Here's the justification for the existence of the Apple TV.
It seems plausible that 10 or 20 years from now, virtually all video content, including the content people watch on TVs in their living rooms, will be on-demand content from the Internet, not content distributed via broadcast-style models in which a) everyone receives all the available content in real-time and b) the content selection is controlled by the network operator.
As of 2009, only a relatively small fraction of video content is delivered to the living room this way.
So we've got this very large shift in the distribution of video content that we can be reasonably sure will happen in the future. But nobody knows exactly where the tipping point will be.
When that tipping point arrives, Apple doesn't want to be caught with its pants down, with no product to sell. It's worth it for them (given the relatively small R&D investment required) to keep the Apple TV around so they'll be in a stronger starting position when this shift starts to really pick up speed.
If you look through various wireless user forums, it doesn't look like they're especially good at enforcing this with other phones.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting people should tether without paying for a tethering plan. I just think the people claiming that universal enforcement on the carrier side is trivial and/or hard but worth the effort are, well, wrong. It's not trivial, and the benefits of universal enforcement are very marginal, given its costs, when compared with simply spot checking the activity of the real bandwidth hogs.
Content providers seem to have decided to be obnoxious to Apple, probably on the basis that providing content at lower cost to other distributors will help undermine Apple's substantial market power in digital distribution. We'll have to see how this develops long-term.
Apple does have one very substantial advantage over other online distributors: they have the easiest access to the world's most popular mobile media devices. (Though the fact that the iPhone and iPod Touch support third-party apps does allow other distributors to gain access to those devices as well, unlike with more specialized iPod models.)
Apple is probably hoping that as content providers become more comfortable with digital distribution (and as new content providers emerge that are "native" to the digital world), they will be able to get access to content under better terms.
I'd say they should just buy Netflix (it's not like they couldn't afford it), but I suspect that would just spook content providers who have cut deals with Netflix.
I really love the ATV, use it daily. It's like an iPod connected to your TV, with all your music, all your movies right there. Sure, some things are missing, but it's still immensly useful for me.
I totally get that, but I'm not confident that the general broadcast model of this new era will center around quicktime/h.264/whatever Apple pushes and I don't think Apple will accept anything else.
In short, Apple need to *lead* this, in selling movies and TV-shows over the air, and also distribute live TV (of some sort, because not everyone will use on-demand scheduling, some just want to swap channels).
While Apple supports mp3 with the iPod, they did use the - at the time, unusual - AAC format. That's just an example with Apple using a format for content that is a standards format but not compatible with the current players. Now, it didn't take long for AAC to creep in
Lets also remember the features that aren't specifically prohibited, but that Apple has required removed before app approval.
Sync In A Blink was required to remove a feature that would allow the initial contact list sync to use the remote source as authoritative.
The PodCasting debacle is an obvious example.
Heck, the 4-week approval process (admittedly down to 3-week now) leaving users stuck with incompatible-with-the-current-iPhone-OS versions of apps when developers have already finished a release that resolves issues.
Err... I don't see what else they're going to use. We've already seen YouTube convert its content to H.264 in part for easier delivery to mobile devices, where the format is widely supported. Once you move past browser-based Flash video players, your choices for video formats are basically 1) H.264 or 2) Microsoft's stuff.
What's actually probably going to happen in this market is that content owners will license their content to multiple distributors who will distribute it using whatever technologies they want to use.
You might want live streaming for news and sports, but I see no reason why you'd ever distribute most content via live streaming.
98% are approved within a week and they approve stupid stuff like farting apps and some even slip through, such as the baby shaker app. they also reject a few that should have been approved.
You can get the Apple TV at Costco for like 20 bucks. They have pallet after pallet of those sitting in there collecting dust. Don't think the thing even has an HDMI output. LOL
Yep. No P2P. You really should read the TOS to see what else is against the rules:
Search for "Prohibited and Permissible Uses". It's quite a long list. The section that prohibits tethering is quite clear: Furthermore, plans (unless specifically designated for tethering usage) cannot be used for any applications that tether the device (through use of, including without limitation, connection kits, other phone/PDA-to computer accessories, BLUETOOTH® or any other wireless technology) to Personal Computers (including without limitation, laptops), or other equipment for any purpose. There are some other mentions of tethering in the TOS, but those are specific to PDA/Blackberry, and does not mention the iPhone. Note that the iPhone ToS are slightly different from the other plans:
but do include the tethering restriction.
So that there's no mistake, you are expected to *ONLY* use your iPhone for: Except as may otherwise be specifically permitted or prohibited for select data plans, data sessions may be conducted only for the following purposes: (i) Internet browsing; (ii) email; and (iii) intranet access. That's it, no more. None of the other nifty internet applications are allowed. I guess AT&T needs to take a look at the Apps Store and consider the possibility that the iPhone might be useful for other purposes.
This was recently added for the "benefit" of iPhone users: If it is determined that you are using iPhone or other designated Smartphone or PDA without an eligible data plan, AT&T reserves the right to add an eligible data plan to your account and bill you the appropriate monthly fee. Use of iPhone 3G to access corporate email, company intranet sites, and/or other business applications requires an Enterprise Data Plan for iPhone. For applicable rates, terms and conditions, see AT&T Business Plans for iPhone 3G brochure. Digging further: The $30 data plan for iPhone does not allow access to corporate email, company intranet sites, and other business applications
So, do individual AT&T iPhone users purchase an Enterprise Data Plan so that they can legally pickup their office or business email?
I couldn't find anything in the wireless or data terms of service that prohibits modifications to the phone. It's usually there, but I either missed it, or someone at AT&T forgot. However P2P is specifically mentioned (see above) as a prohibited use.
Incidentally, I did find that AT&T does not obligate itself to enforce their own rules:
ENFORCEMENT AT&T reserves the right but does not assume the obligation to strictly enforce these Terms,... That makes it easy to be arbitrary and selective.
Perhaps you haven't seen the advertisements. A smartphone is not a computer. It's an entertainment device, status symbol, fashion accessory, restaurant finder, and game machine. I have yet to see a TV commercial showing a smartphone being used in a useful manner.
Sure. There's a fine balance between encouraging customers to over-use their data plans, versus "protecting the network" by limiting bandwidth and usage caps. AT&T even disguises the effort under "Smart Limits" allegedly for kids:
Add $5/month to help AT&T reduce usage.
Agreed. The original question was whether it was possible to detect tethering. I offered several methods that I think would work. I never suggested that AT&T should or might be sniffing for tethering. However, I did suggest that it was possible.
Yep. The privacy policy states that such information may be gathered.
Also true. They're also required to keep any data they collect in their efforts to enforce the DMCA so that those records may later be used in court action. I'll guess that AT&T does exactly what every other sane ISP does, and vaporize the traffic reports as soon as the reports are generated.
It is a foreign country according to his data plan:
International Roaming: Substantial charges may be incurred if phone is taken out of the U.S. even if no services are intentionally used. Receipt of Visual Voicemail messages when roaming internationally are charged at international data pay per use rates unless customer has an international iPhone plan, in which case receipt of Visual Voicemail messages decrement kilobytes included in the international plan. Unless I'm reading this wrong, AT&T can bill someone for simply taking an iPhone out of the country and not intentionally using it? I'm sure that's not what was meant, but that's the way I read it. Perhaps AT&T could use a legal proof reader.
Yep. That's the easy way. No complicated software, no detailed evidence, and no messy log file archiving. In my limited experience, providers has some idea of what constitutes "normal" operation. If something sticks out well above normal, it must be abuse. Incidentally, the average wireless data plan use for all providers is about 5 MBytes per month. iPhone users are substantially above that at about 30 MBytes per month and climbing (as of about 6 months ago).
One of my pet peeves is that all providers demand a mandatory data plan if users activate a smartphone or PDAphone. My phones have Wi-Fi and I don't need 3G wireless. However, every vendor went the route that Apple and AT&T pioneered by forcing the users to buy a data plan. That might explain the fairly low average usage of 5 MBytes/month as many users don't even know that they're paying for a data plan. That also explains the fairly high uptake on data plans with new phones along with the increasing data ARPU for all vendors. If customers won't buy voluntarily, shove it down their throats.
Whether the user is smart enough to distinguish between a free Wi-Fi YouTube download, and a potentially expensive 3G download, is subject to speculation. I've quizzed iPhone users about such things. The fanatics know the difference. The one's that buy iPhones for fashion statements or other dubious reasons, do not (even after I explain it). Just operating the iTunes application is a challenge for most.
Ummm.... It's called the iPod Touch. I have a 2nd generation model. All the iPhone apps work, except those that require the GPS. I use a junk cell phone for talking. One huge advantage is that I can look at my schedule while yacking on the phone (and not using a BT ear thing). One feature that would be nice is to replicate the address book and contacts between the cell phone and iPod Touch directly, without requiring a double sync via computah.
Actually, I'm totally surprised that AT&T didn't insist that Apple disable, cripple, or remove the Wi-Fi feature from the iPhone.
One of the local McDonald's accidentally priced their "meal" combination of burger, fries, and drink higher than the individual components would have cost. It wasn't much (about 10 cents as I recall). It was about a month later before anyone noticed. Think of it as "bundling", with an arithmetic challenged customer base.
Heh. That's pretty absurd even for a cellular carrier. The notion that anyone will take it seriously is rather farfetched. I seriously doubt if even AT&T will take it seriously.
Honestly, most modern ToS agreements seem to follow the principle pioneered by police states: make sure everyone is guilty of something, so if anyone ever does anything you don't like, you have something "legitimate" to charge them with.
[snip]
That's *exactly* what they mean. If you take your phone out of the country and it automatically downloads a few of megabytes of voicemail messages or some e-mail, expect AT&T to try to charge you an extra $300.
Exactly like the fanbois are those who would trash something not out of any actual knowledge of what they're trashing, but out of some deep seated sense of inferiority that they *might* be missing something.
AppleTV isn't twenty bucks anywhere.
And yes, it has HDMI output.
formatting link
It seems that the fanboi thing isn't a straight line; rather, it's a circle. The fanbois and the anti-fanbois aren't a universe apart; instead, they're immediately adjacent to each other.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.