What is the point of Apple TV anyway?

Question

I must be missing something but I don't see the point of the Apple TV:
If one has to convert all video, presentation and other material to run on Apple TV. What is the point?
All these converted videos, etc. don't only take up time to convert but take up unnecessary disk space too. What is the point?
Surely Apple will make future versions of its DVD Player, iLife, and iWorks, especially Keynote, compatible with Apple TV so that one can stream DVD's, Keynote presentations, etc. directly to a TV via Apple TV without having to "rip" ones DVD's and convert them or convert all ones presentations into QuickTime. Otherwise, what is the point?
As for movies on iTunes tell me what proportion of the population buy their movies? Most movies are only worth watching once, if that, so most of us rent them for far less than the cost of buying. You can't rent movies for Apple TV. So, what is the point?
For teaching situations it would also make sense for Apple to make it possible to "stream" the Mac desktop, including running applications to a large screen TV to allow it to be used as teaching tool in lecture theatres, classrooms, etc. I say it again, what is the point?

Answer 1

If one has to convert all video, presentation and
other material to run on Apple TV. What is the
point?
One doesn't have to convert all video. A great deal of compatible MPEG-4 formatted content (including MPEG part 10, a.k.a. H.264) is available from diverse sources, including Apple's iTunes Music Store. One interesting source you may not be aware of is video podcasts. Just as audio podcasts have become popular as a distribution format for audio content, so too now is the video version. An easy way to sample what is available is through the "Apple TV Showcase," accessible from the Podcast section of iTunes Music Store.
All these converted videos, etc. don't only take up
time to convert but take up unnecessary disk space
too. What is the point?
Nothing says you have to keep multiple versions of this content on your hard drive(s). In fact, H.264 is the current state of the art in video compression, offering higher quality vs. file size than any other codec. Most people find that even for HD content up to 720p24, Apple TV's 5 Mbps limit produces either no visible compromise or so little that the file space saved is well worth the tradeoff. Moreover, the number of standard DVD's (which use MPEG-2 compression) that contain content that can't be re-compressed in H.264 at <5 Mbps with no losses at all are few & far between.
<div class="jive-quote">Surely Apple will make future versions of its DVD
Player, iLife, and iWorks, especially Keynote,
compatible with Apple TV so that one can stream
DVD's, Keynote presentations, etc. directly to a TV
via Apple TV without having to "rip" ones DVD's and
convert them or convert all ones presentations into
QuickTime. Otherwise, what is the point?
Only Apple can say what Apple will do, but remember that there are a number of issues involved here, not the least of which is DRM & the legality of providing software that defeats protection schemes, that may prevent it from doing what consumers would like it to do.
As for movies on iTunes tell me what proportion of
the population buy their movies? Most movies are only
worth watching once, if that, so most of us rent them
for far less than the cost of buying. You can't rent
movies for Apple TV. So, what is the point?
Not that long ago, most industry pundits thought the consumer market for buying commercial releases of movies or TV shows was insignificant -- that for instance consumers would prefer to see movies in theaters & have no interest in buying them afterwards, or that they would only be interested in rentals. I don't know if you have noticed, but they were wrong ... to the tune of billions of dollars in revenue per year that often exceed the revenue from theatrical releases.
Some of these same pundits more recently predicted that selling TV shows by the episode, particularly at less than HD resolution, would have no marketing potential -- after all, why buy something you could watch or record for free? Once again, they were wrong. It turns out that some people just like collecting episodes, others are eager to buy a missed episode of a favored show, still others are willing to pay for selected cable content but not for cable TV, & so on.
At the same time, bricks & mortar rental chains like Blockbuster (the world's largest) have seen profits plummet, prompting ever greater reliance on other products, including in-store sales & their own online services, still oriented toward rentals. Other retail giants like Wal-Mart have tried online rental services, too. So far, all these rental-oriented services have yet to exceed "also ran" status compared to Apple's success.
Put simply, the point is renting is becoming less popular & ownership --particularly when it is comparatively easy & cheap -- more popular.
For teaching situations it would also make sense for
Apple to make it possible to "stream" the Mac
desktop, including running applications to a large
screen TV to allow it to be used as teaching tool in
lecture theatres, classrooms, etc. I say it again,
what is the point?
The point here is that products that do this already exist, but the market for them is very limited compared to the one the much cheaper Apple TV targets.
Put another way, what "makes sense" to consumers (the fabled $100 laptop, for example) doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense in commercial terms, no matter how badly people want it or how well it would sell.
iMac G5/2.0 GHz 17" ALS (Rev B)   Mac OS X (10.4.9)   1.5 GB, Kensington Trackball