Doesn't it seem obvious that, regardless of HDTV plans, Apple has to release an Airplay-compatible computer display (or 2 or 3) alongside the release of Mountain Lion?
2) Apple loves simplicity; reducing clutter and cutting cords is part of that
3) They appear to be setting the stage for HDTV market entrance, gradually, a piece at a time, so when it comes, it will only require a couple of final moves; an Airplay Display would seem to fit well as a penultimate piece of the HDTV puzzle
4) Announcing new display hardware in tandem with Mountain Lion is a nice way to goose its release; and let's not forget, the bulk of Apple's revenues come from hardware, so new displays for Mountain Lion could = BIG $$$
2) Apple loves simplicity; reducing clutter and cutting cords is part of that
Interesting, but how would you actually connect the display to do tha–OH RIGHT, Apple doesn't care about Mac Pro users or Mac Mini users. Carry on; I guess that is possible.
Quote:
3) They appear to be setting the stage for HDTV market entrance
Sure as heck hope not.
Oh, and how do they expect to push 2560x1440 over the air (and higher, given the "Retina Macs" rumor)? It would require 802.11ac at MINIMUM, plus you can forget about playing any online games (and many games in general) on such a monitor.
Apple doesn't care about Mac Pro users or Mac Mini users
Why would Pro or Mini users be prevented from using an Airplay display? All they need is access to the same network, right? In fact, it seems this sort of display would be great for Mini and Pro users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
how do they expect to push 2560x1440 over the air
They probably don't, perhaps limiting it to 1920x1080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
you can forget about playing any online games (and many games in general) on such a monitor
Why? This works fine today with iOS devices and AppleTV.
Why would Pro or Mini users be prevented from using an Airplay display?
Can't use it as a primary is what I'm saying. Apple can't plan a future where their displays only have one cable (power) and are connected wirelessly if their computers don't have any means by which to see what's going on to connect these displays in the first place (laptops and iMacs are simple, obviously).
And no one else's computers will ever rely on wireless displays of any sort, so they can forget selling to ANYONE but Mac users if they do that.
Quote:
They probably don't, perhaps limiting it to 1920x1080
Then what's the point?
Quote:
Why? This works fine today with iOS devices and AppleTV.
Lag City, USA. Population: anyone who tries to use wireless solution for real-time situations.
Apple can't plan a future where their displays only have one cable (power)
Yes, there would need to be an alternate connector on the display, just as an AppleTV let's you connect via ethernet OR wifi.
Quote:
they can forget selling to ANYONE but Mac users
Who else is there?
But, seriously, that didn't stop them with the Thunderbolt display. And, as long as there's an alternate connection method, that won't be a concern.
Quote:
Lag City, USA.
I don't know. Airplay performance is amazingly fast when I use it. And there are techniques for getting around the lag problem. I mean look at OnLive. They're doing all the top console games streaming over the internet.
I hear what you're saying, but? USB has been out for over a year. Do you know the % of computers that support it today?
It's the EXACT same situation with an identical argument.
Apple and Intel are fully behind Thunderbolt. Does anyone remember what happened the last time that both Apple and Intel got behind a port? Oh, that's right. USB happened.
My main point is simply that the business dynamics of having the display be Mac-only, at least for a good chunk of time, did not get in the way of releasing a Thunderbolt display and therefore probably wouldn't get in the way of an Airplay display.
Comments
2) Apple loves simplicity; reducing clutter and cutting cords is part of that
3) They appear to be setting the stage for HDTV market entrance, gradually, a piece at a time, so when it comes, it will only require a couple of final moves; an Airplay Display would seem to fit well as a penultimate piece of the HDTV puzzle
4) Announcing new display hardware in tandem with Mountain Lion is a nice way to goose its release; and let's not forget, the bulk of Apple's revenues come from hardware, so new displays for Mountain Lion could = BIG $$$
1) Mountain Lion features Airplay Mirroring
2) Apple loves simplicity; reducing clutter and cutting cords is part of that
Interesting, but how would you actually connect the display to do tha–OH RIGHT, Apple doesn't care about Mac Pro users or Mac Mini users. Carry on; I guess that is possible.
3) They appear to be setting the stage for HDTV market entrance
Sure as heck hope not.
Oh, and how do they expect to push 2560x1440 over the air (and higher, given the "Retina Macs" rumor)? It would require 802.11ac at MINIMUM, plus you can forget about playing any online games (and many games in general) on such a monitor.
Apple doesn't care about Mac Pro users or Mac Mini users
Why would Pro or Mini users be prevented from using an Airplay display? All they need is access to the same network, right? In fact, it seems this sort of display would be great for Mini and Pro users.
how do they expect to push 2560x1440 over the air
They probably don't, perhaps limiting it to 1920x1080
you can forget about playing any online games (and many games in general) on such a monitor
Why? This works fine today with iOS devices and AppleTV.
Why would Pro or Mini users be prevented from using an Airplay display?
Can't use it as a primary is what I'm saying. Apple can't plan a future where their displays only have one cable (power) and are connected wirelessly if their computers don't have any means by which to see what's going on to connect these displays in the first place (laptops and iMacs are simple, obviously).
And no one else's computers will ever rely on wireless displays of any sort, so they can forget selling to ANYONE but Mac users if they do that.
They probably don't, perhaps limiting it to 1920x1080
Then what's the point?
Why? This works fine today with iOS devices and AppleTV.
Lag City, USA. Population: anyone who tries to use wireless solution for real-time situations.
Apple can't plan a future where their displays only have one cable (power)
Yes, there would need to be an alternate connector on the display, just as an AppleTV let's you connect via ethernet OR wifi.
they can forget selling to ANYONE but Mac users
Who else is there?
But, seriously, that didn't stop them with the Thunderbolt display. And, as long as there's an alternate connection method, that won't be a concern.
Lag City, USA.
I don't know. Airplay performance is amazingly fast when I use it. And there are techniques for getting around the lag problem. I mean look at OnLive. They're doing all the top console games streaming over the internet.
But, seriously, that didn't stop them with the Thunderbolt display.
The difference there is Thunderbolt will eventually be supported by 100% of computers. AirPlay may not be.
Thunderbolt will eventually be supported by 100% of computers.
I hear what you're saying, but... Thunderbolt's been out for over a year. Do you know the % of computers that support it today?
I hear what you're saying, but? USB has been out for over a year. Do you know the % of computers that support it today?
It's the EXACT same situation with an identical argument.
Apple and Intel are fully behind Thunderbolt. Does anyone remember what happened the last time that both Apple and Intel got behind a port? Oh, that's right. USB happened.
Very funny.
My main point is simply that the business dynamics of having the display be Mac-only, at least for a good chunk of time, did not get in the way of releasing a Thunderbolt display and therefore probably wouldn't get in the way of an Airplay display.