Unfortunately, Apple gave Jony Ive a monopoly on user interfaces; no one approves his work and there is no user testing.
"Skeuomorphism" is a Greek word that means "things look like what they are." Jony has decided that making things look like what they are is bad design, so instead of icons that are intuitively obvious, we'll have even more abstract symbols that we have to learn. Presently we have the valentine card for the Health app, balloons for games (not parties), and paint sample sticks to see our photos. If the Apple TV UI does not remain a bunch of rounded squares that are increasingly hard to tell apart, it will look like a bubble bath, like the Apple Watch. Jony is good at drawing circles, but precious little else. The whole thing will look like OS X Hanna Barbera.
Jony Ive is a genius at designing hardware, but otherwise he is a walking design disaster who makes software hard to use. Apple could improve its design by firing Jony Ive and replacing him with an idea.
I'm curious though... if you think it's a bad idea for Apple to get into living room gaming... do you think they should get into automobiles?
Now THAT'S a stretch!
I do think getting in to automobiles at this point should be the ultimate secret hobby. Getting the software and hardware, where appropriate, into cars is a good idea. The car thing is even more extreme than getting into the manufacturing of TV's, which I also think would be a mistake at this time.
I am not opposed to gaming. I think it can be done in a natural way by making the ATV open enough. As you and others have pointed out, iDevices have become a major force in mobile, light gaming. The ATV could very well evolve into an interesting gaming experience. My thing is it's more important to keep the price low than to add items that would bring the base price above $100. A $200 Apple TV would really be risky. I'd like to see the Apple TV knock off most of the current popular media players. This means access to a lot of interesting content, and to get that you need a lot of users, and you won't get that with an expensive player.
use to think the same but you have to start counting months from zero - it takes a whole month to get from Jan 1 to Feb 1, though that looks like 2 months. I think the real xmas babies are at the end of September and the New Years babies are early October. Maybe all the love happens at the beginning of the holiday season, before the stress of it all kicks in
You're absolutely right. Xmas eve day, to Sept. 16th is 267 days (8 months, 24 days), which is shy of the 280 days (40 weeks) for human gestation.
I do think getting in to automobiles at this point should be the ultimate secret hobby. Getting the software and hardware, where appropriate, into cars is a good idea. The car thing is even more extreme than getting into the manufacturing of TV's, which I also think would be a mistake at this time.
I am not opposed to gaming. I think it can be done in a natural way by making the ATV open enough. As you and others have pointed out, iDevices have become a major force in mobile, light gaming. The ATV could very well evolve into an interesting gaming experience. My thing is it's more important to keep the price low than to add items that would bring the base price above $100. A $200 Apple TV would really be risky. I'd like to see the Apple TV knock off most of the current popular media players. This means access to a lot of interesting content, and to get that you need a lot of users, and you won't get that with an expensive player.
Exactly... Apple has been involved with light gaming on iPhones. iPods and iPads with much success.
I could see them venture out into light gaming... on TVs... by adding games to a streaming box they were already planning on selling.
Like I said before... Apple can make hardware... they can convince developers to get on board... they have an app store... they have controller APIs.
They've been setting up the chess pieces for a while now. So let's play!
You raise a good point about pricing though. I remember the price-drop from $99 to $69... but did the 3rd-gen start at $99? Or did it used to be higher? I don't even remember since it's been so long.
Yet, you've complained about the speaker quality of iMacs on these boards forever. A product that Jobs created.
Sorry, Ireland, but that sounds a tad facile and hypocritical.
Wrong. I complained about the speaker quality in the newer iMacs with the 5mm audio-funnel chin that were created after Jobs died. But who cares about facts.
And you obviously know everything about sound. All hail the sound king. If you know anything about the TV industry you'd realise that surround sound systems are selling worse than ever because people are realising they are too complex and messy with too many parts, AND ADDITIONAL REMOTES (a pet peeve of mine). Going forward the soundbar reigns supreme. This is the way things are and are headed. It's a far cleaner setup in the living room and these things sound a lot better than you'd imagine. My philosophy is a TV without good sound is an unfinished product. You can disagree with that philosophy, and you're welcome to. But that is my thinking. The general consumer shouldn't be left to solve the sound problem. If you make the TV you need to incorporate good sound quality into the design of the product or get out of the industry. Anything less and you've no respect for product design. The consumer should be able to open the box, plug this TV in and have signicantly better sound then is available out of the box TVs that exist right now. That's a TV product that respects the customer and itself. Nothing should need to be added on. The customer shouldn't need to use a single cell to get decent sound, it should just be.
Unfortunately, Apple gave Jony Ive a monopoly on user interfaces; no one approves his work and there is no user testing.
"Skeuomorphism" is a Greek word that means "things look like what they are." Jony has decided that making things look like what they are is bad design, so instead of icons that are intuitively obvious, we'll have even more abstract symbols that we have to learn. Presently we have the valentine card for the Health app, balloons for games (not parties), and paint sample sticks to see our photos. If the Apple TV UI does not remain a bunch of rounded squares that are increasingly hard to tell apart, it will look like a bubble bath, like the Apple Watch. Jony is good at drawing circles, but precious little else. The whole thing will look like OS X Hanna Barbera.
Jony Ive is a genius at designing hardware, but otherwise he is a walking design disaster who makes software hard to use. Apple could improve its design by firing Jony Ive and replacing him with an idea.
There hasnt been a single tv in the history of man that had theater quality sound built in. It is totally impossible and impractical. What you wish for is simply impossible.
A high quality sound system cost at minimum $3000. It would weigh over 100 lbs and take up at least the size of a Small refridgerator.
Now the only thing that's missing is adding an iTunes server into the little box, and put a sizable SSD into it, so can finally get rid of my Laptop-needing-a-big-internal-drive-and-staying-on-all-the-time-because-I-stream-media-from-it, and replace it with an Air. :-)
Yes, I know there is the Cloud, but I prefer to have my stuff local as well, thank you.
Now the only thing that's missing is adding an iTunes saver into the little box, and put a sizable SSD into it, so can get finally rid of my Laptop-needing-a-big-internal-drive-and-staying-on-all-the-time-because-I-stream-media-from-it, and replace it with an Air. :-)
Yes, I know there is the Cloud, but I prefer to have my stuff local as well, thank you.
This is one of those areas I'd love to see them address too and start to look at the device as a true home hub, so just like you say, get stuff off our laptops and desktops and put it centrally in one location, which is where some of us have the content already (which iTunes doesn't like much or make very easy). A "server based" iTunes would be great! Easy connection to a NAS would be ideal.
I used to eat this stuff up like chocolate Moose Tracks. It (technology) was my hope. No longer. I still get a kick out of the dreams and predictions of tech but hope solely in Jesus now. I believe this year, especially starting this September, we'll see some interesting (most likely scary) changes in the world economy and events surrounding Israel. Kurtzweil, and others, may discover soon that technology is an empty hope.
Apple have an API for game controllers in iOS for two years now. Some iPhones apps use it
They would then need to have a UI that can be controlled with a controller and a remote. But how do you buy things using a controller or type characters/numbers? Over 90% of all App Store revenue is from in-app purchases and ads. The biggest earning apps look like the following:
[VIDEO]
That one app made over $1b, free-to-play and just gets people to buy items in-game. It got 13 million players from Japan playing:
but the revenue model on mobile is free-to-play vs upfront on console so they'd have to figure out which way they want to go. Going the upfront payment route would result in low app sales. Going the IAP/ad route of iOS would require a different control interface because IAPs and ads would feature heavily and most high revenue iOS apps are not suitable for a standard controller. I would expect them to want people to play Candy Crush on the sofa but it would be very difficult with a normal controller as the Amazon Fire TV demonstrates where you have to just move a circle over the gems with the sticks:
I also don't think Apple would want people to be switching between two control methods.
The advantage with making it compatible with iOS touch games is that people can jump between platforms. You can be playing the Sims on the TV and if someone wants to watch TV, you can switch to the iPad and the savegame would be right where you were on the TV synced via iCloud. If you complete a Candy Crush level on one device, it's completed on the other device. Standard consoles can't have that level of integration with mobile devices.
Now the only thing that's missing is adding an iTunes saver into the little box, and put a sizable SSD into it, so can get finally rid of my Laptop-needing-a-big-internal-drive-and-staying-on-all-the-time-because-I-stream-media-from-it, and replace it with an Air. :-)
Yes, I know there is the Cloud, but I prefer to have my stuff local as well, thank you.
This is one of those areas I'd love to see them address too and start to look at the device as a true home hub, so just like you say, get stuff off our laptops and desktops and put it centrally in one location, which is where some of us have the content already (which iTunes doesn't like much or make very easy). A "server based" iTunes would be great! Easy connection to a NAS would be ideal.
Our shared iTunes Library is 5.35 TeraByte and resides on a 28 TeraByte RAID -- with various parts backed up elsewhere.
I would like to see the new AppleTV with a reasonable-sized SSD for active storage and cross-loading. Then have an automatic percolate-up, trickle down interface with the Cloud -- where the files would be archived and distributed across many servers, for reliable access.
That way, the stuff we are currently using is on the AppleTV SSD and everything else can be quickly streamed/cached from the Cloud.
This could use iCloud for the server, but does not need to.
I think this is one of the major reasons that Apple acquired FoundationDB. FDB can run on any 'Nix servers and is designed to be distributed.
So, our personal, encrypted files could be spread across tens or hundreds of servers from Amazon, Apple, Google, IBM, etc. -- or any combination.
Apple could offer a local, Mac version to provide the same capability to manage a local copy of the files -- it's just another distribution point.
Apple have an API for game controllers in iOS for two years now. Some iPhones apps use it
They would then need to have a UI that can be controlled with a controller and a remote. But how do you buy things using a controller or type characters/numbers? Over 90% of all App Store revenue is from in-app purchases and ads.
Going the upfront payment route would result in low app sales. Going the IAP/ad route of iOS would require a different control interface because IAPs and ads would feature heavily and most high revenue iOS apps are not suitable for a standard controller. I would expect them to want people to play Candy Crush on the sofa but it would be very difficult with a normal controller as the Amazon Fire TV demonstrates where you have to just move a circle over the gems with the sticks:
I also don't think Apple would want people to be switching between two control methods.
The advantage with making it compatible with iOS touch games is that people can jump between platforms. You can be playing the Sims on the TV and if someone wants to watch TV, you can switch to the iPad and the savegame would be right where you were on the TV synced via iCloud. If you complete a Candy Crush level on one device, it's completed on the other device. Standard consoles can't have that level of integration with mobile devices.
Mmm ... Good points.
But I think you * answered most of your own questions.
With the new AppleTV, you get, say $50 worth of free game cards. You can register/allocate them among your AppleTVs, iPhones and iPads as you wish. Each user can either pay up front or do in-app purchase as they desire -- with a 1-tap transaction.
My point is that if ATV pushes gaming, IMO, it will be competing with the big three consoles.
I don't know what that means, "pushes." If you get gaming by default, is that pushing? I seriously doubt Apple is going to market this device as a replacement for gaming consoles, that would be incredibly stupid (in my opinion) and would misunderstand and misrepresent the device. Gaming is but *one* of the types of apps the device (via the rumoured App Store) will support. Different price points, different market segments, different functionality vs. gaming consoles, not an either/or situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanVM
And console gaming include great controller, good online and multiplayer experience. And I haven't seen that in iOS games yet.
This gets at "casual gamers aren't *real* gamers" silliness I was talking about. iOS doesn't require controllers (though as I said I think some games are improved by them), online play or multiplayer options, and yet it's one of the most popular platforms for games out there.
It seems the concerns about this device offering gaming are more about protecting what is perhaps considered sacrosanct ("gaming via consoles") as if this device somehow challenges that world by threatening to redefine the entire concept of gaming. It's like there is territory to defend, and that is something I simply don't understand. The two worlds can coexist, gaming consoles aren't going away (not yet anyway).
The A8's GPU is NOT equivalent to the PS3. That's the next generation of PowerVR graphics likely coming in the A9.
And there are more to games than graphics. The fantasy that an AppleTV will replace dedicated game consoles is sheer lunacy.
That being said, hopefully it's actually a decent, open streaming box. The current one is way too closed down.
You're forgetting that the A8 is running games at a higher resolution than the PS3 when used for mobile. Lowering the resolution requirement to 1080p would increase graphic capability. And as the article mentions, an Apple TV with an A8 would always be plugged in. That would eliminate the power consumption concerns that might also limit graphics.
Our shared iTunes Library is 5.35 TeraByte and resides on a 28 TeraByte RAID -- with various parts backed up elsewhere.
I would like to see the new AppleTV with a reasonable-sized SSD for active storage and cross-loading. Then have an automatic percolate-up, trickle down interface with the Cloud -- where the files would be archived and distributed across many servers, for reliable access.
That way, the stuff we are currently using is on the AppleTV SSD and everything else can be quickly streamed/cached from the Cloud.
This could use iCloud for the server, but does not need to.
I think this is one of the major reasons that Apple acquired FoundationDB. FDB can run on any 'Nix servers and is designed to be distributed.
So, our personal, encrypted files could be spread across tens or hundreds of servers from Amazon, Apple, Google, IBM, etc. -- or any combination.
Apple could offer a local, Mac version to provide the same capability to manage a local copy of the files -- it's just another distribution point.
So files are distributed like with torrents? Interesting idea. Would that lead to improved overall availability and download speeds?
I like the idea you describe if a local/remote seamless mix. Maybe even one that automatically "learns", just like a cache on a CPU or SDD.
But I'm sure we're already reaching too high with our expectations here. One can dream, though. And I'm still carefully optimistic that his time will be again a "yes. Yes! YES!"-moment coming up on the 9th
Unfortunately, Apple gave Jony Ive a monopoly on user interfaces; no one approves his work and there is no user testing.
...
Jony Ive is a genius at designing hardware, but otherwise he is a walking design disaster who makes software hard to use. Apple could improve its design by firing Jony Ive and replacing him with an idea.
Comments
Unfortunately, Apple gave Jony Ive a monopoly on user interfaces; no one approves his work and there is no user testing.
"Skeuomorphism" is a Greek word that means "things look like what they are." Jony has decided that making things look like what they are is bad design, so instead of icons that are intuitively obvious, we'll have even more abstract symbols that we have to learn. Presently we have the valentine card for the Health app, balloons for games (not parties), and paint sample sticks to see our photos. If the Apple TV UI does not remain a bunch of rounded squares that are increasingly hard to tell apart, it will look like a bubble bath, like the Apple Watch. Jony is good at drawing circles, but precious little else. The whole thing will look like OS X Hanna Barbera.
Jony Ive is a genius at designing hardware, but otherwise he is a walking design disaster who makes software hard to use. Apple could improve its design by firing Jony Ive and replacing him with an idea.
Oooh. Provocative.
My ComCast Interface designed in 1985 is just fine.
I do think getting in to automobiles at this point should be the ultimate secret hobby. Getting the software and hardware, where appropriate, into cars is a good idea. The car thing is even more extreme than getting into the manufacturing of TV's, which I also think would be a mistake at this time.
I am not opposed to gaming. I think it can be done in a natural way by making the ATV open enough. As you and others have pointed out, iDevices have become a major force in mobile, light gaming. The ATV could very well evolve into an interesting gaming experience. My thing is it's more important to keep the price low than to add items that would bring the base price above $100. A $200 Apple TV would really be risky. I'd like to see the Apple TV knock off most of the current popular media players. This means access to a lot of interesting content, and to get that you need a lot of users, and you won't get that with an expensive player.
You're absolutely right. Xmas eve day, to Sept. 16th is 267 days (8 months, 24 days), which is shy of the 280 days (40 weeks) for human gestation.
Exactly... Apple has been involved with light gaming on iPhones. iPods and iPads with much success.
I could see them venture out into light gaming... on TVs... by adding games to a streaming box they were already planning on selling.
Like I said before... Apple can make hardware... they can convince developers to get on board... they have an app store... they have controller APIs.
They've been setting up the chess pieces for a while now. So let's play!
You raise a good point about pricing though. I remember the price-drop from $99 to $69... but did the 3rd-gen start at $99? Or did it used to be higher? I don't even remember since it's been so long.
Wrong. I complained about the speaker quality in the newer iMacs with the 5mm audio-funnel chin that were created after Jobs died. But who cares about facts.
And you obviously know everything about sound. All hail the sound king. If you know anything about the TV industry you'd realise that surround sound systems are selling worse than ever because people are realising they are too complex and messy with too many parts, AND ADDITIONAL REMOTES (a pet peeve of mine). Going forward the soundbar reigns supreme. This is the way things are and are headed. It's a far cleaner setup in the living room and these things sound a lot better than you'd imagine. My philosophy is a TV without good sound is an unfinished product. You can disagree with that philosophy, and you're welcome to. But that is my thinking. The general consumer shouldn't be left to solve the sound problem. If you make the TV you need to incorporate good sound quality into the design of the product or get out of the industry. Anything less and you've no respect for product design. The consumer should be able to open the box, plug this TV in and have signicantly better sound then is available out of the box TVs that exist right now. That's a TV product that respects the customer and itself. Nothing should need to be added on. The customer shouldn't need to use a single cell to get decent sound, it should just be.
That was a bit harsh, but it was funny.
Good idea.
Now the only thing that's missing is adding an iTunes server into the little box, and put a sizable SSD into it, so can finally get rid of my Laptop-needing-a-big-internal-drive-and-staying-on-all-the-time-because-I-stream-media-from-it, and replace it with an Air. :-)
Yes, I know there is the Cloud, but I prefer to have my stuff local as well, thank you.
Edit: fixed typos.
Now the only thing that's missing is adding an iTunes saver into the little box, and put a sizable SSD into it, so can get finally rid of my Laptop-needing-a-big-internal-drive-and-staying-on-all-the-time-because-I-stream-media-from-it, and replace it with an Air. :-)
Yes, I know there is the Cloud, but I prefer to have my stuff local as well, thank you.
This is one of those areas I'd love to see them address too and start to look at the device as a true home hub, so just like you say, get stuff off our laptops and desktops and put it centrally in one location, which is where some of us have the content already (which iTunes doesn't like much or make very easy). A "server based" iTunes would be great! Easy connection to a NAS would be ideal.
I used to eat this stuff up like chocolate Moose Tracks. It (technology) was my hope. No longer. I still get a kick out of the dreams and predictions of tech but hope solely in Jesus now. I believe this year, especially starting this September, we'll see some interesting (most likely scary) changes in the world economy and events surrounding Israel. Kurtzweil, and others, may discover soon that technology is an empty hope.
They would then need to have a UI that can be controlled with a controller and a remote. But how do you buy things using a controller or type characters/numbers? Over 90% of all App Store revenue is from in-app purchases and ads. The biggest earning apps look like the following:
[VIDEO]
That one app made over $1b, free-to-play and just gets people to buy items in-game. It got 13 million players from Japan playing:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/13/gungho-reports-puzzle-and-dragons-is-earning-3-75-million-a-day/
The Sims is a popular game on mobile:
[VIDEO]
and they managed to port this to consoles:
[VIDEO]
but the revenue model on mobile is free-to-play vs upfront on console so they'd have to figure out which way they want to go. Going the upfront payment route would result in low app sales. Going the IAP/ad route of iOS would require a different control interface because IAPs and ads would feature heavily and most high revenue iOS apps are not suitable for a standard controller. I would expect them to want people to play Candy Crush on the sofa but it would be very difficult with a normal controller as the Amazon Fire TV demonstrates where you have to just move a circle over the gems with the sticks:
http://www.aftvnews.com/amazon-lets-slip-candy-crush-saga-coming-to-fire-tv/
I also don't think Apple would want people to be switching between two control methods.
The advantage with making it compatible with iOS touch games is that people can jump between platforms. You can be playing the Sims on the TV and if someone wants to watch TV, you can switch to the iPad and the savegame would be right where you were on the TV synced via iCloud. If you complete a Candy Crush level on one device, it's completed on the other device. Standard consoles can't have that level of integration with mobile devices.
Our shared iTunes Library is 5.35 TeraByte and resides on a 28 TeraByte RAID -- with various parts backed up elsewhere.
I would like to see the new AppleTV with a reasonable-sized SSD for active storage and cross-loading. Then have an automatic percolate-up, trickle down interface with the Cloud -- where the files would be archived and distributed across many servers, for reliable access.
That way, the stuff we are currently using is on the AppleTV SSD and everything else can be quickly streamed/cached from the Cloud.
This could use iCloud for the server, but does not need to.
I think this is one of the major reasons that Apple acquired FoundationDB. FDB can run on any 'Nix servers and is designed to be distributed.
So, our personal, encrypted files could be spread across tens or hundreds of servers from Amazon, Apple, Google, IBM, etc. -- or any combination.
Apple could offer a local, Mac version to provide the same capability to manage a local copy of the files -- it's just another distribution point.
Mmm ... Good points.
But I think you * answered most of your own questions.
With the new AppleTV, you get, say $50 worth of free game cards. You can register/allocate them among your AppleTVs, iPhones and iPads as you wish. Each user can either pay up front or do in-app purchase as they desire -- with a 1-tap transaction.
Or just use ApplePay ... ApplePlay!
* and Taylor Swift
My point is that if ATV pushes gaming, IMO, it will be competing with the big three consoles.
I don't know what that means, "pushes." If you get gaming by default, is that pushing? I seriously doubt Apple is going to market this device as a replacement for gaming consoles, that would be incredibly stupid (in my opinion) and would misunderstand and misrepresent the device. Gaming is but *one* of the types of apps the device (via the rumoured App Store) will support. Different price points, different market segments, different functionality vs. gaming consoles, not an either/or situation.
And console gaming include great controller, good online and multiplayer experience. And I haven't seen that in iOS games yet.
This gets at "casual gamers aren't *real* gamers" silliness I was talking about. iOS doesn't require controllers (though as I said I think some games are improved by them), online play or multiplayer options, and yet it's one of the most popular platforms for games out there.
It seems the concerns about this device offering gaming are more about protecting what is perhaps considered sacrosanct ("gaming via consoles") as if this device somehow challenges that world by threatening to redefine the entire concept of gaming. It's like there is territory to defend, and that is something I simply don't understand. The two worlds can coexist, gaming consoles aren't going away (not yet anyway).
The A8's GPU is NOT equivalent to the PS3. That's the next generation of PowerVR graphics likely coming in the A9.
And there are more to games than graphics. The fantasy that an AppleTV will replace dedicated game consoles is sheer lunacy.
That being said, hopefully it's actually a decent, open streaming box. The current one is way too closed down.
You're forgetting that the A8 is running games at a higher resolution than the PS3 when used for mobile. Lowering the resolution requirement to 1080p would increase graphic capability. And as the article mentions, an Apple TV with an A8 would always be plugged in. That would eliminate the power consumption concerns that might also limit graphics.
So files are distributed like with torrents? Interesting idea. Would that lead to improved overall availability and download speeds?
I like the idea you describe if a local/remote seamless mix. Maybe even one that automatically "learns", just like a cache on a CPU or SDD.
But I'm sure we're already reaching too high with our expectations here. One can dream, though. And I'm still carefully optimistic that his time will be again a "yes. Yes! YES!"-moment coming up on the 9th
Unfortunately, Apple gave Jony Ive a monopoly on user interfaces; no one approves his work and there is no user testing.
...
Jony Ive is a genius at designing hardware, but otherwise he is a walking design disaster who makes software hard to use. Apple could improve its design by firing Jony Ive and replacing him with an idea.
Whatever.
Sigh.
Yawn.