<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It&#8217;s Not A Digital House, It&#8217;s A Home</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 01:39:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: davis</title>
		<link>http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/comment-page-1/#comment-944</link>
		<dc:creator>davis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/#comment-944</guid>
		<description>Hey Mark,

In all fairness, the Apple post was actually written by Thomas Hawk and not myself (seeking alpha accidently gave me the credit), but I actually agree with a lot of what Hawk says.  HDTV is going to drive the future of television and even the phone companies that have installed your super fast FIOS understand this and are implementing HDTV content on demand.  Of all the companies out there I think that Comcast, Verizon and AT&amp;T are better positioned then anyone to take advantage of this trend.

Over the last year, we&#039;ve seen several $300 iDongle movie devices come out and none have taken off.  There will be blind loyalty by the Appleheaded Mac fans, but lets be honest, people don&#039;t want to pay $300 to hook up a computer to their TV that then makes them pay per download.  If Steve Jobs would get with the program and implement a TV tuner into the device then I would say watch out, but without the tuner, there is no HDTV content and without the HDTV content, this device is set to be a flop.

Finally, in your comments you rightly point out the limitations of bandwidth and HDTV.  This is why we won&#039;t see HDTV on demand anytime soon.  I do think though that you ignore the advanced file compression of Divx and it&#039;s potential to download content significantly faster then Apple&#039;s proprietary format.  I also think that you&#039;ve over estimated the capabilities of an 802.11 wireless connection.  It seems funny to hear you say that iDongle will suceed because you can&#039;t get the bandwidth to stream HDTV on a FIOS connection, but then to try and say that it will suceed because you can stream it wirelessly?  I would encourage you to talk to someone who understands the bandwidth capabilities of an 802.11 connection and encourage you to reconsider your thoughts on the product.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Mark,</p>
<p>In all fairness, the Apple post was actually written by Thomas Hawk and not myself (seeking alpha accidently gave me the credit), but I actually agree with a lot of what Hawk says.  HDTV is going to drive the future of television and even the phone companies that have installed your super fast FIOS understand this and are implementing HDTV content on demand.  Of all the companies out there I think that Comcast, Verizon and AT&#038;T are better positioned then anyone to take advantage of this trend.</p>
<p>Over the last year, we&#8217;ve seen several $300 iDongle movie devices come out and none have taken off.  There will be blind loyalty by the Appleheaded Mac fans, but lets be honest, people don&#8217;t want to pay $300 to hook up a computer to their TV that then makes them pay per download.  If Steve Jobs would get with the program and implement a TV tuner into the device then I would say watch out, but without the tuner, there is no HDTV content and without the HDTV content, this device is set to be a flop.</p>
<p>Finally, in your comments you rightly point out the limitations of bandwidth and HDTV.  This is why we won&#8217;t see HDTV on demand anytime soon.  I do think though that you ignore the advanced file compression of Divx and it&#8217;s potential to download content significantly faster then Apple&#8217;s proprietary format.  I also think that you&#8217;ve over estimated the capabilities of an 802.11 wireless connection.  It seems funny to hear you say that iDongle will suceed because you can&#8217;t get the bandwidth to stream HDTV on a FIOS connection, but then to try and say that it will suceed because you can stream it wirelessly?  I would encourage you to talk to someone who understands the bandwidth capabilities of an 802.11 connection and encourage you to reconsider your thoughts on the product.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/comment-page-1/#comment-939</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 16:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davisfreeberg.com/2006/07/18/its-not-a-digital-house-its-a-home/#comment-939</guid>
		<description>Hello Davis,

I read your recent post at Alpha, regarding Apple and Google - can the &quot;iTV&quot; device make it or no?

Indeed, the image quality that hovers between broadcast TV and DVD quality is nothing to write home about, but millions of Mac folk will get the ball rolling regardless.

Ouside of this niche loyalty what will Apple need to win in this market?

1a. Download speed. Unfortunately, this is not available for most to do HD downloads. I have fiber to my home, so it is easily possible for me, but most have cable, and past 7 PM, most might as well go the route of a modem - good night Comcast!

1b. Apple however gets this, while many columnists seem to be missing the boat. &quot;Who is going to wait 30 minutes to download a movie!? For HD, who is going to wait 1 hour and 30 minutes to download a flick!?&quot; The point is missed. If I must wait 10 - 15 minutes to begin watching my HD movie, so be it. It still beats going to Blockbuster, and like many, I don&#039;t plan on what I will watch a day or two in advance and do the mail-order thing. I want what I want, and I want it now. The internet age, taking selfishness a step futher...

2. &quot;iTV&quot; will debut with two features, well three really, that Steve didn&#039;t show off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Davis,</p>
<p>I read your recent post at Alpha, regarding Apple and Google &#8211; can the &#8220;iTV&#8221; device make it or no?</p>
<p>Indeed, the image quality that hovers between broadcast TV and DVD quality is nothing to write home about, but millions of Mac folk will get the ball rolling regardless.</p>
<p>Ouside of this niche loyalty what will Apple need to win in this market?</p>
<p>1a. Download speed. Unfortunately, this is not available for most to do HD downloads. I have fiber to my home, so it is easily possible for me, but most have cable, and past 7 PM, most might as well go the route of a modem &#8211; good night Comcast!</p>
<p>1b. Apple however gets this, while many columnists seem to be missing the boat. &#8220;Who is going to wait 30 minutes to download a movie!? For HD, who is going to wait 1 hour and 30 minutes to download a flick!?&#8221; The point is missed. If I must wait 10 &#8211; 15 minutes to begin watching my HD movie, so be it. It still beats going to Blockbuster, and like many, I don&#8217;t plan on what I will watch a day or two in advance and do the mail-order thing. I want what I want, and I want it now. The internet age, taking selfishness a step futher&#8230;</p>
<p>2. &#8220;iTV&#8221; will debut with two features, well three really, that Steve didn&#8217;t show off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

