AppleTV vs. Vudu media box
By Jonathan Schlaffer
Apple may have just updated its AppleTV by lowering the price of both the 40GB and 160GB model. By doing so, it has also forced companies that make competing products to lower their prices as well. Specifically, the Vudu media box. How does it stack up against the AppleTV feature wise? Read on to find out!
The AppleTV ships in two versions, one with a 40GB hard drive for $229 and one with a 160GB hard drive. Both support WiFi or Ethernet connections and downloads from the iTunes store. It supports HDMI, DVI or component connections, 5.1 surround sound and a high-def widescreen TV is recommended. It supports a maximum resolution of 720p.
Apple says the 40GB version holds 50 hours of content and the 160GB version holds 200 hours of content. It includes a remote, power cord and documentation but that’s it.
Spec wise, Vudu wins, hands down.
There is only the 250GB version of the Vudu media box which comes with a remote, HDMI cable, Ethernet cable, Composite video with audio cable, power supply, AC adapter, RF antenna and a quick start guide. As well as support for 5.1 Surrsound sound and you’ll want a high-def widescreen TV to connect it to. Vudu supports all resolutions (including standard-def 480i) all the way up to 1080p/24.
Vudu says the 250GB hard drive will hold 100 hours of owned movies.
I can’t say for sure why the 160GB AppleTV claims to hold more content than the Vudu’s 250GB hard drive. Perhaps this has to do with the fact that Vudu is using 1080p content as a measure and Apple is using 720p content. Or, it could be different compression technologies or a combination of these two factors. But, if you run out of storage on the Vudu, you can add external hard drives using the two USB ports.
The Vudu costs $295 with free shipping and includes two permanent movies from the Bourne Triology. The AppleTV costs $329, has a smaller hard drive and doesn’t include all the cables, though the hard drive stores more content. In this case, the Vudu wins because I’d rather have fewer high-def titles than more lower resolution but still high-def titles.
Rentals for the AppleTV cost $2.99 for standard-def all the way to $4.99 for high-def titles. Movies can be bought in standard-def for $15. With the Vudu rentals are $0.99 to $3.99, permanent copies of a movie cost $4.99 to $19.99 (depending on release date and resolution) and TV shows cost $1.99 per episode.
There is at least one thing that Apple has over Vudu, marketing. Apple spends tons of money on marketing its products, even the lonesome AppleTV and the company is more well known. When was the last time you saw an ad for the Vudu? If ever.
The Vudu is cheaper and includes a lot more features for the price and easily bests the 160GB AppleTV which costs more and offers less. I fear this won’t be much of a war, Apple has brand recognition and marketing on its side. What does Vudu have besides a great piece of equipment? That’s not enough in this day and age.
Related:
Stumble It!







January 29th, 2008
How nice of Vudu to include that ethernet cable … because you’ll need it. No wireless?!? Sure, I’ll just run a 100′ cable (included?) to my computer downstairs. Or purchase a wireless ethernet bridge. Good luck grandma!
January 29th, 2008
I wasn’t trying to make a point of the Ethernet cable, it’s really more about the inclusion of the HDMI cable that’s more interesting.
Lots of people have at least one unused Ethernet cable lying around. Yes, it has wireless but if your TV is close enough to your router then just use the Ethernet because its faster.
How does it manage to escape a lot of people that wired Ethernet is still a lot faster than WiFi.
February 4th, 2008
Vudu doesn’t allow you to play content located on your PC and I believe that Apple TV does (for anything in your iTunes folders?
February 8th, 2008
Vudu does not have WiFi. Isn’t that sort of important? Wired internet is not faster if you can’t get a wire from your router to your TV. Sorry Vudu, I guess you should’ve thought of that. Give me a call when you make something I can actually use.