a self-proclaimed Apple fanboy, you may want to shut this browser window immediately - things are going to get roasty. Apple recently unveiled Front Row, a "media experience" software package that comes with their new iMacs. Let me get this out of the way up-front: Front Row is a watered-down version of what Windows Media Center was over two years ago. It lacks any TV functionality - it's a glorified slideshow and music program. For all the people who whine when Microsoft "copies" Apple, turnabout is fair play: Apple has copied Windows MCE, and done a poor job at it. As <a href="http://www.edbott.com/mediacenter/archives/apple-recycles-media-center/">Ed Bott put it</a>, "It appears they’re going after the dorm room, not the living room." That's a dorm room without TV it seems. This is where Microsoft started several years back, but the extenders evolved that concept to allow customers to access their MCE content on any TV. This is a critical step that Apple is missing. Sure, they might get there, but this is an underwhelming product given how well Apple usually executes.<br /><br />The TV shows that you can download from iTunes? Great idea, nice market breakthrough, but now I see why the studios allowed it to happen: the video resolution is only 320 x 240! NTSC cable TV is 720 x 480, and anyone who has watched regular cable on computer monitor or HDTV will tell you how bad it looks. 320 x 240 is a joke, pure and simple - and Apple wants you to pay $1.99 for the experience. Why wouldn't someone just record the TV shows on their PVR? If they don't have cable TV, will they be into paying $24 a month to watch three weekly shows? The math just doesn't add up - I can see someone buying a favourite music video for $1.99, but that's 4-5 minutes of video. Watching a badly pixellated video for 60 minutes is not my idea of quality TV. Then there's the remote...<br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/remote-jobs.jpg" /><br /><br />The above photo was published on <a href="http://www.jackcheng.com/">Jack Cheng.com</a>, and he says "I don’t think there’s ever been a slide that captures what Apple is about as much as this one." Now, I'm one for simplicity, and I know that MCE needs to get more appliance-like if it's ever to be a real replacement for a TV tuner box, but this slide is a massive deception. If I remove all of the buttons on my MCE remote that have anything to do with TV, guess how many I'm left with? 15. The number pad buttons are for more than just TV though - when I want to find music by a certain artist, I press the button that has the letter of the artist and it jumps to that group of artists. Apple seems to assume that the buttons are gratuitous, but I seem them as a way to get richer input without having to use a keyboard. Yes, the remote is nice and little, which I like. Yes, it's cool that it attached itself to the side of the Mac via magnets. But I for one <i>like</i> having a button on my remote for DVD menus. I don't want to press the button, press down a few times, then press the button again to get to the DVD menu. I have this feeling that if Apple were ever to release a stand-alone DVD player, it would probably have one button for playing the DVD. After all, who wants to navigate those complex DVD menus to see the extras right? :roll:<br /><br />eHomeUpgrade has <a href="http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/1498/apple_unveils_front">some of their own thoughts</a> on Front Row worth checking out.

[Jason Eaton]

I like Apple as much as the next fan, but this does come across as a litte half baked.

[Felix Torres]

Shouldn't that be iYawn? :twisted:

1- Apple always does a good job of matching the capabilities of the hardware and the software; if the software only works at 320x240 it is by design, which means it is the highest resolution the decoder can properly process.

2- It would be totally senseless to provide the video at higher resolution since the screen can't display it anyway. (Btw, I've seen postage stamps that were bigger than that screen.)

3- 320x240 is VHS resolution. It is also VCD resolution. Very 90's.

4- As for the remote, well, the company that insisted a 1-button round mouse was ergonomic would think 6 buttons are enough on a media center remote. To be honest, that is 3 buttons more than I would've expected: One to invoke/dispel the menu, one to cycle through the list, and one to activate a pick.

5- At $2 a pop, a season of a show would cost at least $44, which is a bit more than the DVD version. I would wait for the reruns or the DVD set.

6- $300 for the player is about right. But I'd rather pay $100 more for a Zen Vision if I were looking for a portable video player. Better yet, I would either get a Dell Axim PDA or iMate Jam. But that's just me; I favor functionality over looks, after all...

P.S. At the theater or the ballet, the Front Row is the best place to be; at the movies, though, it is the worst. Hard on the neck, too.

[Jason Dunn]

2- It would be totally senseless to provide the video at higher resolution since the screen can't display it anyway. (Btw, I've seen postage stamps that were bigger than that screen.)

I disagree - they could provide it at 720 x 480 or 640 x 480 from iTunes, then transcode it for the device sync (or iTunes would download two versions). That way you'd have decent video on the desktop for viewing, and optimized iPod content. They're taking the easy way out.

[Phronetix]

I think Apple is merely crafting a beginning entry into the media centre fray. I had no idea that the downloads were only 240x320. That really bites.

Jason, we mac fans know the closest you'll come to an apple product is the piece of highway 1A that separates our homes, so I'm not thinking Apple was trying to win you over, no pun intended. :lol:

Apple takes some hard knocks on this site, and I've been a bit battered on their behalf as well (:splat:) , but who besides Kent uses both Mac OS and Windows daily? I can't lay claim to that anymore, as our three household machines all run Tiger.

From my standpoint, the new iMac is just about the perfect next computer. Being fair, I think the XP Media Center is a cool idea, and with the proper hardware can be awesome. I had a hard time playing with one at Best Buy last month, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the Vista version looks like, and compare it to what Apple offers then before I commit.

[Phronetix]

2- It would be totally senseless to provide the video at higher resolution since the screen can't display it anyway. (Btw, I've seen postage stamps that were bigger than that screen.)

I disagree - they could provide it at 720 x 480 or 640 x 480 from iTunes, then transcode it for the device sync (or iTunes would download two versions). That way you'd have decent video on the desktop for viewing, and optimized iPod content. They're taking the easy way out.

And nobody's whined yet about the fact it's only on the US iTMS.

[Felix Torres]

Of course, they *are* taking the easy side out.
The whole thing--from the timing of the intro to the half-baked video functionality--screams rush job, no?
(It makes me wonder what made Apple rush so... PSP? PMC 2.0? The Dish portable players? Something else?)

They're also sending a message or three: "downloadable/portable video is low-res video". Its not as if Mr Jobs has ever been a big believer in consumer digital video; as you pointed out, Front Row is something that should have been released with the Mini, *if* they had it then. I'm suspecting they only *started* work on it *after* the Mini proved a slow seller..

As for transcoding, didn't the MS PMCs take a lot of flak for requiring it?
Hard to rag on MS for doing it and on Apple for not doing it. :wink:
Also, transcoding is cpu intensive work and Macs are hardly the best encoding hardware on the planet.

Besides, why would Disney/ABC be licensing anything that might compete against DVD sales? The movie studios are determined not to make any of the mistakes of their music brethren, and DVD sales are their sacred cow these days...

High-priced low-quality d/ls are a safe bet and serve more as a promotional item than a true competitor for the networks' broadcast business.

Best thing is that now that the video pod is out, the competition will be measured against a shipping product, not fanciful dreams.
Me, I'm thinking Sony, Archos, and Samsung have to be pleased with the video pod.

[Jason Eaton]

... but who besides Keith uses both Mac OS and Windows daily? ...

Off Topic:
I'll raise my hand for that one. XP at work and at home running iMac, PowerBook, assorted iPods (but a mind set shift there), and an XP2500+@3200 with ATI XT850XT.

The division at home is Apple for life events (banking, word processing, etc) while the PC at home is for gaming.


On Topic:
I have reserved judgement till I see it myself but as more and more stuff comes out for reviews/previews, Apple's Front Row seems a little underwheleming. I'll give the nod to Windows Media Center for better functionality and in trying to be more then a DVD player front end that Apple seems to be using. I'll add the caviot that to me both are still not finished. (shrugs)

[Jason Dunn]

Shouldn't that be iYawn? :twisted:

Noted and changed. Nicely done sir! ;-)

[sojourner753]

Perhaps they released it in such a state to sell off their remaining pre-intel hardware.