I think Apple TV supports "1080P HD". By no means do I have a perfect record in predicting Apple products but it certainly seems like time to introduce a 4K-capable model of Apple TV and hopefully also start selling a 4K monitor for a reasonable price. I think Dell now sells a 4K for $699 but it has a 30 Hz refresh rate which is considered slow. Perhaps Apple plans to announce a $999 (or no worse than $1299) 4K monitor with a better refresh rate.
Does anyone know if there are any Internet-based content providers that provide online video at 4K? Could Apple start selling some iTunes movies at a 4K resolution? Are there any movies that were filmed in 4K? I just did some web research and found that a 4K movie takes 40 GB to transfer, which means very few people would be able to download a 4K movie. So I don't think this is a likely scenario for popular use until the average person gets a data cap of at least 200 GB/month. I just can't see how 4K movies can viably be sold online yet. I can't see how Apple would allow multiple downloads of a 40 GB movie.
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
The problem that Apple is not going to solve is how to get content on the internet and off of cable... the problem is to make all content be controlled by the appleTV box between all the sources and your TV, and make it easy enough for a 3 year old to navigate it ("I want to watch TeleTubbies")
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yeah, that’s the way to revolutionize¡
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT which, by my take, in the end will turn wireless mobile phone companies into commodity pipes instead of companies that controls the features you got on your mobile device? (in 5 years, you went from buying minutes to buying GBs... the minutes, the messaging, etc, are free). In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable... but AppleTV makes it actually easy, and almost impossible to tell where the cable ends and the apps begin (again iPhone... where is the 'phone' in iPhone... it's an app)
To take over the content delivery from cable companies... Apple has to be the face of the delivery... so Like maps, or iMessage, the underlying delivery can change, but the user sees nothing different. So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT…
This is completely different and you know it.
In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
Unless you’ve heard that the telecoms are all going bankrupt at once within the next five years, I don’t see how this optimism can ever work out.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable...
And that’s not how to revolutionize television.
So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
This is stupid. We all know what they're going to make. They're going to open up the platform for gaming. They may even have it run a full iOS 7 release so that developers could finally develop for it.
I think Apple TV supports "1080P HD". By no means do I have a perfect record in predicting Apple products but it certainly seems like time to introduce a 4K-capable model of Apple TV and hopefully also start selling a 4K monitor for a reasonable price. I think Dell now sells a 4K for $699 but it has a 30 Hz refresh rate which is considered slow. Perhaps Apple plans to announce a $999 (or no worse than $1299) 4K monitor with a better refresh rate.
Does anyone know if there are any Internet-based content providers that provide online video at 4K? Could Apple start selling some iTunes movies at a 4K resolution? Are there any movies that were filmed in 4K? I just did some web research and found that a 4K movie takes 40 GB to transfer, which means very few people would be able to download a 4K movie. So I don't think this is a likely scenario for popular use until the average person gets a data cap of at least 200 GB/month. I just can't see how 4K movies can viably be sold online yet. I can't see how Apple would allow multiple downloads of a 40 GB movie.
Consumer 4K is still a mostly an unsolved problem. The film industry has had access to 4K (or higher) digital formats, so there is plenty of recent content.
Sony and others are upping the capacity of Blu-Ray for 4K. Sony has a $800 4K streaming appliance that (AFIAK) only supports Sony 4K TVs. So dead-end format. Netflix promises 4K streaming (yeah right, we'll see how 4K it is when Comcast and Time Warner start to throttle your bandwidth in violation of Net Neutrality rules). YouTube claims to offer some 2160p (UHD) content, but when I play video from the built-in YouTube app that ships with Korean "smart" UHDTVs, there is no way to select the resolution, and from what I saw, it would use regular HD. I think the only way to display 4K YouTube content is to connect a 4K display to a PC (or recent Mac/MacBook Pro) and manually choose the 2160p version of the video.
If Apple wanted to raise the specs of AppleTV to 4K, and start selling or renting 4K movies on iTunes, they would be in a position to clean up the 4K content market before Microsoft and Sony get something together. I hope that's the case.
It's all about the content. The idea of integrated monitors is intriguing, but I can't imagine AAPL want to compete with the race to the bottom HDTV market. Screens are great, getting better, and prices dropping. APPL has no experience in that market.
But...they do in content. And when they can show the content providers a huge market for their wares - all mobile stuff that...plugs into a box anyone can hand on their already owned HDTV...it starts to look attractive. It all works with iOS7, sdks etc etc....it's a huge marketing incentive. All without having to compete in a dead marketspace.
Genius. I so want to cut the cable. But that damn cable box, for all it's shortcomings...does work.
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
The problem that Apple is not going to solve is how to get content on the internet and off of cable... the problem is to make all content be controlled by the appleTV box between all the sources and your TV, and make it easy enough for a 3 year old to navigate it ("I want to watch TeleTubbies")
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT which, by my take, in the end will turn wireless mobile phone companies into commodity pipes instead of companies that controls the features you got on your mobile device? (in 5 years, you went from buying minutes to buying GBs... the minutes, the messaging, etc, are free). In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable... but AppleTV makes it actually easy, and almost impossible to tell where the cable ends and the apps begin (again iPhone... where is the 'phone' in iPhone... it's an app)
To take over the content delivery from cable companies... Apple has to be the face of the delivery... so Like maps, or iMessage, the underlying delivery can change, but the user sees nothing different. So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
That will be revolutionary.
I think you have some good ideas. There is such a mess of stuff out there when it comes to TV. The main ones:
OTA (Over The Air -- antenna)
STB (cable or satellite Set Top Box)
OTT (Over The Top -- streamers like ATV or Roku)
BluRay/DVD
Some people pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars installing control systems like AMX or Crestron to put a relatively easy to use interface on all this. Although many cut the cord and go completely OTT, you end up with less. For some, less is best, but STB and yes, even Disc formats (which may well be around longer as a relatively low-cost/high quality method of 4K distribution) will likely be part of the TV landscape for the foreseeable future. And OTA's ability to provide signal with a simple antenna connected to a TV running on battery or generator is a tremendous benefit during widespread power outages when Internet and often even cellular service gets disrupted (plus, it's free). These distribution mechanisms provide choices desired by many that should not be ignored.
I like the idea of putting an OTT device like the Apple TV in between the STB or other HDMI sources and the TV (an HDMI "sink"). Control via HDMI/CEC to control the sources and the TV (including switching the TV to OTA when desired) using an ATV remote or the Remote iOS app, with a searchable and easily customizable interface would be awesome. In this case, the ATV should act as the "sink" to the sources, then as a source to the TV to deal with HDCP (not repeater mode like AV receivers do) thereby allowing for fast switching, like commercial HDMI switches do. As channels/apps (games?) get added directly within ATV, and 4K capability (HEVC H.265), so much the better.
Well, we can dream, can't we?
A lot of the above involves integration of legacy devices, something Apple doesn't usually do. But if they do, I would say they "finally cracked it."
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls </span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app. </span>
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
The problem that Apple is not going to solve is how to get content on the internet and off of cable... the problem is to make all content be controlled by the appleTV box between all the sources and your TV, and make it easy enough for a 3 year old to navigate it ("I want to watch TeleTubbies")
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT which, by my take, in the end will turn wireless mobile phone companies into commodity pipes instead of companies that controls the features you got on your mobile device? (in 5 years, you went from buying minutes to buying GBs... the minutes, the messaging, etc, are free). In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable... but AppleTV makes it actually easy, and almost impossible to tell where the cable ends and the apps begin (again iPhone... where is the 'phone' in iPhone... it's an app)
To take over the content delivery from cable companies... Apple has to be the face of the delivery... so Like maps, or iMessage, the underlying delivery can change, but the user sees nothing different. So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
That will be revolutionary.
Thank You for saving me the time to write thie above myself. I pointed this out months ago here on another thread.
If the AppleTV gets an SDK and peripheral support on the level of other iPhone devices then Blu-ray support could come from a third party developer and Blu-ray player manufacturer.
Alternatively, Apple could support HDMI-in and pass through the signal from any other HDMI device.
Either are realistic, since iOS can already accomplish the former, and the latter is a reasonable solution (Xbox One).
A7 processor, stuff a hard drive back in as in the first gen - or a larger SSD...
Saved my mind this morning when DirecTV had a problem streaming Bloomberg's Surveillance. Fortunately, AppleTV added Bloomberg a few weeks back and I just switched over and watched the show live.
Which was great - with Ken Burns as a guest for the second hour discussing the new Ken Burns/PBS history series app.
And the AppleTV stream is the same as the iPad app stream - no commercials.
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
I think he was correct. iOS 7 contains everything needed for apps on aTV. You don't need CEC/HEC access on the first API cut since Apple will want to establish their own way of doing device control and internally add specific CEC/HEC drivers/configurations from CE manufacturers that wish to integrate.
They don't want a Denon or LG app to do special Denon or LG things. They want a unified control system and the best way to do that is to NOT provide access to the CEC and HEC functions.
The first set of apps will likely be just games and maybe some iLife stuff.
And unless they are building in good audio capability they aren't going to replace my Denon receiver.
Quote:
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
Despite protestations that they'd love an Apple STB I don't really think that cable operators are all that keen on letting Apple control the gateway the way Apple would insist on controlling the gateway to the viewers. They didn't make cable card an immense pain in the ass for so many years because they want to let other folks get between them and their customers.
If the Cable STB is a HDMI CEC compliant device where you can set the channel and it's not dog slow so folks can actually surf as fast as with the native cable remote then perhaps it would work with a good EPG and UI.
DTV has all the infrastructure and content in place and could probably be bought for 50-60B in cash & AAPL stock.
I think having Apple behind DTV would boost DTV membership significantly and set Apple up with all the content (including the exclusive "LIVE" coverage ) they could hope for virtually overnight.
And the AppleTV stream is the same as the iPad app stream - no commercials.
When I stream from the various canadien channels using there ipad apps there are commercials. I like commercials, I dont want to pay for every single show I watch and be force to buy them all.
In fact, streaming could be a solution for PVR commercials bypass, if the PVR is moved into the cloud, they could force the commercials on playback just like channels TV apps do.
If Apple wanted to raise the specs of AppleTV to 4K, and start selling or renting 4K movies on iTunes, they would be in a position to clean up the 4K content market before Microsoft and Sony get something together. I hope that's the case.
problem with that is bandwidth, you need a lot of it or an unlimited package to stream a lot of content. The better solution would be for Apple to make agreements with cable operators so they could have Apple TV apps and be able to feed you channels that dont used any internet bandwidht. But for the looks of it, the cable operators need to die first, because they dont want to do it.
imo if cable doesnt do anything, they will become internet pipes over time and lose there TV business.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
This control centre makes sense, but not for apps, for TV and Movie
content.
1) Create an SDK which allows content owners to publish their schedule, or available movies.
2) Read that published list into an EPG app owned by Apple.
3) When someone picks a programme from a certain app, the app is launched
( or more cleverly) the viewing window is shown within the EPG app, possibly with
external branding - all possible with the window server model.
So if I have BBC Player, 4oD, and Sky I have all that in the Apple branded EPG app.
That solves the content problem.
The advantages to the companies are - if they have their viewing window in the EPG, they
can monetise with Adds ( 4od), or people have to pay (Sky).
The BBC might be a bit more reluctant but I doubt it. Netflix wont care as long as they are paid.
Comments
Does anyone know if there are any Internet-based content providers that provide online video at 4K? Could Apple start selling some iTunes movies at a 4K resolution? Are there any movies that were filmed in 4K? I just did some web research and found that a 4K movie takes 40 GB to transfer, which means very few people would be able to download a 4K movie. So I don't think this is a likely scenario for popular use until the average person gets a data cap of at least 200 GB/month. I just can't see how 4K movies can viably be sold online yet. I can't see how Apple would allow multiple downloads of a 40 GB movie.
Bluray? Nope.
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
The problem that Apple is not going to solve is how to get content on the internet and off of cable... the problem is to make all content be controlled by the appleTV box between all the sources and your TV, and make it easy enough for a 3 year old to navigate it ("I want to watch TeleTubbies")
Yeah, that’s the way to revolutionize¡
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT which, by my take, in the end will turn wireless mobile phone companies into commodity pipes instead of companies that controls the features you got on your mobile device? (in 5 years, you went from buying minutes to buying GBs... the minutes, the messaging, etc, are free). In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable... but AppleTV makes it actually easy, and almost impossible to tell where the cable ends and the apps begin (again iPhone... where is the 'phone' in iPhone... it's an app)
To take over the content delivery from cable companies... Apple has to be the face of the delivery... so Like maps, or iMessage, the underlying delivery can change, but the user sees nothing different. So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
That will be revolutionary.
Whatever they do hardware-wise, let's hope for a new interface.
The current one has evolved to a mess.
This is completely different and you know it.
Unless you’ve heard that the telecoms are all going bankrupt at once within the next five years, I don’t see how this optimism can ever work out.
And that’s not how to revolutionize television.
See, that’s the opposite of what you said above.
Aluminum...!
Consumer 4K is still a mostly an unsolved problem. The film industry has had access to 4K (or higher) digital formats, so there is plenty of recent content.
Sony and others are upping the capacity of Blu-Ray for 4K. Sony has a $800 4K streaming appliance that (AFIAK) only supports Sony 4K TVs. So dead-end format. Netflix promises 4K streaming (yeah right, we'll see how 4K it is when Comcast and Time Warner start to throttle your bandwidth in violation of Net Neutrality rules). YouTube claims to offer some 2160p (UHD) content, but when I play video from the built-in YouTube app that ships with Korean "smart" UHDTVs, there is no way to select the resolution, and from what I saw, it would use regular HD. I think the only way to display 4K YouTube content is to connect a 4K display to a PC (or recent Mac/MacBook Pro) and manually choose the 2160p version of the video.
If Apple wanted to raise the specs of AppleTV to 4K, and start selling or renting 4K movies on iTunes, they would be in a position to clean up the 4K content market before Microsoft and Sony get something together. I hope that's the case.
It's all about the content. The idea of integrated monitors is intriguing, but I can't imagine AAPL want to compete with the race to the bottom HDTV market. Screens are great, getting better, and prices dropping. APPL has no experience in that market.
But...they do in content. And when they can show the content providers a huge market for their wares - all mobile stuff that...plugs into a box anyone can hand on their already owned HDTV...it starts to look attractive. It all works with iOS7, sdks etc etc....it's a huge marketing incentive. All without having to compete in a dead marketspace.
Genius. I so want to cut the cable. But that damn cable box, for all it's shortcomings...does work.
Wi-Fi reception…
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
Add controls for controlling a Cable Settop box and you're golden.
The problem that Apple is not going to solve is how to get content on the internet and off of cable... the problem is to make all content be controlled by the appleTV box between all the sources and your TV, and make it easy enough for a 3 year old to navigate it ("I want to watch TeleTubbies")
TS, How revolutionary was it of apple to join ATT which, by my take, in the end will turn wireless mobile phone companies into commodity pipes instead of companies that controls the features you got on your mobile device? (in 5 years, you went from buying minutes to buying GBs... the minutes, the messaging, etc, are free). In 5 more years, the concept of iMessage and FaceTime will be the standard modes of communication.
In 5 years, Apps on AppleTV will be hot... ONLY if you can still watch your cable... but AppleTV makes it actually easy, and almost impossible to tell where the cable ends and the apps begin (again iPhone... where is the 'phone' in iPhone... it's an app)
To take over the content delivery from cable companies... Apple has to be the face of the delivery... so Like maps, or iMessage, the underlying delivery can change, but the user sees nothing different. So... When The Real housewives of Hoboken lose their cable feed, they build an app, and sell directly to their following... and if on AppleTV, it looks no different than when they were on AMC-HD.
That will be revolutionary.
I think you have some good ideas. There is such a mess of stuff out there when it comes to TV. The main ones:
OTA (Over The Air -- antenna)
STB (cable or satellite Set Top Box)
OTT (Over The Top -- streamers like ATV or Roku)
BluRay/DVD
Some people pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars installing control systems like AMX or Crestron to put a relatively easy to use interface on all this. Although many cut the cord and go completely OTT, you end up with less. For some, less is best, but STB and yes, even Disc formats (which may well be around longer as a relatively low-cost/high quality method of 4K distribution) will likely be part of the TV landscape for the foreseeable future. And OTA's ability to provide signal with a simple antenna connected to a TV running on battery or generator is a tremendous benefit during widespread power outages when Internet and often even cellular service gets disrupted (plus, it's free). These distribution mechanisms provide choices desired by many that should not be ignored.
I like the idea of putting an OTT device like the Apple TV in between the STB or other HDMI sources and the TV (an HDMI "sink"). Control via HDMI/CEC to control the sources and the TV (including switching the TV to OTA when desired) using an ATV remote or the Remote iOS app, with a searchable and easily customizable interface would be awesome. In this case, the ATV should act as the "sink" to the sources, then as a source to the TV to deal with HDCP (not repeater mode like AV receivers do) thereby allowing for fast switching, like commercial HDMI switches do. As channels/apps (games?) get added directly within ATV, and 4K capability (HEVC H.265), so much the better.
Well, we can dream, can't we?
A lot of the above involves integration of legacy devices, something Apple doesn't usually do. But if they do, I would say they "finally cracked it."
Aluminum...!
Aluminium!
Aluminium!
You’d trust a newspaper over the guy who actually came up with the real name (who, as it happens, was British in the first place)?
Alternatively, Apple could support HDMI-in and pass through the signal from any other HDMI device.
Either are realistic, since iOS can already accomplish the former, and the latter is a reasonable solution (Xbox One).
Saved my mind this morning when DirecTV had a problem streaming Bloomberg's Surveillance. Fortunately, AppleTV added Bloomberg a few weeks back and I just switched over and watched the show live.
Which was great - with Ken Burns as a guest for the second hour discussing the new Ken Burns/PBS history series app.
And the AppleTV stream is the same as the iPad app stream - no commercials.
You'd swear that you guys see the words BluRay and Apple in a sentence,and you go Pavlovianlngly direct to "Never gonna happen?"
Sigh... you don't see the beauty of using HDMI control channels to build out a 'entertainment center' the size of an AirportExtreme?
Not an Apple bluRay SKU, but an internal framework to allowing an app to control it. Again, Apple isn't selling it, they are just creating an intelligent HDMI-IN port on their box. It's the HDMI IN with programmable controls that's revolutionary. This isn't dumb pass thru of a DVD players controls... this is iDVD on AppleTV... as an app.
But developing that framework now put apple not into the TV market, but the Home Theater market. Let' replace that $800 Denon receiver for... $99.
And 7.x API's aren't gonna just solve that in SW.
And integrating your apps into the 'control' system that integrates all your 'sources' into one searchable nav system, that you use either onscreen with your 6 button apple remote, or with your Apple Remote App on your iPad mini.
I think he was correct. iOS 7 contains everything needed for apps on aTV. You don't need CEC/HEC access on the first API cut since Apple will want to establish their own way of doing device control and internally add specific CEC/HEC drivers/configurations from CE manufacturers that wish to integrate.
They don't want a Denon or LG app to do special Denon or LG things. They want a unified control system and the best way to do that is to NOT provide access to the CEC and HEC functions.
The first set of apps will likely be just games and maybe some iLife stuff.
And unless they are building in good audio capability they aren't going to replace my Denon receiver.
Despite protestations that they'd love an Apple STB I don't really think that cable operators are all that keen on letting Apple control the gateway the way Apple would insist on controlling the gateway to the viewers. They didn't make cable card an immense pain in the ass for so many years because they want to let other folks get between them and their customers.
If the Cable STB is a HDMI CEC compliant device where you can set the channel and it's not dog slow so folks can actually surf as fast as with the native cable remote then perhaps it would work with a good EPG and UI.
I think Apple should just buy DTV and get all their content PLUS the NFL ticket and a bunch of physical satellites all in one swoop.
From Wiki:
"DirecTV is also the exclusive U.S. rights holder to sports package NFL Sunday Ticket. DirecTV also exclusively carries the "DirecTV Experience", which includes bonus coverage of Men's Majors Golf Tournaments and Grand Slam Tennis Tournaments, including live feeds not available on other networks such as CBS, NBC, ESPN, Golf Channel and Tennis Channel, that cover the events. DirecTV was also the exclusive provider of defunct sports packages NASCAR Hot Pass andMega March Madness."
DTV has all the infrastructure and content in place and could probably be bought for 50-60B in cash & AAPL stock.
I think having Apple behind DTV would boost DTV membership significantly and set Apple up with all the content (including the exclusive "LIVE" coverage ) they could hope for virtually overnight.
Does this make sense to anyone else?
And the AppleTV stream is the same as the iPad app stream - no commercials.
When I stream from the various canadien channels using there ipad apps there are commercials. I like commercials, I dont want to pay for every single show I watch and be force to buy them all.
In fact, streaming could be a solution for PVR commercials bypass, if the PVR is moved into the cloud, they could force the commercials on playback just like channels TV apps do.
If Apple wanted to raise the specs of AppleTV to 4K, and start selling or renting 4K movies on iTunes, they would be in a position to clean up the 4K content market before Microsoft and Sony get something together. I hope that's the case.
problem with that is bandwidth, you need a lot of it or an unlimited package to stream a lot of content. The better solution would be for Apple to make agreements with cable operators so they could have Apple TV apps and be able to feed you channels that dont used any internet bandwidht. But for the looks of it, the cable operators need to die first, because they dont want to do it.
imo if cable doesnt do anything, they will become internet pipes over time and lose there TV business.
This control centre makes sense, but not for apps, for TV and Movie
content.
1) Create an SDK which allows content owners to publish their schedule, or available movies.
2) Read that published list into an EPG app owned by Apple.
3) When someone picks a programme from a certain app, the app is launched
( or more cleverly) the viewing window is shown within the EPG app, possibly with
external branding - all possible with the window server model.
So if I have BBC Player, 4oD, and Sky I have all that in the Apple branded EPG app.
That solves the content problem.
The advantages to the companies are - if they have their viewing window in the EPG, they
can monetise with Adds ( 4od), or people have to pay (Sky).
The BBC might be a bit more reluctant but I doubt it. Netflix wont care as long as they are paid.