Among announcements for the Macbook Air, the Time Capsule back-up device and iPhone updates, Apple's Steve Jobs has announced at Macworld '08 a series of changes to their poorly selling Apple TV product. The one I think most appropriate to Big Contact creators and audiences: it finally allows Apple TV owners to subscribe and/or view video and audio podcasts directly through the Apple TV device without requiring the management of podcast subscriptions on your Mac or PC and iTunes.

It also allows for HD content and Dolby 5.1. (You can also rent major studio movies directly through the device - no PC needed.) They've also reduced the price slightly: $229 for the 40gb model and $329 for the 160gb model.

As a fan of the ease-of-use of the device - but not a fan of its PC-reliance - especially for podcast management - I think this is good news.

So what does this mean?

It means media junkies can go out and buy a small, quiet Apple TV box and hook it up to their big screen tv. And without requiring a pc/Mac/iTunes they can move through the slick Apple TV menus and browse and search through a podcast directory in their living room. And upon finding something they like subscribe and/or begin to watch the individual content then and there. And if the creators of that video podcast published their videos in high definition, then the content will look just as sharp as anything out there.

For podcasters it means: a) you keep doing what you are doing, no changes required. It also means b) that video podcasters can also consider publishing higher definition versions of their podcasts for more and more use in the living room - as opposed to small screen iPods.

Something we've had here at Big Contact for a while: publish your media in multiple formats - including a "full-screen" version of your video podcast.

To view a short video demo of podcasts on an Apple Tv go to Apple's site.

I've been playing around a little with You Tube on my Apple TV and had a few thoughts.

Short Videos Are Not As Fun In The Living Room

Short-form video in the living room just isn't nearly as enjoyable as on the desktop. With all the clicking through the menus and searching and all you get is a 1 or 2 minute clip of some little silly something? That's not a rewarding pay off. I suspect that once they put up their entire collection with its abundance of illegal, and often longer-form content there may be more enjoyable content to view.

A Library of Videos On The Web

It is, however, great to have a library of videos on demand stored on the web that is constantly updated to search through and discover things. I wish Apple allowed more of this searcing, discovering and managing with video podcasts. Imagine being able to search the iTunes podcast directory through your Apple TV - and to subscribe and unsubscribe through the device. And I suppose to download directly to the Apple TV rather than first to your PC. You would feel a lot less tethered to your desktop/laptop and feel like you have options in your living room.

So I think a successful living room internet TV MUST have: management of your media via the TV and NOT solely on your desktop/laptop like Apple forces for its podcast management.

Streaming vs Downloading

This video-podcast-management-through-the-tv proposal then begs the question: is instant-gratification streaming a la YouTube better than downloading a la podcasts? It is great to find something, click it, and have it start playing a few seconds later. I'd say it seems like it's more reasonable that you can get better quality, larger files via the download route. But it's not a technology issue - it's a user experience issue. You can get away with larger podcasts becasue you aren't waiting for them to reach you RIGHT NOW. But I think some type of hybrid would be ideal. Here's what I mean:

My Proposal: A Streaming/Download Hybrid

Search an internet-residing directory of podcasts and podcast channels. If you find a video you want to watch click download. And it will be added to your queue. You can start watching any amount of that video that has made it down to your box. Or you can continue searching around for more video. If you don't want just single videos you can search podcast channels and subscribe to them. Subscribing would do the same thing: start to download the latest video. And when you are done sniffing around the directory you can go to your download queue and start watching. And it would do the same file management that Apple TV currently does which is to dump old files.

This is what I would like to see in my living room: A Podcast Menu something like this:

• My Recent Podcasts (river-view of latest downloaded individual podcasts)
• My Podcast Channels (organize podcasts via the channels that I am subscribed to [like current Apple TV] - and allow me to unsubscribe here as well)
• Downloading (my active queue of downloads. I can start to watch videos from here - but only as much as I have so far downloaded.)
• Search
• Popular (A list of popular channels and videos)

YouTube on Apple TV (and Joost for that matter) I think prove streaming into the living room isn't perfect because the pipes aren't that fat. I think something like what I outlined above would be the best of both the "download & wait" and the "stream me now" worlds. Even for the "instant" stream of YouTube I find I'd like to have a "download basket" a queue to drop a bushel of things and once I'm done with my searching - come back to it. This is mostly due, I think, to YouTube's super short content which makes me want to aggreagte a bunch of little things into one, longer experience.

You Tube Is Not For News, Video Podcasts Are

News on internet tv is the #1 thing to get right first in my opinion. It's the one thing that I think can most easily make internet tv a go-to device - at least for people older than teenagers. Why? 3 reasons: 1) Because it's internet you can get the most timely info. 2) It's the internet you could get news on all the myriad topics that satisfy your specific interests that cable news would never be able to touch [Tibetan technology news?] and 3) News doesn't need to be large, high quality files to be compelling like other forms of entertainment may require - so viewers can be more forgiving.

While 10's of thousands of videos are uploaded to You Tube every day - it doesn't seem to be the best resource for news. At least not on the Apple TV. Again, this may just be due to their limited catalog at the moment - but I don't suspect so. It seems logical that YouTube content would be the go-to place to find out the latest news on virtually any topic. But it's not. There is far more 'date-unimportant' content cluttering the search results. This is less a technology issue and more of a philosophy issue. YouTube is a destination for interesting/goofy/humorous/etc stuff where page views and popularity trump timelines.

I searched news, tech news, technology news - among other tech geek searches to test it out. Surprisingly, video podcasts, delivered in their chronological episode/channel format are still the best way to get video news through the web it seems. At least via the Apple TV.

After living with Apple Tv for a little while I'm thinking back to the open source entertainment system I sketched out years ago. Where is something like that?

Knowing I couldn't be the only person wanting such a thing I recently went looking for existing projects. What kind of open source entertainment in your living room options are there these days?

First, what are we looking for? I think an ideal system would bring the following into my living room (the fake screenshot above is a quickie I did):

An Entertainment System Should Bring The Following Into My Living Room:

• hd videos I own
• video podcasts
• music I own
• api-accessible content streamed over the internet such as YouTube videos and Flickr photos
• web radio
• pc-based games
• weather
• photos I own
• rss feeds
• recorded tv
• calendar synced with my computer's via iCal feed

Apple TV does a very tiny portion of some of this list and Netgear's Digital Entertainer HD does even more though with limitations.

What would be great is an open source option(s) that would allow more flexibility...

"Myth Tv is a Linux application that turns a computer with the necessary hardware into a digital video recorder, a digital multimedia home entertainment system, or Home Theater Personal Computer."

It has an impressive set of functionality. In addition to its Tivo-like recording functionality it has modules that handle: photos, weather, digital video, rss feeds, simple pc games, even a VOIP video phone plug in... but no video podcasts that I know of (yet?).

"Clutter is an open source software library for creating fast, visually rich graphical user interfaces. The most obvious example of potential usage is in media center type applications. We hope however it can be used for a lot more.

"Clutter uses OpenGL (and soon optionally OpenGL ES) for rendering but with an API which hides the underlying GL complexity from the developer. The Clutter API is intended to be easy to use, efficient and flexible."

23 years old Londonite Neil Patel is working on a slick TV interface using Clutter and has posted a few screenshots.

I've recently bought an Apple TV and have been using it in my Brooklyn apartment for a couple days now - and I like it - with caveats. I've never bought iTunes content and I don't have any real plans to do so. I'm not a big TV-show fan and I'm not compelled to buy movies (or music for that matter) with Apple's offered quality and that are tied to the iTunes drm.

So why buy the Apple TV if you don't want iTunes Store content?

The number one draw for me was to be able to easily bring video podcasts into my living room. Secondarily it's nice to bring photos and mp3s into the living room as well.

What I Like

• Access to an ungated swarm of content.
• While there is a somewhat limited set of video podcast content, the great thing is that just about every micro niche you may be interested in is probably covered. I'm watching (and learning) things about geeky tech (of course), design, martial arts, animation, news, automotive-related things & family-friendly shows for my 3 year old.
• Ability to create my own content and publish it through places like Big Contact and have it end up in other people's living rooms.
• Being able to choose what to watch when I want to watch.
• Hopefully, eventually allow easier sharing of video with family members.

What I Don't Like

• Because Apple TV doesn't draw the podcasts directly from the internet (instead it relies on the computer in your den to do the main work) you still feel tethered to that computer and what it may or may not be doing. If your "mothership" computer and iTunes aren't constantly running then you aren't gauranteed to have the latest content on your TV. So I find myself still managing the iTunes software on my laptop making sure Apple TV has the latest goods. That's a little annoying.
• It's a very closed system. Folks are hacking away at this device around the country I see - but for normal folks who want more options - this device ain't it. What kind of options? How about the ability to load any 3rd party app onto the device? One that perhaps would let you find content directly from the web? Or that would allow you to play internet-connected games? Or that would allow for something no one has thought of yet?

I'm still surprised a small company, a group of open source folks or an individual with a lot of time on his or her hands hasn't created an open alternative using all the off-the-shelf stuff that the Apple TV uses.. and more. That day-dreaming, wishful-thinking project will be the subject of my next post...

Until that day comes, I do like the Apple TV even in this 1.0 state. I can't wait to see ever more clever folks come to the video podcasting game as they see the Video-Podcast-In-The-Living-Room audience grow. And I'm excited to add my 2 bits in there where I can...

In addition to the iPhone, Apple also announced its Apple TV. Your Mac or PC + iTunes + wireless router + Apple TV + your tv = digital media (including your video podcasts) in your living room.

I'm excited about this (maybe even more so than the iPhone - which would put me in the minority I know). I'm excited because it's coming asap - and it promises to do something I've really been waiting to see done well: getting internet content into the living room.

I'm also excited because we here at Big Contact have new features that will work great with this device (and some other "media converters") we do believe.

Jobs has just made a few announcements at MacWorld - and the Apple site has just been updated. The Apple iPhone is a widescreen video iPod + phone + internet/email tool.

• Runs Mac OS X
• Screen size: 3.5 inches
• Screen resolution: 320 by 480 at 160 ppi
• 4GB Flash memory = $499
• 8GB Flash memory = $599
• Still needs FCC approval
• Should launch in June for US, third quarter for Europe and '08 for Asia

My main question is: how much access will developers have to build apps on the phone's OS?

So Microsoft doesn't have podcast-friendly features built into their 'iPod-killer.' Some bloggers say it's due to the name 'podcasting' and its reference to its main rival in this domain: Apple. What with Apple sending folks cease and desist orders for their use of "podcast"-related words who could blame them? Not that Apple created the name or the method.

Some cheekily predict that if Microsoft does choose to offer podcast tools that they will probably be called "Zunecasts." Creative, maker of the Zen line of media players and another company wary of using a name suggesting a competitor's trademark, tried something similar by trying to redefine the meaning of "podcast." Or rather: P.O.D.Cast, "Personal On Demand broadCast."

Which all comes back to an old argument: that "podcast" is a dumb name. It was created by a journalist in an article in early 2004. It caught on with early adopters and was amplified by the "Pod Father" Adam Curry.

If anything, this provides a good lesson on how not to name a "general use" techie thing: Don't include (even a portion) of a trademarked name as part of your word - unless of course you want to see fragmented adoption and a confused public.

This leads me to recall my original grumblings about the term "podcast" when the name first hit the scene over two years ago. Here's an excerpt from a comment on this post dated Oct 10, 2004 - as the name had picked up steam.

I would argue... that there is a problem that stems from the fact that "Podcast" is a faulty and ill-advised term. No one "Podcasting" that I know of is broadcasting specifically to a "pod": ie, to an iPod or any other mobile audio device. They are compressing their content, whatever it is, into the mp3 format and creating an RSS document that describes that mp3 file. That's it. Then, that RSS is being read by all types of RSS-consuming applications, on desktops and on mobile devices.

In other words, no one podcasts. They make their media available in a commonly understood format and all types of devices and applications (such as Big Contact's web-based Feed Players) play them.

And history has proven me right: only a small percentage of podcasts actually make it to Apple's iPods. One report suggested that 90% or so of podcasts are consumed on the desktop.

Non-proprietary names have been bandied about. Microsoft itself has played with the term "blogcast" to incorporate all types of personal media syndication. "Mediacasting" may be a more accurate, though uninspired, term. Here are some more ridiculous "-casting" terms from that post in 2004:

And when the authors of this content publish their creations via MP3-RSS they are not specifcally 'Podcasting' but are potentially 'Podcasting' (mobile devices) AND 'Deskcasting' (desktop apps) and even, for WiFi home stereo users 'Dencasting.' Ha. In other words they are 'multicasting'... or better yet, they are 'Metacasting' as they have no control over the distribution of the content other than properly describing the meta information in a format that a wide variety of applications can understand.

Nielsen/NetRatings has just released a report that suggests the bulk of podcast subscribers are Mac-using, Nike-wearing Trekies - and that 18-to-24 year olds make up the bulk of audio podcast listeners and 25-to-34 year olds download the most video podcasts.

The Mac-loving stat got me wondering what the demographics might be on the creation side of podcasts. I can't answer that but I can answer this: which platform is better, Mac or Windows, for recording podcasts. Highly subjective of course - but I just bought a Mac after about 7 years? of being away - and here are my thoughts:

Let's look at audio podcasting and later look at video podcasting.

Apple's Promise:

Apple's Mac-only Garageband is a superior podcast recorder.

Verdict:

True (with big caveat).

Apple's Mac-only audio-recording/mixing software Garageband is pretty nice. I've used Logic Audio, Pro Tools, Audacity & others to record music (and eventually podcasts) for about 10 years now - and free Garageband is a much happier place to spend time in. It's strength is its intuitive design that makes you want to experiment and spend time w/ a song/podcast. That and they give you a good bit of resources (loops, jingles etc) to play with right out of the box.

However: Call it simplifying the process for non-professionals or, as I see it, call it a Microsoft-esque, lock-in mentality, but Garageband gets major negative points for their awful export set up. They give you very little options for how to export your song/podcast - and mp3 ain't one of them.

Garageband exports using the m4a format and doesn't offer specific adjustment of bitrates (only clownish good, better, best). This makes sense as their iPod, iTunes and Quicktime products all have special features to handle special features of the m4a format.

But this means you have to go through another round of trickery to convert exported files to mp3s. I'm doing that through iTunes which is not the best place to do it. Plus you can end up with two files for every 1 file you want. Which means more pain-in-the-arse file management...

All this could and should be easier w/ an "advanced setting" export...

Microsoft's Promise:

Microsoft makes no loud promises to podcasters.

But you can find small, ununified mention of podcasting. Record audio from your PocketPc or Windows Smart Phone using VoiceNotes. Make movies with the Windows Movie Maker they say.

These little items are examples of existing applications originally built for different uses. From what I understand Microsoft has made no effort to specifically court podcast producers nor, even, podcast listeners. They offer no podcast-friendly audio recording/mixing software. Even their latest release  of the Windows Media Player playback software requires a plug-in to allow podcast subscriptions. Though the Vista release may change that as it is supposedly very xml-friendly? There are no details yet on whether the Microsoft iPod competitor Argo/Zune? will have any podcast-friendly features.

But Windows isn't about supplying all the tools, you say. And you'd be right. They leave that up to thrid parties. So what about them?

Verdict:

If you don't promise anything then it's ok if you don't deliver right? Ha.

Like I said this isn't an exhaustive comparison of available options - just 1 man's opinion based on years of using this stuff. I haven't used any Windows-based audio recording/mixing software that I would rather use over Garageband for recording podcasts.

Are there Windows-based progams that make it easier to record podcasts? Possibly, but I haven't seen them. Pro Tools and Logic Audio were built for recording music and they are what they are. Audacity is surprisingly good for a freebie app - but has some awful little things that make the experience not very fun.

Final Verdict

Obviously this isn't a very scientific or exhaustive comparison. But isn't that also a point? Productivity can also be measured by the hours you have to spend researching, finding, downloading, installing and learning new software. Which can be frustrating.

The Mac environment and Garageband are significantly better platforms to record and mix podcasts and audio for podcasts compared to the Windows platform and it's available software. That doesn't mean you can't do a good job or pull less hair out on a Windows machine. But I asked for my own opinion... and I gave it. Ha.

Man, I hope I don't become a Mac butt-kissing, evangelizer, snob like those pretentious Mac commercials (view Mac spoof ads). I don't think so.

Next up we'll be looking at creating video podcasts... and Apple's low-end iMovie is awful...

Stats in the intro come from this Cnet article via Digg.