Yes it does- Apple required me to plunk that down to get full functionality from a remote out of my Apple TV as it is right now.
My girlfriend and I use her AppleTV with the white remote and with a harmony remote despite having the iPod touch with the remote app. There's no AppleTV functionality that *requires* a device with the remote software on it, even though it's more convenient at times.
Presumably, the remote app is just a prototype of the future AppleTV remote, which will be a separate piece of hardware that will replace the existing white remote.
My girlfriend and I use her AppleTV with the white remote and with a harmony remote despite having the iPod touch with the remote app. There's no AppleTV functionality that *requires* a device with the remote software on it, even though it's more convenient at times.
.
Yes there is- "search" your own file by name rather than scrolling through thousand of files to find it. "Search" on the white remote only throws you into the iTunes store to buy.
Yes there is- "search" your own file by name rather than scrolling through thousand of files to find it. "Search" on the white remote only throws you into the iTunes store to buy.
I'm surprised nobody speculated about what this may mean for gaming on the Mac.
Does this mean that Apple is poised for a renewed Mac gaming push?
More like a first time push. I know from time to time they give lip service to the idea of mac gaming but seem to do little to actually push forward this concept. Especially if you look at the historically week cards they tend to select for the consumer models. Imho.
Besides innovative new work, it seems Apple may also be addressing some of their graphics deficiencies on the desktop side and reliability issues they have had with graphics cards.
I think they are building a GPGPU solution that doesn't compete or detract from sales of Nvidia or ATi. It reminds me of the thought of having 48 cores of Cell-like processors for the x86 platform. This will be for the Mac Pro and the rest of the desktop lineup with a scaled down solution for the Laptop and later iPhone platforms. Just speculation, but I see them targeting the largest form-factor first and the smallest last.
Gaming on a generic PC box is getting old-fashioned even on the Windows side. The market for gaming top-gear is extremely thin. Outside the top 5 most developed countries is close to 0. Could you imagine who are the people in China, India, Russia or Brasil who will buy an expensive PC box for gaming mainly. Well, there are people that will, those who are driving Mmaybach or Mercedes at a minimum, or their kids. Does it makes sense to target this market? How much market share you will gain if you succeed to push out some of the competition out of the 1% market niche (I am pretty sure it is less than that worldwide)? Well, there is more to this, because there are many sites and magazines which publish reviews and benchmarks and praise the winers, so there is some room for adding respect to the brand, but is it worth the investment?
There are plenty of reasons to improve the GPU hardware, but gaming is not the number one. Even the game console market is not large enough for Apple IMO.
Apple may get casual gaming on iPhone, AppleTV or new hardware but I don't think it is going to be the #1 feature. I mean personal movies, photos, your digital life comes first. Then [may be] gaming. Casual gaming. It is a much bigger market. These are the people who bought a computer for other purposes, like doing a real work or media/communication activities (Web, mail, instant messaging) and play a game or two from time to time. But those are not the kind of games which require lots of graphics power.
I think they are building a GPGPU solution that doesn't compete or detract from sales of Nvidia or ATi.
I'm think more along the lines of a vector processor that sits in one of the processor slots on a dual chip motherboard. Ideally such a processor would be fully integrated into the SMP arraingement with cache coherency and the like. The would be fantastic even if there are less than 48 cores of vector processing. The vector processors on cell are very interesting but I'm thinking the iterface to them might be different. The idea is sound though and prevents issues with overloading the GPU.
Quote:
It reminds me of the thought of having 48 cores of Cell-like processors for the x86 platform. This will be for the Mac Pro and the rest of the desktop lineup with a scaled down solution for the Laptop and later iPhone platforms.
It depends on the approach taken of course but I'd expect quick broad application across the board. Different performance levels certainly, but this could put a very positive light on OpenCL apps, especially on machines with lower capability GPUs. Not to mention is the idea that a purpose built vector processor can be optimized in ways a GPU can't.
Quote:
Just speculation, but I see them targeting the largest form-factor first and the smallest last.
Possibly, but I could also see the opposite as the custom hardware would mean better usage of low end GPUs. I just can't see Apple building their own GPUs even if they have a lot of IP. That is why I see potential in an Apple vector processor. Designed right it could fill the gap between what a CPU does well and what a GPU does well.
It certainly exciting times at Apple. The biggest problem is that these are recent hires, so we won't be seeing benefit from their input for awhile. However you would think that something from PA would hit soon.
Especially on the AppleTV ala Wii with an iPod touch doing the motions.
g
God no. If they are going to do motion properly at least learn from nintendo's mistake and include gyroscopes. The infrared pointer is the most awesome tech in the Wii remote as it currently stands. I would love Apple tv to step into the game space but as only as long as it can attract quality developers. It saddens me to see the flood of half-baked casual copycat games on the Wii when original and innovative ideas are getting lost in the crowd.
Apple's assembling an All Star team of graphics talent. If you look at their investment in technology and talent it's clear they realize the future is not desktop/laptop but the freaking do everything tricorder Star Trek "phaser on stun" portable device we've all seen in the geek movies.
LOL! So I'm not the only one who realizes this it seems.
More like a first time push. I know from time to time they give lip service to the idea of mac gaming but seem to do little to actually push forward this concept. Especially if you look at the historically week cards they tend to select for the consumer models. Imho.
It appears that Apple has the willingness to spend a lot for video chip R & D, but it is indeed
a question whether they will order enough of these custom chips from their semiconductor
fabricating vendors to get a price that is competitive with commodity chips. I hope the fabs
value Apple's business enough to make favorable deals, because I think the vertically integrated
model will produce the best products.
If these chips go in the iPhone and the itouch, that would be plenty.
Two reasons for that.
The first is that there will be a lot of sales of those two devices in one year. Possibly 30 million, and later 40, maybe more. That's a lot of devices, esp. if the same chip goes into them all.
The second reason is that the economies of scale are not what most people think when it comes to computers, or even phones. With all the computers sold each year, you would think that it's big scales they're working on, but not so.
There are a lot of levels of computers as far as cpus used. Most don't sell in more than the tens of millions.
Other than Intel's GMA chips, the same thing is true of gpu's. Even less.
The highest end gaming boards sell no more than a few hundred, sometimes fewer. You can see this from the sites that report on this and test the boards.
So if Apple can make chips that are used by them in the millions, they will have about the same economies of scale as everyone else, perhaps more in some cases.
I think Apple is just going for greater profit margins in the mobile devices. The more functions you can put on one chip, the cheaper the device will be and you can also build it smaller and make room for things like a bigger battery. I don't think that Apple can necessarily build a better graphics or processor chip better than a major chip maker could. I'm guessing Apple is thinking that they can keep a proprietary chip to themselves, but that's probably hard in this day and age of corporate spying and reverse engineering. Maybe it could give them a slight jump on the rest of the industry though when new products are introduced. Apple is definitely spending money in the right direction if OpenCL is going to be in Apple's future.
Comments
Yes it does- Apple required me to plunk that down to get full functionality from a remote out of my Apple TV as it is right now.
My girlfriend and I use her AppleTV with the white remote and with a harmony remote despite having the iPod touch with the remote app. There's no AppleTV functionality that *requires* a device with the remote software on it, even though it's more convenient at times.
Presumably, the remote app is just a prototype of the future AppleTV remote, which will be a separate piece of hardware that will replace the existing white remote.
My girlfriend and I use her AppleTV with the white remote and with a harmony remote despite having the iPod touch with the remote app. There's no AppleTV functionality that *requires* a device with the remote software on it, even though it's more convenient at times.
.
Yes there is- "search" your own file by name rather than scrolling through thousand of files to find it. "Search" on the white remote only throws you into the iTunes store to buy.
Yes there is- "search" your own file by name rather than scrolling through thousand of files to find it. "Search" on the white remote only throws you into the iTunes store to buy.
Wasn't aware of that..... that bites!
I'm surprised nobody speculated about what this may mean for gaming on the Mac.
Does this mean that Apple is poised for a renewed Mac gaming push?
More like a first time push. I know from time to time they give lip service to the idea of mac gaming but seem to do little to actually push forward this concept. Especially if you look at the historically week cards they tend to select for the consumer models.
Besides innovative new work, it seems Apple may also be addressing some of their graphics deficiencies on the desktop side and reliability issues they have had with graphics cards.
I think they are building a GPGPU solution that doesn't compete or detract from sales of Nvidia or ATi. It reminds me of the thought of having 48 cores of Cell-like processors for the x86 platform. This will be for the Mac Pro and the rest of the desktop lineup with a scaled down solution for the Laptop and later iPhone platforms. Just speculation, but I see them targeting the largest form-factor first and the smallest last.
Isn't that what this article essentially says is coming?
http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/04/25...d-ray-footage/
Maybe they should buy red?
Can't imagine an Apple TV being able to stream HD movies at minimal data rates based on graphics chips compressions, etc.
Isn't that what this article essentially says is coming?
http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/04/25...d-ray-footage/
Maybe they should buy red?
They'd rather have their platform make the content for HD than sell hype.
There are plenty of reasons to improve the GPU hardware, but gaming is not the number one. Even the game console market is not large enough for Apple IMO.
Apple may get casual gaming on iPhone, AppleTV or new hardware but I don't think it is going to be the #1 feature. I mean personal movies, photos, your digital life comes first. Then [may be] gaming. Casual gaming. It is a much bigger market. These are the people who bought a computer for other purposes, like doing a real work or media/communication activities (Web, mail, instant messaging) and play a game or two from time to time. But those are not the kind of games which require lots of graphics power.
I think they are building a GPGPU solution that doesn't compete or detract from sales of Nvidia or ATi.
I'm think more along the lines of a vector processor that sits in one of the processor slots on a dual chip motherboard. Ideally such a processor would be fully integrated into the SMP arraingement with cache coherency and the like. The would be fantastic even if there are less than 48 cores of vector processing. The vector processors on cell are very interesting but I'm thinking the iterface to them might be different. The idea is sound though and prevents issues with overloading the GPU.
It reminds me of the thought of having 48 cores of Cell-like processors for the x86 platform. This will be for the Mac Pro and the rest of the desktop lineup with a scaled down solution for the Laptop and later iPhone platforms.
It depends on the approach taken of course but I'd expect quick broad application across the board. Different performance levels certainly, but this could put a very positive light on OpenCL apps, especially on machines with lower capability GPUs. Not to mention is the idea that a purpose built vector processor can be optimized in ways a GPU can't.
Just speculation, but I see them targeting the largest form-factor first and the smallest last.
Possibly, but I could also see the opposite as the custom hardware would mean better usage of low end GPUs. I just can't see Apple building their own GPUs even if they have a lot of IP. That is why I see potential in an Apple vector processor. Designed right it could fill the gap between what a CPU does well and what a GPU does well.
It certainly exciting times at Apple. The biggest problem is that these are recent hires, so we won't be seeing benefit from their input for awhile. However you would think that something from PA would hit soon.
Dave
Especially on the AppleTV ala Wii with an iPod touch doing the motions.
g
God no. If they are going to do motion properly at least learn from nintendo's mistake and include gyroscopes. The infrared pointer is the most awesome tech in the Wii remote as it currently stands. I would love Apple tv to step into the game space but as only as long as it can attract quality developers. It saddens me to see the flood of half-baked casual copycat games on the Wii when original and innovative ideas are getting lost in the crowd.
Behold the Beast looms.
Apple's assembling an All Star team of graphics talent. If you look at their investment in technology and talent it's clear they realize the future is not desktop/laptop but the freaking do everything tricorder Star Trek "phaser on stun" portable device we've all seen in the geek movies.
LOL! So I'm not the only one who realizes this it seems.
More like a first time push. I know from time to time they give lip service to the idea of mac gaming but seem to do little to actually push forward this concept. Especially if you look at the historically week cards they tend to select for the consumer models.
We must never give up.
I'm surprised nobody speculated about what this may mean for gaming on the Mac.
Does this mean that Apple is poised for a renewed Mac gaming push?
A dedicated console, maybe? iPlay or iGame?
That would be interesting to see.
It appears that Apple has the willingness to spend a lot for video chip R & D, but it is indeed
a question whether they will order enough of these custom chips from their semiconductor
fabricating vendors to get a price that is competitive with commodity chips. I hope the fabs
value Apple's business enough to make favorable deals, because I think the vertically integrated
model will produce the best products.
If these chips go in the iPhone and the itouch, that would be plenty.
Two reasons for that.
The first is that there will be a lot of sales of those two devices in one year. Possibly 30 million, and later 40, maybe more. That's a lot of devices, esp. if the same chip goes into them all.
The second reason is that the economies of scale are not what most people think when it comes to computers, or even phones. With all the computers sold each year, you would think that it's big scales they're working on, but not so.
There are a lot of levels of computers as far as cpus used. Most don't sell in more than the tens of millions.
Other than Intel's GMA chips, the same thing is true of gpu's. Even less.
The highest end gaming boards sell no more than a few hundred, sometimes fewer. You can see this from the sites that report on this and test the boards.
So if Apple can make chips that are used by them in the millions, they will have about the same economies of scale as everyone else, perhaps more in some cases.