But the Apple TV is not a server it's a media extender which is why some people actually have more than one (depending on how many TV they own).
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
No I'm simply saying that a software and hardware perspective the Apple TV makes for a poor server. It may be better and more functional for Apple to offer a storage/server device where the ATV is just another client.
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
Why share media from an ATV when its much easier to manage a library from iTunes? This isnt logical to me. Kids should have iPod nanos.
The best ATV setups I have seen are those who are using it to send media from a centrally located desktop external hard drive (2TB+) that contains hundreds of handbrak'd MP4s and M4V files and thousands of MP3s. Everyone in the house can access this content (shared via iTunes) from their laptop or ATV (yes, a very efficient media extender).
From my point of view, the only thing missing is the ability to stream media directly to an iphone or iphone touch so you dont even need a laptop or ATV to access the media. Ultimately, streaming this across the world should be where this is going. The concept of a a truly mobile media library is something i have had dreams about since the mid 90s. There's software that does this, but Apple needs to go ahead and build it into the iPhone 3.x software. Not sure what the holdup is here... 3G bandwith maybe?
Comments
But the Apple TV is not a server it's a media extender which is why some people actually have more than one (depending on how many TV they own).
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
No I'm simply saying that a software and hardware perspective the Apple TV makes for a poor server. It may be better and more functional for Apple to offer a storage/server device where the ATV is just another client.
Already have a Blu-ray player.
I need something that's going to display my photos once I get around to gettings a good camera that shoots RAW.
I have one that shoots RAW and the moment iPhoto touches it, it converts it to a JPEG.
That line of reasoning is a little unclear to me. Currently, one user can sync their library (or a portion of their library) to the ATV. Why not allow more than one user to sync their library to it? If you're suggesting that makes it a "server", fine with me, it doesn't matter what it's called, it addresses the issue of a family sharing an ATV in the living room. Having more than one ATV in different rooms doesn't seem to solve the issue.
Why share media from an ATV when its much easier to manage a library from iTunes? This isnt logical to me. Kids should have iPod nanos.
The best ATV setups I have seen are those who are using it to send media from a centrally located desktop external hard drive (2TB+) that contains hundreds of handbrak'd MP4s and M4V files and thousands of MP3s. Everyone in the house can access this content (shared via iTunes) from their laptop or ATV (yes, a very efficient media extender).
From my point of view, the only thing missing is the ability to stream media directly to an iphone or iphone touch so you dont even need a laptop or ATV to access the media. Ultimately, streaming this across the world should be where this is going. The concept of a a truly mobile media library is something i have had dreams about since the mid 90s. There's software that does this, but Apple needs to go ahead and build it into the iPhone 3.x software. Not sure what the holdup is here... 3G bandwith maybe?