Remote control iPad interface reportedly outlined for rumored Apple HDTV

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
An uncorroborated report claims to have knowledge of how Apple is planning to use the iPad with a much rumored unannounced television, saying that the tablet will run dedicated remote control apps featuring an enhanced UI.

An industry source gave a second-hand account of the tablet-as-remote functionality to Business Insider, outlining how the iPad will reportedly be used as a channel-surfing tool for an Apple television set rumored to be in development.

Despite having a somewhat dubious origin, the information is the first of its kind and offers a glimpse as to what Apple may be working on regarding the HDTV's user interface.

The source claims that the iPad will be running special apps that will allow users to scan media content through a GUI akin to that seen on the existing TiVo app and its set-box counterpart. The system is "early stage" and could be merely a working model for Apple engineers.

Specific channels are said to have their own app that displays extra content and information on the iPad in concert with regular programming. For example, while watching ESPN, dedicated app would possibly show upcoming games, provide statistics or offer show information that would otherwise clutter the HDTV's screen. Current versions of the system are said to not contain extended content as the apps have not been sufficiently developed.

An obvious concern with this system is the amount of apps that will reside on a user's iPad as current cable providers offer hundreds of channels which would each require their own software. The notion of having to launch a new app for each channel change seems cumbersome at best. Perhaps more likely would be a single remote app that change channel, pull extra content and schedule recordings.

TiVo app
Apple's iPad remote control interface will reportedly resemble the current TiVo app. | Source: TiVo


Development of Apple's HDTV is rumored to be well underway, though conflicting reports have yet to pinpoint a release window. Most recently Apple was reported to be in talks with Disney to bring WatchESPN content to the iPad maker's current set-top streaming device.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    O~r it's just an updated Remote app for the Apple TV.

  • Reply 2 of 21
    irelandireland Posts: 17,547member


    I'd rather have a simple remote like the one they have, but with bluetooth. MUCH rather!

  • Reply 3 of 21
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member


    They will still need a dedicated hardware remote.  the problem with using the remote app is the whole "waking it up and waiting for it to connect to the network" thing.  This is easily 10 seconds or so every time and then when you put it back down it falls asleep and turns off in four or five seconds.  


     


    Next time you want to change channels ... wait ten seconds again.  It's really not that convenient at all.  

  • Reply 4 of 21
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    O~r it's just an updated Remote app for the Apple TV.





    What will you do if Apple does announce a TV?  If they have no interest in selling a television they're sure not doing anything to dampen the speculation (like Tim Cook did with the MacBook Air/iPad convergence).

  • Reply 5 of 21
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    They will still need a dedicated hardware remote.  the problem with using the remote app is the whole "waking it up and waiting for it to connect to the network" thing.  This is easily 10 seconds or so every time and then when you put it back down it falls asleep and turns off in four or five seconds.  


     


    Next time you want to change channels ... wait ten seconds again.  It's really not that convenient at all.  





    I think an iPad type remote is great when searching for things where you're typing in the name of the program.  Because then you have a keypad rather than having to up/down/left/right arrow to type out a word.  But just for changing channels, accessing the channel guide, or recorded programs on DVR a hardware remote makes the most sense.

  • Reply 6 of 21
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

    What will you do if Apple does announce a TV?


     


    Decide that I'm not going to buy any Apple stock after all. I'd rather watch the company lose $200 billion than be on the ride as it happens.


     


    Quote:


    If they have no interest in selling a television they're sure not doing anything to dampen the speculation (like Tim Cook did with the MacBook Air/iPad convergence).



     


    Because Apple doesn't do that. A compound AiPad is ludicrously asinine. Do you have a link to where he did that? I'm certainly not doubting you, I just don't remember when that happened.

  • Reply 7 of 21


    How is scrolling through a bunch of apps harder than scrolling through a program guide one painfully slow page at a time?

  • Reply 8 of 21
    8corewhore8corewhore Posts: 833member
    First of all most people don't want hundreds of channels. And channel types can go into categories.
  • Reply 9 of 21
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,205member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    O~r it's just an updated Remote app for the Apple TV.



     


    Yep and it's more likely to look just like the Remote app does now with perhaps a first scene that has the same buttons as the Apple TV interface. Or it might just be the Apple TV interface 100%. At least when you are using it linked to your Apple TV. You could also be using it with iTunes on your computer and then it might look like that interface. 

  • Reply 10 of 21
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,205member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post




    What will you do if Apple does announce a TV?  If they have no interest in selling a television they're sure not doing anything to dampen the speculation (like Tim Cook did with the MacBook Air/iPad convergence).



     


    If they were to do anything it wouldn't matter cause folks would just trot out the whole "Steve Jobs said they would never put video on an iPod and then they did it a year later" to show that Cook is almost certainly lying. 

  • Reply 11 of 21
    msimpsonmsimpson Posts: 452member


    I hope Steve cracked the problem of having the iPad slide down under the couch cushions.

  • Reply 12 of 21
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Because Apple doesn't do that. A compound AiPad is ludicrously asinine. Do you have a link to where he did that? I'm certainly not doubting you, I just don't remember when that happened.



    When asked by Richard Gardner of Citigroup whether Apple will eventually converge its iPad and MacBook Air products into a single computing device combining the portability of a tablet with the functionality of a keyboard and full desktop operating system, Cook dismissed the idea as poorly conceived.


     


    "Anything can be forced to converge," Cook answered. "But the problem is that the products are about tradeoffs. You begin to make tradeoffs to the point where what you have left at the end of the day doesn't please anyone."



    Cook quipped "you can converge a toaster and a refrigerator, but you know, those things are probably not going to be pleasing to the user."


     


    Cook added, "Our view is that the tablet market is huge," noting that Apple realized this before the iPad ever went on sale, just from observing how broadly useful the tablet device was in internal testing. 




    "The iPad has taken off, not only in consumer [markets] in a meaningful way," Cook stated, "but in education and in enterprise, and its sort of everywhere you look now."



    Additionally, "as the ecosystem gets better and better and as we double down on making great products, I think the limit here is nowhere in sight."


     


    Cook also stated that he also sees tremendous potential for conventional systems like the MacBook Air, noting that "we continue to innovate in that product. But I do think that it appeals to someone that has a little bit different requirements. 




    "You wouldn't want to put these things together because you end up compromising in both and not pleasing either user. Some people will prefer to own both, and that's great too. But to make the compromise of convergence, we're not going to that party. 



    "Others might, from a defensive point of view particularly," Cook said, a clear dig at Microsoft's strategy of offering one converged product line under Windows 8 while advertising that it will offer 'compromise free' computing. 



    "We're going to play above," Cook stated.


     


    http://www.appleinsider.com/print/12/04/24/tim_cook_says_windows_8_style_tablet_pc_convergence_wont_please_anyone.html

  • Reply 13 of 21
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


    When asked by Richard Gardner of Citigroup whether Apple will eventually converge its iPad and MacBook Air products into a single computing device combining the portability of a tablet with the functionality of a keyboard and full desktop operating system, Cook dismissed the idea as poorly conceived.


     


    "Anything can be forced to converge," Cook answered. "But the problem is that the products are about tradeoffs. You begin to make tradeoffs to the point where what you have left at the end of the day doesn't please anyone."



    Cook quipped "you can converge a toaster and a refrigerator, but you know, those things are probably not going to be pleasing to the user."


     


    Cook added, "Our view is that the tablet market is huge," noting that Apple realized this before the iPad ever went on sale, just from observing how broadly useful the tablet device was in internal testing. 




    "The iPad has taken off, not only in consumer [markets] in a meaningful way," Cook stated, "but in education and in enterprise, and its sort of everywhere you look now."



    Additionally, "as the ecosystem gets better and better and as we double down on making great products, I think the limit here is nowhere in sight."


     


    Cook also stated that he also sees tremendous potential for conventional systems like the MacBook Air, noting that "we continue to innovate in that product. But I do think that it appeals to someone that has a little bit different requirements. 




    "You wouldn't want to put these things together because you end up compromising in both and not pleasing either user. Some people will prefer to own both, and that's great too. But to make the compromise of convergence, we're not going to that party. 



    "Others might, from a defensive point of view particularly," Cook said, a clear dig at Microsoft's strategy of offering one converged product line under Windows 8 while advertising that it will offer 'compromise free' computing. 



    "We're going to play above," Cook stated.


     


    http://www.appleinsider.com/print/12/04/24/tim_cook_says_windows_8_style_tablet_pc_convergence_wont_please_anyone.html



     


    Thanks!



    And that certainly shows that he didn't at all debunk anything directly. He used it as an in-company analogy, like his comment on the froaster. 

  • Reply 14 of 21
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    An uncorroborated report claims to have knowledge...


     


    I'm sorry, but this differs from own uncorroborated report which claims to have knowledge that the soon-to-be-released Apple TV panel will actually come with a stylus.

  • Reply 15 of 21
    pmcdpmcd Posts: 393member
    The whole Apple TV thing makes no sense at all, for now at least. They have no content, people do not want to use an iPad or even an iPhone as a controller and TV's are now at commodity prices. People will not pay double for an AppleTV. This has to be the craziest hobby one can think of. It's one think to tinker with $100 but quite another when it comes to $2000.

    The cable companies will not give up their monopolies that easily. Just look at the rumors surrounding access to Hulu being linked to a cable subscription.

    Anything is possible but I just don't see it. People are already annoyed with the price of cable and think they will pay less with an a la carte approach. Good luck with that.

    Google TV, Boxee Box, etc .... seem to be massive failures. Making things easier to use won't get people to buy. You need content that is trailered to the iPanel and that doesn't exist yet.

    Philip

    Note: By cable I mean all of the usual culprits.
  • Reply 16 of 21
    nchianchia Posts: 122member


    Exactly what did you think all those 7.85" panels were for? It's the remote control!

  • Reply 17 of 21
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member


    I've never understood the appeal of using a phone or tablet as a remote control.  With a regular remote, I pick it up, hit stop/any button I like, and I'm done. Takes a second.


     


    With a phone/tablet, I have to pick it up, unlock it, find the remote app, wait for it to load, then touch a clunky virtual button.  It's slow, cumbersome, and a big step backwards.

  • Reply 18 of 21
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,435member
    He used it as an in-company analogy, like his comment on the froaster. 

    Nice portmanteau! (had a mind-black-out for a sec and had to look that word up. Then I came across this one:

    Rinderkennzeichnungs- und Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz

    Wiki

    edit: Longest word in English: 189,819 letters (the protein Titin)
  • Reply 19 of 21
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,343member


    History has just been made!


    AI have run their first article since last October mentioning the AppleTV set without mentioning how Steve Jobs had "cracked the TV control".

  • Reply 20 of 21
    bmason1270bmason1270 Posts: 258member
    pmcd wrote: »
    The whole Apple TV thing makes no sense at all, for now at least. They have no content, people do not want to use an iPad or even an iPhone as a controller and TV's are now at commodity prices. People will not pay double for an AppleTV. This has to be the craziest hobby one can think of. It's one think to tinker with $100 but quite another when it comes to $2000.
    The cable companies will not give up their monopolies that easily. Just look at the rumors surrounding access to Hulu being linked to a cable subscription.
    Anything is possible but I just don't see it. People are already annoyed with the price of cable and think they will pay less with an a la carte approach. Good luck with that.
    Google TV, Boxee Box, etc .... seem to be massive failures. Making things easier to use won't get people to buy. You need content that is trailered to the iPanel and that doesn't exist yet.
    Philip
    Note: By cable I mean all of the usual culprits.

    I've mentioned it in another thread. I think the only way Apple can deliver the content that we think they should or want is to buy Dish Network.

    Otherwise dealing with the cable companies is a bag of hurt.
Sign In or Register to comment.