or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple TV 3.0 update not helping sales as AirPort routers lose share
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple TV 3.0 update not helping sales as AirPort routers lose share - Page 5

post #161 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

So many stupid people.

1) "AppleTV should have a DVD player" Why? Don't you already own a DVD player?
2) "AppleTV should let me import my DVDs" You would have to be living in a cave if you have never heard of HandBrake.
3) "AppleTV should be a cable/sat box with DVR." Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes. They won't spend the licensing fees to build a box compatible with DirecTV, DishNetwork, and CableCards.

Amazing what dreams people have for a low selling product. I highly doubt that Apple spent millions on this hobby. It doesn't take much to write some software and build a cheap logic board based on an outdated Pentium processor.

1) Yes I have a DVD (well xbox) but like a lot of people I want to minimize the number of box's and remotes I have.
2) Yes I have heard of handbrake but only because I'm a computer geek. The average person will be expecting iTunes to do it.
3) Why shouldn't it be a set top box? It's not like any of these ideas arnt already availiable in cheaper alternatives. Maybe not all together but the fact is so far despite being positioned to be able to sell the most has so far come up with the worst set of features and priced it at the top.
post #162 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

So many stupid people.

1) "AppleTV should have a DVD player" Why? Don't you already own a DVD player?

Only so many plugs on a TV. Besides, isn't Apple's philosophy combining multiple devices into a single box?

Quote:
2) "AppleTV should let me import my DVDs" You would have to be living in a cave if you have never heard of HandBrake.

The problem is that 99% of iTunes users live in that cave. And besides, handbrake doesn't always work. The users want an iTunes based solution

One of the main reasons digital music caught on was because you could seamlessly import your library.

Quote:
3) "AppleTV should be a cable/sat box with DVR." Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes.

And the customers have said no thanks in its current form. So, Apple, what else you got?

Quote:
Amazing what dreams people have for a low selling product. I highly doubt that Apple spent millions on this hobby. It doesn't take much to write some software and build a cheap logic board based on an outdated Pentium processor.

"Hobby" is a complete and utter copout. It only became a "hobby" after the users rejected it. The dreaded listening to the customers thing turned a very expensive and limited device into Apple's most important product.
post #163 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Not surprised. The Airport is well built and stylish, but prohibitively expensive. Knock $50 off of it and the 1TB time capsule as well as $100 off the 2TB capsule and they would sell very well.

As for AppleTV. Unless the movie studios permit Apple to give it the ability to import your DVDs, its not going to catch on, especially at $230. In a lineup of integrated multi-use devices, its a one trick pony that requires a separate DVD or Blu-ray player for your current movies, a PVR for recording your shows or games, and video game console if you want to do that. Combine one, two, or all of these features, or integrate it into TVs and it would sell much better.

totally agree Ben... the price needs to be dropped, capacity increased to at least 1tb and bluray functionality added along with FREESAT so we can move away from SKY in UK

Apple got the ipod market, phone market but are missing out on "one box under tv" market.

but unlike cheap handhelds once you have sold 1 ATV you may buy one for the bedroom but not more unless required, Apple are probably thinking how we can get more money from us.

ooops just saw above post as well... we share the same sentiments, atv is pretty crap as it is (agreed its highly polished for what it can do) but we need the above functionality to take stage under the plasma/lcd/oled whatever we have chosen as our media
post #164 of 212
"AppleTV should let me import my DVDs"

In the US and many other countries it is illegal to make, sell or distribute any software/hardware that will let you circumvent copy protection systems such as the copy protection on DVD movies. In the US this is part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

RealNetworks is challenging this in the courts so it might change in future; however for now, Apple is by federal law not allowed to add the ability to import a DVD to either iTunes or the AppleTV.
post #165 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Macs already have HDCP in the hardware as you can run Windows on a Mac with a BRD an play at full resolution. If You say Apple won't support it on OS X then that excludes the AppleTV which happens to be the closest flavour of OS X to Mac OS.

in that case the HDCP is contained within the running Windows OS, not OS X. the only hardware aspect of HDCP is the HDMI output - which Macs don't have. yes, AppleTV is HDCP compliant, including the HDMI output. it is running a version of Tiger, OS X 10.4, which clearly has been modified accordingly.
post #166 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

"AppleTV should let me import my DVDs"

In the US and many other countries it is illegal to make, sell or distribute any software/hardware that will let you circumvent copy protection systems such as the copy protection on DVD movies. In the US this is part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

RealNetworks is challenging this in the courts so it might change in future; however for now, Apple is by federal law not allowed to add the ability to import a DVD to either iTunes or the AppleTV.

Not exactly. yes, it is illegal to copy a copyrighted DVD. but it is perfectly legal to copy any non-copyrighted DVD. like one you made yourself from your camcorder video. and making/copying DVD's of TV shows you already recorded on a DVR is a gray zone.

Roxio's Toast already has all this parsed into a specific set of options for its DVD copying functions which have been validated as legal, so i suggest you check its manual for the details.

Whatever Roxio is doing, Apple could do as well.
post #167 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

in that case the HDCP is contained within the running Windows OS, not OS X. the only hardware aspect of HDCP is the HDMI output - which Macs don't have. yes, AppleTV is HDCP compliant, including the HDMI output. it is running a version of Tiger, OS X 10.4, which clearly has been modified accordingly.

You're forgetting DVI and DP use of HDCP. I think your confusing AACS and HDCP.

Plus, doesn't iTS HD content use HDCP?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #168 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

Not exactly. yes, it is illegal to copy a copyrighted DVD. but it is perfectly legal to copy any non-copyrighted DVD. like one you made yourself from your camcorder video. and making/copying DVD's of TV shows you already recorded on a DVR is a gray zone.

Roxio's Toast already has all this parsed into a specific set of options for its DVD copying functions which have been validated as legal, so i suggest you check its manual for the details.

Whatever Roxio is doing, Apple could do as well.

Think about what you're saying. Where did this non-copyrighted DVD from a camcorder come from? Likely from a PC after the file was uploaded onto the HDD then edited, perhaps with iMovie. If you already have I there and you already have a media extender, then why go out of your way to burn a DVD just to play it in said media extender? It's illogical. Plus, how many ODD players does one need in their home entertainment system?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #169 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'd like to see 3rd-party apps for the AppleTV but I think one of two things need to happen first.

1) They need to get a large enough user base in plae so developers will come.

2) They'll need to alter te iPhone SDK in some very amazing ways in order to simulate every touch screen action with a remote if you expect every game to simple work great on the AppleTV. Frankly, I don't see it.

i don't understand. if AppleTV could mirror your iPhone screen on a TV, then effectively the apps already exist for it. the only issue is the screen resolution. 480x320p won't look good on a TV.

The AppleTV could upscale iPhone apps display to better than SD quality 720x480p, which would be better than the Wii. it already has such upscaling capability built in.

that would all be compatible with iPhone 3.x.

but alternatively, if a new higher resolution optional iPhone app display spec is going to be established for the new Tablet and iPhone 4.x, like 1080x720p, that of course would look really good on your HDTV too. and the AppleTV already is optimized for 720p content display.

and the rumor is that Apple has already asked some iPhone app developers for higher resolution demos to show off this month.

and of course, the basic idea is the iPhone itself would be the remote control. the apps could be actually running just on the iPhone. all the AppleTV would need to do is "sling" the iPhone screen image to your TV. we know the iPhone screen display can be outputted already by cable (there is an app now to do that on jailbroken iPhones). so all that is needed is to do it wirelessly (blutooth or wifi).
post #170 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I am sure the HDTV market gets more accepted every day, but what is the current marketshare compared to SDTV or EDTV? Id say its high enough to not worry about it. You also have to consider that Apple isnt selling the device to everyone who has a TV but to everyone who buys Apples premium products, which would more likely fall to people that started buying HDTV many years ago.

Is there still SDTV? When my grandmother bought her HDTV set last year, I figured the SDTV market was over.

On a side note, now that the digital transition is over, are we going to finally see the content providers paying for throughput instead of a per customer basis from the cable companies? Here in NY Food Network and HGTV were pulled because Cablevision isn't paying enough per subscriber.

Their (content providers) revenue streams are drying up because no one feels like paying for advertising on a medium that doesn't guarantee watchers. If the model would switch to network usage per broadcaster, instead of per subscriber, I think you'd see the AppleTV be a Studios favorite. Until then, the big studios aren't sure what they can make off of it, and are steering clear of contracts for it. They don't want to make the same "mistakes" as the music business did
post #171 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

i don't understand. if AppleTV could mirror your iPhone screen on a TV, then effectively the apps already exist for it. the only issue is the screen resolution. 480x320p won't look good on a TV.

Gotcha. You literally mean mirroring from your iPhone. Apple already allows this for videos.

Explain to me how I can play Tap Tap Revenge on my iPhone while looking only at my HDTV. There is a problem with going from the sight required touchscreen to now having to guess where your finger will likely end up. If you say you look at the iPhone screen then why have the external display except for others to watch you play the game. What about portrait v. lanscape mode on the TV? What about the length of the cable when using game that require you to move your device rapidly because it uses the accelorometer?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #172 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You're forgetting DVI and DP use of HDCP. I think your confusing AACS and HDCP.

Plus, doesn't iTS HD content use HDCP?

As i wrote earlier, the HDCP "flag" that would limit output options for protected content has never actually be activated. (the industry is worried about a consumer backlash against BluRay before it can replace DVD's as the consumer standard). so yes, right now you can output protected content via DVI to a display in some cases. but if that flag is ever triggered for a specific piece of content, then you will not be able to do that.

HDCP and AACS are the two halves of the overall DRM system. AACS is the literal DRM for the content files and their decoding. while HDCP is the pathway control after decoding, both within the OS and on the hardware, so you can't somehow hijack and copy the content post-decoding.

the fully-protected Sony PS3 for example will not allow you now to somehow convert its HDMI output to a display via DVI. has to be an HDMI display, which means the display is fully HDCP compliant and won't let you somehow hijack its image.
post #173 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Gotcha. You literally mean mirroring from your iPhone. Apple already allows this for videos.

Explain to me how I can play Tap Tap Revenge on my iPhone while looking only at my HDTV. There is a problem with going from the sight required touchscreen to now having to guess where your finger will likely end up. If you say you look at the iPhone screen then why have the external display except for others to watch you play the game. What about portrait v. lanscape mode on the TV? What about the length of the cable when using game that require you to move your device rapidly because it uses the accelorometer?

Right, definitely not all iPhone games would work. but SuperMonkeyBall and many others baed mainly on the accelerometer would. and a new generation of games (or revised existing games) better optimized for this setup would soon appear. i didn't mention web browsing, but that would be the other big thing that would be great.

and right, landscape mode obviously would be preferred. but apps in portrait would still work, they just won't be visually enlarged as much.

No cable. has to be wireless, wifi or blutooth connection.

(the next big leap for the digital home will be getting rid of all those damn cables and cords.)
post #174 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit View Post

Is there still SDTV? When my grandmother bought her HDTV set last year, I figured the SDTV market was over.

i'm sure most viewership is on SD vontnt even if they ar watching on HDTVs, but I think that most small TVs are still SD. Being higher definition doesn't do much good but evetually the cost for a small HDTV will win out. That is how these things tend to work.

Quote:
On a side note, now that the digital transition is over, are we going to finally see the content providers paying for throughput instead of a per customer basis from the cable companies? Here in NY Food Network and HGTV were pulled because Cablevision isn't paying enough per subscriber.

Their (content providers) revenue streams are drying up because no one feels like paying for advertising on a medium that doesn't guarantee watchers. If the model would switch to network usage per broadcaster, instead of per subscriber, I think you'd see the AppleTV be a Studios favorite. Until then, the big studios aren't sure what they can make off of it, and are steering clear of contracts for it. They don't want to make the same "mistakes" as the music business did

Digital content appears to be growing considerably faster than anything else. My guess is that we'll see TV subsciption packages this way they push their new and unwanted content along with popular content to help boost channel profit. They do thi now but the alÃ* carte model in the hands of the consumer will make this even more pronounced. Perhaps even moving a popular show to an affiliate to balance out popular shows to maximize subsriber numbers. It's what I'd do.

I think we'll see a lot of media extenders at CES this year. Especially ones trying to capitalize on social networking. If you recall the initial AppleTV announcemet: it was called iTV, didn't get demoed for another 6 months, and was released 2 months after that. I feel this was to curry favour with the movie studios to allow content on the device by seeing a secure method and gauging consumer reaction. If that is true, then it didn't work out as planned. I think we'll see an entirely new AppleTV HW and SW in January. They give it up and they can't keep using the antiquanted model they have.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #175 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

No cable. has to be wireless, wifi or blutooth connection.

Sending 3D graphics to an HDTV over WiFi or BT? Not gonna happen. Your beat bet is hope for an AppleTV with Safari where you use your iPhone wirelessly to ONLY send text and accelorometer data like a Wii control with a virtual keyboard.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #176 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

As i wrote earlier, the HDCP "flag" that would limit output options for protected content has never actually be activated. (the industry is worried about a consumer backlash against BluRay before it can replace DVD's as the consumer standard). so yes, right now you can output protected content via DVI to a display in some cases. but if that flag is ever triggered for a specific piece of content, then you will not be able to do that.

HDCP and AACS are the two halves of the overall DRM system. AACS is the literal DRM for the content files and their decoding. while HDCP is the pathway control after decoding, both within the OS and on the hardware, so you can't somehow hijack and copy the content post-decoding.

the fully-protected Sony PS3 for example will not allow you now to somehow convert its HDMI output to a display via DVI. has to be an HDMI display, which means the display is fully HDCP compliant and won't let you somehow hijack its image.

I don't understand. It seems to me that the output limitation "flag" has indeed been turned on. For instance, try outputting HDCP compliant iTunes HD content to a non-compliant external screen. It won't play. You get an error message and a blank screen.
post #177 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


Digital content appears to be growing considerably faster than anything else.

What I meant by digital transition was all broadcasts are in fact now digital, meaning networks can be monitored for bandwidth usage just as the internet is. It's all packets now. What I've been saying on here and other places for a while is that they should move off of a content per subscriber model, and perhaps pay for throughput per "channel." Net neutrality, by my definition. Packets are packets whether they carry TV broadcasts or internet data. Or internet TV broadcasts
Let's say a local node of Fox uses 1TB an hour. Cablevision pays Fox for the TB of content, and charges it's customers accordingly for profit. Right now, the model doesn't work that way. By using polls and such, content providers say "oh we have x amount of viewers and you need to pay us y amount for the content then." Cablevision has to charge us to make up for that. The problem now is, advertisers are not paying what they used to, but the networks want more money. Cablevision says they aren't worth it, and are trying to limit price hikes, because they are already gouging us for television subscriptions.
I would assume now that all the information coming into my house is packets, there is in fact a way to know exactly what I'm watching and for how long. By measuring exactly what people use, there is no guesswork, and rates could be established based on true usage information.
post #178 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think we'll see a lot of media extenders at CES this year. Especially ones trying to capitalize on social networking. If you recall the initial AppleTV announcemet: it was called iTV, didn't get demoed for another 6 months, and was released 2 months after that. I feel this was to curry favour with the movie studios to allow content on the device by seeing a secure method and gauging consumer reaction. If that is true, then it didn't work out as planned. I think we'll see an entirely new AppleTV HW and SW in January. They give it up and they can't keep using the antiquanted model they have.

I hope we see some news in January concerning an Apple TV upgrade.

I think Apple expected that the movie studios would be all over the Apple TV when it first came out. Kind of like how the music studios teamed up with Apple for iTunes. Apple expected there to be all this content at reasonable prices and that consumers would eat it up. Movies and TV shows would be as successful as music.

Unfortunately it didn't work out very well. The studios were/are too reluctant to give Apple as much control over their content after seeing what happened with the music makers. That left the Apple TV as a very restricted device with limited, over-priced content.

Apple needs to let consumers use their own content with a new Apple TV for it to succeed. CD ripping made the iPod what it is today. The same can happen with a new Apple TV.

Even if Apple can't let people rip their own DVDs with iTunes(due to legalities), they can at least open up iTunes/Front Row/Apple TV to more video formats so people can rip stuff themselves and upload into iTunes. Then iTunes can organize the files and gather the meta-data. The iTunes can stream the media to a new, more open Apple TV.
post #179 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


Time Machine:

A lifesaver for those newbies who don't know anything about backing up. However since Time Machine isn't bootable, it's a pale solution to simply cloning your entire boot drive using Carbon Copy Cloner or other which is much superior as it also provides hardware protection as you can 'hold option' and boot from it.

This is true, in part, and because it's only partly true it can be misleading. Because there's no reason why someone can't use cloning software and tm in tandem, because time machine is not meant to be a cloner, but a versions backup. On top of that in super duper you can have a sandboxed version with everything but user files (which shouldn't be more than 20gb now with snow leopard) to boot up at any point and all your files can be catered by tm.

There are a lot of options.
post #180 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

Having never owned an Airport router of any kind, I have to ask those with experience: Are there really any functional advantages to Apple's routers (like ease of setup) that justify the much higher prices?

Well in my own experience, I have used in identical locations: NetGear, Apple, LinkSys, and Belkin wireless routers. In all those areas the Apple routers frankly performed better. It was easier to setup, it had as good or better range than most and has provided range in places where the others didn't, and has encountered fewer issues.

For example in one place I installed a Belkin router and occasionally we just get 5-10 seconds of nothing happening as if the router is stuck. The Apple router in the same spot works flawlessly.

I know these experiences are contrary to some other people which makes me think it depends where you are and what you're doing and possibly even how you arrange the network, but for me the Apple base stations are the only choice in most cases.
post #181 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I don't understand. It seems to me that the output limitation "flag" has indeed been turned on. For instance, try outputting HDCP compliant iTunes HD content to a non-compliant external screen. It won't play. You get an error message and a blank screen.

forgive the shorthand, this is a complex topic. the "flag" i referred to is for AACS protected content. Apple as you know uses its different FairPlay DRM system for iTunes, which is always in effect. but you are right, the ultimate result is the same, a blank screen. do you also get the blank screen if you use the ATV's component cable connections instead of its HDMI output?
post #182 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock View Post

I hope we see some news in January concerning an Apple TV upgrade.

almost no hope for this, darn. the upcoming Tablet unveiling event theme is reportedly "mobility," and ATV does not fit that at all.

but i bet there will be a big Fall event themed on the "home" somehow which will feature a revitalized AppleTV.

that would give Apple a good 1-2-3 punch for 2010 (with iPhone 4.0 in between).
post #183 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

forgive the shorthand, this is a complex topic. the "flag" i referred to is for AACS protected content. Apple as you know uses its different FairPlay DRM system for iTunes, which is always in effect. but you are right, the ultimate result is the same, a blank screen. do you also get the blank screen if you use the ATV's component cable connections instead of its HDMI output?

I am outputting from my MacBook Pro and I don't have an TV. I may get an TV soon. My guess is, no. But by now I've installed the HDCP drivers for my monitor (Viewsonic VX2433w), so I can't test analog results with my MacBook Pro even if I had a MDP to VGA adapter (I'm using MDP to DVI).
post #184 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

almost no hope for this, darn. the upcoming Tablet unveiling event theme is reportedly "mobility," and ATV does not fit that at all.

but i bet there will be a big Fall event themed on the "home" somehow which will feature a revitalized AppleTV.

that would give Apple a good 1-2-3 punch for 2010 (with iPhone 4.0 in between).

Apple could wait until the March event when they update the iPhone OS SDK for v4.0 and give us demo, which may work if the AppleTV gets an SDK, too. Or they could introduce the SDK and preview iPhone this month. We're only going by Apple's relatively short history but things are bound to change as needed.

Note that the "focusing on mobility" doesn't exclude stationary devices from being updated. I've also heard that Apple can't introduce two major product categories the same day but note tr original iPhone was demoed right after the AppleTV.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #185 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit View Post

What I meant by digital transition was all broadcasts are in fact now digital, meaning networks can be monitored for bandwidth usage just as the internet is. It's all packets now. What I've been saying on here and other places for a while is that they should move off of a content per subscriber model, and perhaps pay for throughput per "channel." Net neutrality, by my definition. Packets are packets whether they carry TV broadcasts or internet data. Or internet TV broadcasts
Let's say a local node of Fox uses 1TB an hour. Cablevision pays Fox for the TB of content, and charges it's customers accordingly for profit. Right now, the model doesn't work that way. By using polls and such, content providers say "oh we have x amount of viewers and you need to pay us y amount for the content then." Cablevision has to charge us to make up for that. The problem now is, advertisers are not paying what they used to, but the networks want more money. Cablevision says they aren't worth it, and are trying to limit price hikes, because they are already gouging us for television subscriptions.
I would assume now that all the information coming into my house is packets, there is in fact a way to know exactly what I'm watching and for how long. By measuring exactly what people use, there is no guesswork, and rates could be established based on true usage information.

For cable TV, the signal is is modulated, broadcasted, demodulated at the home and then it becomes a transport stream (digital, packets). There is no way to tell of the customer actually "used" the broadcast.

Unlike the internet which contains the "TCP" part of TCP/IP which the ISP can determine how much bandwidth is actually being used. So there isn't a way to determine how much the customer is watching without additional software to communicate that information back to the broadcaster.
post #186 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Sending 3D graphics to an HDTV over WiFi or BT? Not gonna happen. Your beat bet is hope for an AppleTV with Safari where you use your iPhone wirelessly to ONLY send text and accelorometer data like a Wii control with a virtual keyboard.

you don't send "3D graphics" to a TV (with an AppleTV in between to upscale and tweak it as needed). just need to output a video signal in a codec the TV can display. as i mentioned, the iPhone can already output such a video stream for display on a TV connected by cables (either component or composite).

here's the cable: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB128LL/B

this iPhone output is 480p. but the iPhone does not display the video image at the same time it is being output to the TV, the iPhone screen goes black. so that would need to be changed in order to mirror apps. the iPhone's "g" wifi has plenty bandwidth to transmit 480p video to an ATV.

however, apps are written for the iPhone's 480x320 display. (when you play a 640x480 SD video on an iPhone, it actually downscales it to that lower resolution.) so they would need to be upscaled by either the iPhone or the ATV, probably the latter.

480p is DVD/Wii quality - certainly good enough for iPhone games on an HDTV and ok for web browsing.

there are other more complicated ways to achieve the same visible results. whichever approach Apple might use to link your iPhone to your HDTV via AppleTV, it would be a hot new thing.
post #187 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

you don't send "3D graphics" to a TV (with an AppleTV in between to upscale and tweak it as needed). just need to output a video signal in a codec the TV can display. as i mentioned, the iPhone can already output such a video stream for display on a TV connected by cables (either component or composite).

here's the cable: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB128LL/B

this iPhone output is 480p. but the iPhone does not display the video image at the same time it is being output to the TV, the iPhone screen goes black. so that would need to be changed in order to mirror apps. the iPhone's "g" wifi has plenty bandwidth to transmit 480p video to an ATV.

however, apps are written for the iPhone's 480x320 display. (when you play a 640x480 SD video on an iPhone, it actually downscales it to that lower resolution.) so they would need to be upscaled by either the iPhone or the ATV, probably the latter.

480p is DVD/Wii quality - certainly good enough for iPhone games on an HDTV and ok for web browsing.

there are other more complicated ways to achieve the same visible results. whichever approach Apple might use to link your iPhone to your HDTV via AppleTV, it would be a hot new thing.

I don’t even know where to begin with your post and I doubt you’d understand anything I wrote so I concede that your idea is super brilliant and makes absolute perfect sense.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #188 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I don’t even know where to begin with your post and I doubt you’d understand anything I wrote so I concede that your idea is super brilliant and makes absolute perfect sense.

HAHAHAHHA

Super Awesome.



It had to be done
post #189 of 212
If NAS fails for any reason and it is not available then iLife applications start crashing even though you try hard to repoint to new source for same files (Why do i need this if I intend to create new project? Any sensible logic behind this design?)


I happen to run NAS with Airport Extreme. It is fast, but Apple iLife working wit this... Well i will spare tale of Apple bugs and design issues. If you wan to try what happens fdor your self then put your media files on NAS create few projects between iP{hoto, iMovie and iDVD from iLife '09 and also import yoir music and create few playlists in iTunes. Then disconnect NAS as if it failed permamently (which is simply a way of life). then create another NAS or add USB drive with all backup media and see recovery issues with iTunes/iLife for yourself.

Whant to recover hundreds of playlists that now are on different (backup) drive? Good luck and have a nice sleepless nights in manual fixing of thousands media "relinks".


BTW iLife in current form is effectively POS loaded with piles of features, but missing reliablity an having bugs that damage your artwork frequently in random fashion.

I am moving to Boinx FotoMagico and yes I prefer paying $300 for more relaible and really supported slideshow software with reliable HD export features to spare hours of workarounds on slideshow that used to take me 3) minutes in older iLife versions thna falll for fooolish statemet "Oh Mac comes with iLife that will allow you to have fun". It ain't fun anymore. It is as technical to workaround as working on PC with its funky ways that no user really need or should understand.

Appple is getting worse as far as software. I guess the team of original developers has changed and the current one needs to learn much about term "rliability".

Similarily some other products like Apple TV and Airport Extreme although the last one is much improved and very good.
post #190 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I dont even know where to begin with your post and I doubt youd understand anything I wrote so I concede that your idea is super brilliant and makes absolute perfect sense.

Thanks!
post #191 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

Game-console sales are driven by content, especially exclusive content. Nintendo has Wii Fit, Wii Sports and Mario. These are big name franchises and are only available on a Nintendo system. Casual games are simply not system sellers. If you have a AppleTV you might then buy casual games for it, but very few new customers will buy a AppleTV for casual gaming.

In addition, unless Apple sells a lot more AppleTVs (or at least get the public excited about it), developers won't bother with the platform and will focus their resources elsewhere.

Wii Sports and Wii Fit can easily be replicated and aren't real franchises. These are exactly the kind of games you can expect on AppleTV in addition to iPhone game ports. Mario is a franchise that leads to a lot of Nintendo sales and would be harder to replicate.

There are a lot of games on the iPhone that would work on an updated aTV. Even the older iPhone 3G could do SDTV...just at lower frame rates than you want. Heck, a game like Civ Colonization would be easy.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...ing-device.ars

Money quote:

"In the end, the entire development effort took about three hours."

With a 1Ghz hummingbird ARM and a PowerVR SGX and it can handle 480p games with decent framerates for any of the Wii Sports and Wii Fit style games. Not to mention any of the existing iPhone games that could be ported relatively easily.
post #192 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

if AppleTV allowed you to mirror your iPhone/touch games simultaneously on your big screen HDTV, that would be terrific fun. that would mean there are already tens of millions of game controllers in consumer homes today. that would mean there are already tens of thousands of games available - many being "exclusive content". that would mean kids and adults already have favorites and know how to play them. Then all they would need to bridge the connection wirelessly is a $229 AppleTV - which btw also does some other things too.

iPhone games keep becoming more varied and sophisticated. multiplayer games are now being developed too. yes, they are very different than traditional game counsel or PSP/DSI games - but that is actually a very compelling reason to buy them - something new and different! and the games prices are so much lower than Sony/Nintendo charge, it would undercut their market savagely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'd like to see 3rd-party apps for the AppleTV but I think one of two things need to happen first.

1) They need to get a large enough user base in plae so developers will come.

2) They'll need to alter te iPhone SDK in some very amazing ways in order to simulate every touch screen action with a remote if you expect every game to simple work great on the AppleTV. Frankly, I don't see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Sending 3D graphics to an HDTV over WiFi or BT? Not gonna happen. Your beat bet is hope for an AppleTV with Safari where you use your iPhone wirelessly to ONLY send text and accelorometer data like a Wii control with a virtual keyboard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I don’t even know where to begin with your post and I doubt you’d understand anything I wrote so I concede that your idea is super brilliant and makes absolute perfect sense.

No, the aTV plays the iPhone game natively since it runs the same CPU (ARM Cortex A8) and GPU (Power VR) and uses BT to connect to the iPhone or iPod Touch for controls.

As the link above shows, the enabling of the iPhone to TV for games is already in the Apple SDK.

Porting existing iPhone games to a ARM based aTV would be fairly easy. You'd need some new UI code and reuse the multi-player SDK support to connect to the aTV. A little more than the 3 hour Moto-Chaser proof of concept but not months and months.

I'll be pretty disappointed if Apple doesn't do this. The hardware and ecosystem are ready for it and it would really give their living room footprint a big boost. And that "full screen" rumor for apps is a hopeful indicator...and not just for the tablet.
post #193 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

No, the aTV plays the iPhone game natively since it runs the same CPU (ARM Cortex A8) and GPU (Power VR) and uses BT to connect to the iPhone or iPod Touch for controls.

As the link above shows, the enabling of the iPhone to TV for games is already in the Apple SDK.

Porting existing iPhone games to a ARM based aTV would be fairly easy. You'd need some new UI code and reuse the multi-player SDK support to connect to the aTV. A little more than the 3 hour Moto-Chaser proof of concept but not months and months.

I'll be pretty disappointed if Apple doesn't do this. The hardware and ecosystem are ready for it and it would really give their living room footprint a big boost. And that "full screen" rumor for apps is a hopeful indicator...and not just for the tablet.

Any iPhone game that has on-screen controls means that the iPhone needs to have the exact display as the TV. Besides this now requiring some super-syncing between the two via Bluetooth you still have the user looking at the phone for the controls, not the TV.

The only that will work is with games ONLY using the accelerometer and that seems a bit defeatist. I think well see an AppleTV OS SDK before we see some complete porting with display mirroring that makes no sense in any way shape or form.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #194 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Any iPhone game that has on-screen controls means that the iPhone needs to have the exact display as the TV. Besides this now requiring some super-syncing between the two via Bluetooth you still have the user looking at the phone for the controls, not the TV.

The only that will work is with games ONLY using the accelerometer and that seems a bit defeatist. I think well see an AppleTV OS SDK before we see some complete porting with display mirroring that makes no sense in any way shape or form.

"Using the iPhone as a controller opens up any number of new possibilities. When you use a wiimote as a controller, you can imagine it is a fishing reel or a katana but there's nothing visual on the controller itself that really tells you what it's being used as. With the iPhone, its visual screen offers a way to expand game play into your hands. "Imagine using the iPhone with Gears of War," Morrison said. "You could show your weapon inventory directly on the touch screen. For now it's just a matter of waiting for the technology to catch up. There's lots of potential for future development." He felt that the iPhone's accelerometer could at least equal the Play Station 3's six axis input if pushed to its limit."

From that ars article. Given it's from an iphone game dev I think it shows there are valid possibilities.

Current real world example:

http://mashable.com/2008/11/17/ifun/

The lack of tactile buttons requires larger buttons on the iphone interface. You might also see physical dpad extensions for the iphone.



It's not as hard as you think.
post #195 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

"Using the iPhone as a controller opens up any number of new possibilities. When you use a wiimote as a controller, you can imagine it is a fishing reel or a katana but there's nothing visual on the controller itself that really tells you what it's being used as. With the iPhone, its visual screen offers a way to expand game play into your hands. "Imagine using the iPhone with Gears of War," Morrison said. "You could show your weapon inventory directly on the touch screen. For now it's just a matter of waiting for the technology to catch up. There's lots of potential for future development." He felt that the iPhone's accelerometer could at least equal the Play Station 3's six axis input if pushed to its limit."

From that ars article. Given it's from an iphone game dev I think it shows there are valid possibilities.

Current real world example:

http://mashable.com/2008/11/17/ifun/

The lack of tactile buttons requires larger buttons on the iphone interface. You might also see physical dpad extensions for the iphone.



It's not as hard as you think.

I agree that using the accelerometer isnt difficult and have stated as such. The original poster stated that the iPhone display and graphics would MIRROR what is on the TV and all being pushed wirelessly. That simply wont happen.

I can see some large buttons on the iPhone display which would make it fairly easy to use without looking, but that still requires a rewrite to have the game now play on the HDTVin landscape, have the iPhone work as a remote and the app now be just some big buttons. I cant see Apple doing that.

I can see them making an SDK for the next AppleTV. I can see them offer wireless controllers for the device or making an iPhone app that is just a standard wireless control that AppleTV developers can tape into with an API.

That concept looks like a device is nothing like what was previously discussed. That is a hardware add-on with hardware buttons that dont require constant visual contact to use. That is a completely different usage model.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #196 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

As i wrote earlier, the HDCP "flag" that would limit output options for protected content has never actually be activated. (the industry is worried about a consumer backlash against BluRay before it can replace DVD's as the consumer standard). so yes, right now you can output protected content via DVI to a display in some cases. but if that flag is ever triggered for a specific piece of content, then you will not be able to do that.

ICT is part of AACS, not HDCP


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

the fully-protected Sony PS3 for example will not allow you now to somehow convert its HDMI output to a display via DVI. has to be an HDMI display, which means the display is fully HDCP compliant and won't let you somehow hijack its image.

Which model of the PS3 is the fully-protected one you talk about?
post #197 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

in that case the HDCP is contained within the running Windows OS, not OS X. the only hardware aspect of HDCP is the HDMI output - which Macs don't have. yes, AppleTV is HDCP compliant, including the HDMI output. it is running a version of Tiger, OS X 10.4, which clearly has been modified accordingly.

There is HDCP support on OSX, Apple exposed it when they wrongfully blocked content to the VGA port on those machines rather than downsizing it.
post #198 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I agree that using the accelerometer isnt difficult and have stated as such. The original poster stated that the iPhone display and graphics would MIRROR what is on the TV and all being pushed wirelessly. That simply wont happen.

Meh...you can given the low resolution. Frame rates would be low and it would be something of a bandwidth hog depending on how it's done. But I agree, no one would bother doing it that way. Especially given that an ARM based aTV could run the apps natively.

Connecting the iPhone to the aTV is no different than what iFun did for their games.

This one has a working movie.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/17...me-controller/

Quote:
I can see some large buttons on the iPhone display which would make it fairly easy to use without looking, but that still requires a rewrite to have the game now play on the HDTVin landscape, have the iPhone work as a remote and the app now be just some big buttons. I cant see Apple doing that.

Not that much rework.

Quote:
I can see them making an SDK for the next AppleTV. I can see them offer wireless controllers for the device or making an iPhone app that is just a standard wireless control that AppleTV developers can tape into with an API.

As you say, Apple does that with the remote already and it doesn't require that the iphone show the same image as is on the screen. For many games this would work fine. You could also use the iPhone as simply a touch and gesture pad for cursor position and commands.

That's a lot better user interaction than on the Wii. You don't need to look at the iPhone any more than you normally look at your trackpad.

Quote:
That concept looks like a device is nothing like what was previously discussed. That is a hardware add-on with hardware buttons that dont require constant visual contact to use. That is a completely different usage model.

But one already expected for the iPhone family at some point for a better gaming experience. If and when that happens that would also translate into making the iPhone and Touch a better controller.
post #199 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

"AppleTV should let me import my DVDs"

In the US and many other countries it is illegal to make, sell or distribute any software/hardware that will let you circumvent copy protection systems such as the copy protection on DVD movies. In the US this is part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

RealNetworks is challenging this in the courts so it might change in future; however for now, Apple is by federal law not allowed to add the ability to import a DVD to either iTunes or the AppleTV.

That is circumvented if they get an agreement with the movie studios. Not to say they haven't tried, but with its current functionality, aTV isn't an easy sell.
post #200 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

There is HDCP support on OSX, Apple exposed it when they wrongfully blocked content to the VGA port on those machines rather than downsizing it.

yes, i was disappointed to just learn that the new Mini Display Port enforces HDCP. but just with the Apple FairPlay DRM on HD movies, not AACS DRM'd media.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple TV 3.0 update not helping sales as AirPort routers lose share