Apple may have bought PrimeSense, but I'd still wager that is for camera technology (ie. depth sensing) for the iPhone. Duplicating the functionality of the Xbox One doesn't seem right. The market isn't exactly embracing it and the technology has a good number of problems (raise a fork while eating and your tv changes a channel).
Re; the PrimeSense acquisition:
Here's a video showing a camera capturing 3D. Matterport is the company that builds the camera which includes a PrimeSense 3D camera chip;
[VIDEO]
And here's a link that suggests:
Apple to use PrimeSense 3D to boost indoor mapping, rather than iTV set?
The width provides a camera with a wider field of view and more accurate 3D sensing. Presumably, the 3D sensing would be used [in the AppleTV] to recognize gestures ala the XBox's Kinect.
If I'm not mistaken there's more than one camera for depth perception. Unless they use infrared to determine distance.
I think you are correct! It would better if I had said: The width allows more than one camera to support 3D depth perception.
FWIW, the PrimeSense camera chip uses:
Light Coding Technology
PrimeSense’s depth acquisition is enabled by "light coding" technology. The process codes the scene with near-IR light, light that returns distorted depending upon where things are. The solution then uses a standard off-the-shelf CMOS image sensor to read the coded light back from the scene using various algorithms to triangulate and extract the 3D data. The product analyses scenery in 3 dimensions with software, so that devices can interact with users.
Adding a camera is a good idea for gestures and FaceTime.
A better addition would be original content. Netflix has great shows. Amazon has great original shows. Hulu is adding original content. Their brands give you content nobody else delivers at that time.
If Apple opens up Apple TV to apps, then they solve this problem. Apps are content.
Gotta make Apple TV able to do stuff no other gizmo or platform can do today.
No..apps aren't good enough for TV. The problem with apps, is that there's no unified list of all programming available. It's a pain to switch from Netflix to Hulu to Amazon to AppleTV offerings to an actual cable or OTA channel.
It all needs to be integrated and I think Steve Jobs recognized that when he supposedly made the comment that he had licked the UI problem.
3D mapping could be another feature of an Apple mobile camera device.
Exactly. Thanks for the links.
I think the original article's speculation is off. It's estimated the Kinect hardware in the Xbox One costs around $70 for parts. That would suggest a $100 price increase on a new Apple TV with Kinect-like hardware. I don't think a motion sensing UI justifies that unless Apple figures out how to radically improve on what the Kinect can do. (And of course they might..)
A cheap camera sensor that makes your Apple TV FaceTime capable makes a lot of sense though.
And an iPhone or iPod that has more advanced imaging makes sense.. But you can see the tech in that video is pretty far away from being practical. The depth resolution isn't great and infrared for depth sensing doesn't really work outdoors... just to name two problems. I'm excited to see what they're working on though!
I don't even trust Apple with that combo. If they can leave an obvious back door in their open source SSL code for months, what NSA induced nightmares will be lurking inside their black box code?
3D mapping could be another feature of an Apple mobile camera device.
Exactly. Thanks for the links.
I think the original article's speculation is off. It's estimated the Kinect hardware in the Xbox One costs around $70 for parts. That would suggest a $100 price increase on a new Apple TV with Kinect-like hardware. I don't think a motion sensing UI justifies that unless Apple figures out how to radically improve on what the Kinect can do. (And of course they might..)
A cheap camera sensor that makes your Apple TV FaceTime capable makes a lot of sense though.
And an iPhone or iPod that has more advanced imaging makes sense.. But you can see the tech in that video is pretty far away from being practical. The depth resolution isn't great and infrared for depth sensing doesn't really work outdoors... just to name two problems. I'm excited to see what they're working on though!
Here's a video demoing 2D indoor mapping using WiFiSLAM * software:
So, Apple could combine all these new technologies along with existing Apple camera tech -- and produce amazing, 2D, 3D and AR maps with realistic camera images.
I suspect that Apple built the A7 and M7 chips with this in mind.
I think he means an ATSC tuner (a.k.a. ATSC receiver). You know, some circuitry to decode terrestrial broadcast transmissions via an Over-The-Air antenna (a.k.a. "rabbit ears").
Just make a nice remote App for my phone to navigate ATV - that's all I need.
You need dedicated hardware, dude. Even Gruber said do. There's no app to find when their a physical remote right in front of you. The remote is a handy keyboard, but it's no substitute for holding a piece of dedicated hardware.
I agree with Inkling above. I personally have no need for an always on camera and microphone set up in the house. With all the recent media disclosures, all I can see when I look at an XBox One in someone's lounge is Rummy or Clapper's face behind that unblinking camera. At least with laptops we can put a cover over the camera and it is not always on like a TV set up. Some people have no problem with it though, so who's to judge I guess.
Great, my TV is going to look so awesome with my Xbox One Kinect AND a big Apple TV thing on top of it.. and the Playstation Camera on the bottom, AND the Wii U sensor bar.
No..apps aren't good enough for TV. The problem with apps, is that there's no unified list of all programming available. It's a pain to switch from Netflix to Hulu to Amazon to AppleTV offerings to an actual cable or OTA channel.
It all needs to be integrated and I think Steve Jobs recognized that when he supposedly made the comment that he had licked the UI problem.
Do the apps need to be integrated, or just the search? Wouldn't it be better for Apple to define a standard way for apps to make their content index available to Spotlight, perhaps with an integration to a single library service - IMDb for example - for advanced searching by metadata (director, actor, genre etc) and recommendations. Background app refresh means the indexes always stay up-to-date.
Then, apps that don't provide the index don't get listed in the search/schedule/recommendations and don't get the customers, but the channels get to retain ownership and control of their content and subscribers.
Besides gesture controls, say hello to the new FaceTime for Apple TV app!
I remember a TV ad that ran during the mid '80's for a Zenith TV that also had a built in speaker phone. A family is gathered around their living room watching TV when something unusual happened. Their TV rang.
"Someone want to answer it?"
"No, you answer it..."
"I answered it last time... It's your turn!"
"Alright... I'll answer it!"
He reaches for the remote, aims it towards the TV, presses a button, and says "Hello!"
Nevermind the annoyance of the ring interrupting the program you were watching and the fact that there was no benefit of using TV speakers for a phone call rather than your phone speakers (because there was still no video).
FaceTime on AppleTV may automatically pause whatever you're watching when someone is calling and be far less intrusive than the Zenith concept, while finally bringing video to "landlines" (video VoIP).
You need dedicated hardware, dude. Even Gruber said do. There's no app to find when their a physical remote right in front of you. The remote is a handy keyboard, but it's no substitute for holding a piece of dedicated hardware.
Actually, MacApfel is correct.
A high quality Apple TV Remote app is really what you want because it would be customizable, like some of the high-end universal remotes and touchscreen panels for home theater control.
For example, if you like NFL, you'd have an NFL button on your phone, and it would find all NFL content available to your device, whether it be online, cable, satellite or OTA television. You shouldn't have to check four services/channels to find the content you want, nor should you have to type in a text-based search for "football" or "NFL." The remote app should be smart enough to figure this out.
Note that a physical remote has less ability for customized keys unless there's an LCD screen. Some universal remotes have customizable screens (some of the Harmony remotes from Logitech, for example), and generally the more you spend, the greater the customization.
Also, an intelligent remote app would have voice recognition. If you say "Giants baseball" or "Chelsea football" it should go out, find it, then just change to the source. Typing in "Chelsea" as a text search on a remote is the stupid way, as you would likely get a combination of Chelsea Handler and Chelsea ____ results.
Moreover, each phone/tablet could be a separate person's interface, tailored to their own specific interests (me = baseball, wife = golf). You can't really do that elegantly with a dedicated hardware remote.
Dedicated remotes are okay for dumb electronics, but after you have many dumb electronics, a universal remote is a better solution. If you have a smart set-top box like an AppleTV, you really want a high quality, customizable app. A smartphone/tablet app would also be able to push notifications of interesting upcoming programming ("PGA Championship 1st round coverage starts in 30 minutes, do you want to watch?"). Dedicated hardware remotes are too dumb to do this.
Of course, the set-top box would still ship with a caveman hardware remote for people who don't have the proper app-equipped smartphone.
In the end, the screen would display content that's specific to the person sitting in front of it. The user interface is an extension of the user. I sit down in front of the TV with the guys, I would hope to see *my* stuff on the screen and remote. If we take off, and my wife sits down with her girlfriends, she would want *her* stuff on the screen and her remote.
Same with cars. A guy should be able to approach his car and have it automatically configure his favorite settings: steering wheel height, seat position, climate control, entertainment center preferences, etc. If his wife approaches the car, it should be smart enough to reconfigure everything to her liking without her pressing a bunch of buttons.
"potentially paving the way for gesture-based motion controls in the living room."
and the use of FaceTime or dare I say it, Skype.
Come on Apple, why not just go the whole hog and provide a flagship iMac as a TV. All the components are already provided, just put them in a bigger, single, well-sculptured box and hey presto you will sell millions!!!
Leave us to fight between each other in the household whether we want to call friends, watch tv, watch an iTunes movie, create a spreadsheet or write a letter….or perhaps reduce the fights and buy a smaller iMac or a mac book air for the study/office.
Comments
Re; the PrimeSense acquisition:
Here's a video showing a camera capturing 3D. Matterport is the company that builds the camera which includes a PrimeSense 3D camera chip;
[VIDEO]
And here's a link that suggests:
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/television/apple/computing/apple-s-to-use-primesense-3d-to-boost-indoor-mapping-rather-than-itv-set--1202909
It is interesting that this AI article lists some camera job postings for Macs, IPads,, iPhones and iPods -- but do not include AppleTV.
Why the iPod?
A while ago, on another thread, I speculated that the iPod might evolve into a DSLR-class camera with:
3D mapping could be another feature of an Apple mobile camera device.
I think you are correct! It would better if I had said: The width allows more than one camera to support 3D depth perception.
FWIW, the PrimeSense camera chip uses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PrimeSense
https://www.google.com/search?q=primesense+camera&biw=2172&bih=1020&tbm=isch&imgil=uzxZ23AKQazSQM%3A%3Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSCPZwRT6AC2FnX_0tqmMnL6tsHtwrIiHKex4e0wKxcGs0cQfJhZw%3B580%3B499%3B0X9Di2cC240veM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.hizook.com%252Fblog%252F2010%252F03%252F28%252Flow-cost-depth-cameras-aka-ranging-cameras-or-rgb-d-cameras-emerge-2010&source=iu&usg=__rG3G-ueMobSRHoNKNtiUZfbQMQE=&sa=X&ei=XXwgU6zWEYv7oAS01IKoDg&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAg#facrc=_&imgrc=uzxZ23AKQazSQM%3A;0X9Di2cC240veM;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hizook.com%2Ffiles%2Fusers%2F3%2FPrimeSense_DepthCamera.jpg;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hizook.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F03%2F28%2Flow-cost-depth-cameras-aka-ranging-cameras-or-rgb-d-cameras-emerge-2010;580;499
Adding a camera is a good idea for gestures and FaceTime.
A better addition would be original content. Netflix has great shows. Amazon has great original shows. Hulu is adding original content. Their brands give you content nobody else delivers at that time.
If Apple opens up Apple TV to apps, then they solve this problem. Apps are content.
Gotta make Apple TV able to do stuff no other gizmo or platform can do today.
No..apps aren't good enough for TV. The problem with apps, is that there's no unified list of all programming available. It's a pain to switch from Netflix to Hulu to Amazon to AppleTV offerings to an actual cable or OTA channel.
It all needs to be integrated and I think Steve Jobs recognized that when he supposedly made the comment that he had licked the UI problem.
I'm sure the next Apple TV won't be the size of a soundbar!
This is nothing new at all. Many existing smart TVs and game/TV consoles already have this function.
Exactly. Thanks for the links.
I think the original article's speculation is off. It's estimated the Kinect hardware in the Xbox One costs around $70 for parts. That would suggest a $100 price increase on a new Apple TV with Kinect-like hardware. I don't think a motion sensing UI justifies that unless Apple figures out how to radically improve on what the Kinect can do. (And of course they might..)
A cheap camera sensor that makes your Apple TV FaceTime capable makes a lot of sense though.
And an iPhone or iPod that has more advanced imaging makes sense.. But you can see the tech in that video is pretty far away from being practical. The depth resolution isn't great and infrared for depth sensing doesn't really work outdoors... just to name two problems. I'm excited to see what they're working on though!
But, it might be likely that Apple will come up with individual remote cameras that will feed into the Apple TV as a consolidator.
Three things that don't mix:
Cameras in the living room or bed room
Smart internet connected technology
Closed source software
I don't even trust Apple with that combo. If they can leave an obvious back door in their open source SSL code for months, what NSA induced nightmares will be lurking inside their black box code?
If you like something, give it 'Thumbs-Up!'
If what you are watching is pure crap, give it 'The Finger!'
Here's a video demoing 2D indoor mapping using WiFiSLAM * software:
* recent acquired by Apple
[VIDEO]
Here's an image of an AR map patent by Apple:
http://www.razorianfly.com/2011/08/18/apple-patents-ar-assisted-mapping-for-ios/
So, Apple could combine all these new technologies along with existing Apple camera tech -- and produce amazing, 2D, 3D and AR maps with realistic camera images.
I suspect that Apple built the A7 and M7 chips with this in mind.
I don't know what that is.
I think he means an ATSC tuner (a.k.a. ATSC receiver). You know, some circuitry to decode terrestrial broadcast transmissions via an Over-The-Air antenna (a.k.a. "rabbit ears").
For more information, please see this Wikipedia article on ATSC receiver.
Correct. That is what TiVo does. All the Internet content you want, plus 4 (or 6) broadcast receivers.
You need dedicated hardware, dude. Even Gruber said do. There's no app to find when their a physical remote right in front of you. The remote is a handy keyboard, but it's no substitute for holding a piece of dedicated hardware.
It really creeps me out to think that some huge multinational corporation has a camera built in to my TV and trained on me as I make my every move.
But if it's Apple, then probably it would be great. I'd be more productive with gesture control. And I can trust them.
At least with laptops we can put a cover over the camera and it is not always on like a TV set up.
Some people have no problem with it though, so who's to judge I guess.
No..apps aren't good enough for TV. The problem with apps, is that there's no unified list of all programming available. It's a pain to switch from Netflix to Hulu to Amazon to AppleTV offerings to an actual cable or OTA channel.
It all needs to be integrated and I think Steve Jobs recognized that when he supposedly made the comment that he had licked the UI problem.
Do the apps need to be integrated, or just the search? Wouldn't it be better for Apple to define a standard way for apps to make their content index available to Spotlight, perhaps with an integration to a single library service - IMDb for example - for advanced searching by metadata (director, actor, genre etc) and recommendations. Background app refresh means the indexes always stay up-to-date.
Then, apps that don't provide the index don't get listed in the search/schedule/recommendations and don't get the customers, but the channels get to retain ownership and control of their content and subscribers.
I remember a TV ad that ran during the mid '80's for a Zenith TV that also had a built in speaker phone. A family is gathered around their living room watching TV when something unusual happened. Their TV rang.
"Someone want to answer it?"
"No, you answer it..."
"I answered it last time... It's your turn!"
"Alright... I'll answer it!"
He reaches for the remote, aims it towards the TV, presses a button, and says "Hello!"
Nevermind the annoyance of the ring interrupting the program you were watching and the fact that there was no benefit of using TV speakers for a phone call rather than your phone speakers (because there was still no video).
FaceTime on AppleTV may automatically pause whatever you're watching when someone is calling and be far less intrusive than the Zenith concept, while finally bringing video to "landlines" (video VoIP).
Various sex perverts?
Yes, GCHQ apparently.
You need dedicated hardware, dude. Even Gruber said do. There's no app to find when their a physical remote right in front of you. The remote is a handy keyboard, but it's no substitute for holding a piece of dedicated hardware.
Actually, MacApfel is correct.
A high quality Apple TV Remote app is really what you want because it would be customizable, like some of the high-end universal remotes and touchscreen panels for home theater control.
For example, if you like NFL, you'd have an NFL button on your phone, and it would find all NFL content available to your device, whether it be online, cable, satellite or OTA television. You shouldn't have to check four services/channels to find the content you want, nor should you have to type in a text-based search for "football" or "NFL." The remote app should be smart enough to figure this out.
Note that a physical remote has less ability for customized keys unless there's an LCD screen. Some universal remotes have customizable screens (some of the Harmony remotes from Logitech, for example), and generally the more you spend, the greater the customization.
Also, an intelligent remote app would have voice recognition. If you say "Giants baseball" or "Chelsea football" it should go out, find it, then just change to the source. Typing in "Chelsea" as a text search on a remote is the stupid way, as you would likely get a combination of Chelsea Handler and Chelsea ____ results.
Moreover, each phone/tablet could be a separate person's interface, tailored to their own specific interests (me = baseball, wife = golf). You can't really do that elegantly with a dedicated hardware remote.
Dedicated remotes are okay for dumb electronics, but after you have many dumb electronics, a universal remote is a better solution. If you have a smart set-top box like an AppleTV, you really want a high quality, customizable app. A smartphone/tablet app would also be able to push notifications of interesting upcoming programming ("PGA Championship 1st round coverage starts in 30 minutes, do you want to watch?"). Dedicated hardware remotes are too dumb to do this.
Of course, the set-top box would still ship with a caveman hardware remote for people who don't have the proper app-equipped smartphone.
In the end, the screen would display content that's specific to the person sitting in front of it. The user interface is an extension of the user. I sit down in front of the TV with the guys, I would hope to see *my* stuff on the screen and remote. If we take off, and my wife sits down with her girlfriends, she would want *her* stuff on the screen and her remote.
Same with cars. A guy should be able to approach his car and have it automatically configure his favorite settings: steering wheel height, seat position, climate control, entertainment center preferences, etc. If his wife approaches the car, it should be smart enough to reconfigure everything to her liking without her pressing a bunch of buttons.
"potentially paving the way for gesture-based motion controls in the living room."
and the use of FaceTime or dare I say it, Skype.
Come on Apple, why not just go the whole hog and provide a flagship iMac as a TV. All the components are already provided, just put them in a bigger, single, well-sculptured box and hey presto you will sell millions!!!
Leave us to fight between each other in the household whether we want to call friends, watch tv, watch an iTunes movie, create a spreadsheet or write a letter….or perhaps reduce the fights and buy a smaller iMac or a mac book air for the study/office.