OMG, free software, use teh red text! Use teh red tex!!!1!
But seriously, the iPhone and AppleTV are first generation products that are going to have noticeable inadequacies. Apple had better provide updated software with expanded feature sets. This is exactly what they did with OS X and the iPod when they were new.
If you compare the sections that have similar strings you will notice they all actually do the functions in the real world except for the games on the phone.
I'm not sure what that means, but they obviously don't do the functions if you are assuming they are for future product updates. Do any of the iTunes-equipped phones allow transfer of voice memos back to the iTunes computer? (I actually don't know the answer to that one) Does the AppleTV do voice memos? No, it doesn't...
Quote:
I know a lot of runners that would love to see there progress on their TV's- there is a lot that can be done with this in the future.
Yes, but the messages you grabbed talked about the Nike + iPod voice kit. I'm assuming that is the software that does the voice over stuff with the iPod Nanos and the Nike+ kit. What good would that do on the AppleTV? I suppose you could run around the living room with your Nano and have the audio come out of your TV, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Quote:
Ever connected to another computer on the network? You have to eject it when you are done.
To be honest, I haven't done that with a Mac. I've connect to shared drives with PC's but generally haven't ejected/disconnected afterwards. Again, why would you eject the AppleTV? You would never have to because it should pretty much always be on the same network as the host computer. I understand why such a message exists for the iPod and mobile phones, because they do get removed from the network frequently.
Quote:
Well that would be true, however if you go and look at the actual file its not kept in sync between the different sections at all.
I did look at the actual file. I didn't read every line in the iPod/mobile phones/AppleTV sections, but they seemed pretty in sync. Feel free to point out where these major differences were. Every message you posted was in all three sections in exactly the same words except for changing to iPod/mobile phone/Apple TV as appropriate for the various sections.
I really don't think these messages hint at any future functions on either the iPhone or the AppleTV.
Sarbanes-Oxley is... complex. Very broadly speaking, it was supposed to reinstate confidence in accounting practices in the US by introducing new standards and regulations. It has numerous provisions, all presumably designed to make business and accounting more, well, accountable. This specific issue with Apple is, as pointed out, a consequence of their reading of what they need to report and how.
Such pedantry did't apply to their accounting for stock options.
To slightly misquote Ralph Waldo Emerson, demanding consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind ...
We don't know that the ATv isn't finished. According to the reviews I've read, it seems to do just what it's been advertised to do.
This is an open system, just as the iPhone, and Apple's computers are, and to a certain extent the iPods are as well. They are designed to be upgraded.
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system. These are not really new features, but for the most part already there in the OS and only need to be expanded on much the way Apple adds new printer and camera drivers with each incremental update to OS X.
Right now neither the Apple TV nor the yet to be released iPhone are open systems. An Open system implies that there is a development kit available (no "hacking required") and that a developer can release software written with that development kit without approval from Apple and the consumer can install said programs. We do not know that this will happen with either the iPhone or Apple TV. Hopefully they will release a development kit for both of these systems because it will increase their appeal to consumers and help them gain market share in their intended markets.
Such pedantry did't apply to their accounting for stock options.
To slightly misquote Ralph Waldo Emerson, demanding consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind ...
S/O didn't exist back then. It would have been difficult to adhere to standards that weren't around.
Back then, the CEO was not responsible for accounting methods and accuracy. S/O has attempted to make them more responsible by having them sign off on the financial statement.
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system. These are not really new features, but for the most part already there in the OS and only need to be expanded on much the way Apple adds new printer and camera drivers with each incremental update to OS X.
Right now neither the Apple TV nor the yet to be released iPhone are open systems. An Open system implies that there is a development kit available (no "hacking required") and that a developer can release software written with that development kit without approval from Apple and the consumer can install said programs. We do not know that this will happen with either the iPhone or Apple TV. Hopefully they will release a development kit for both of these systems because it will increase their appeal to consumers and help them gain market share in their intended markets.
There are two parts to a system being open.
The first and most important is that it be upgradable in the first place. Both the iPhone and the ATv fit that definition perfectly. The iPod sort of does.
The second, as you say, requires support from the manufacturer. So far, that hasn't come?as far as we know. What we do know is that Apple has said that third party software for the iPhone is likely, so there is obviously a way to do that, kit or no kit.
As far as the ATv is concerned, there is already plenty of third party stuff available?no kit required.
Apple even recently stated that once someone buys an ATV, it was theirs to fiddle with. That certainly implies that it is open.
>>It's hard to tell if this is a case of them adding value to the product after people have purchased it, or shipping a product before it's complete and finishing it afterwards via software updates..<<
I think it's at least some of the latter. Nothing wrong with that per se, just call it what it is. Because when I first saw the link to this news, I took it as an answer to my top iPhone issue: the rules about third-party software and installing your own. i.e. There will apparently be no installing whatever you like at will, as you would say the latest greatest open source phone browser/media player, or most of the things Mac users grab and try at macupdate.com
For legitimate enough reasons, Apple will provide links to Apple-approved add-ons to be developed by Apple-approved third parties, if I'm understanding the shape of things to come. That's fine, it's their prerogative and all -- but for a whole fleet of would-be iPhone buyers, it could be a deal-breaker, at least for a while.
Thus I thought this news was some official expansion on Apple's own plans for an expanded iPhone download site, perhaps letting all-comers develop and distribute third-party iPhone software via a central Apple site. (Like they do with OS X software downloads at Apple.com)
Rather, this does sound more like Microsoft making a feature out of the latest security hole update program.
As someone who's reluctantly avoided iPod because he can't surrender geek add-ons to buy the whole ranch, the apparent all-or-nothing bargain is going to be a real struggle when the day comes to get a fancy new phone.
The upside? The iPhone could still do enough things so well that it's worth -- like the iPod -- almost any tradeoff Apple asks me to make.
I'm not sure what that means, but they obviously don't do the functions if you are assuming they are for future product updates. Do any of the iTunes-equipped phones allow transfer of voice memos back to the iTunes computer? (I actually don't know the answer to that one) Does the AppleTV do voice memos? No, it doesn't...
AppleTV may transfer your voice memo's to its hard drive int he future - thats the point of speculating what this all means. I do not currently have a phone that works with iTunes so maybe someone else can answer that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
Yes, but the messages you grabbed talked about the Nike + iPod voice kit. I'm assuming that is the software that does the voice over stuff with the iPod Nanos and the Nike+ kit. What good would that do on the AppleTV? I suppose you could run around the living room with your Nano and have the audio come out of your TV, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
There is a lot more to the Nike + iPod experiance.
Go to the nike site and see how it works. Please take note of your runs, history, community etc.
To be honest, I haven't done that with a Mac. I've connect to shared drives with PC's but generally haven't ejected/disconnected afterwards. Again, why would you eject the AppleTV? You would never have to because it should pretty much always be on the same network as the host computer. I understand why such a message exists for the iPod and mobile phones, because they do get removed from the network frequently.
If you connect to a computer over the network you do at some point disconnect from it for many many reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
I did look at the actual file. I didn't read every line in the iPod/mobile phones/AppleTV sections, but they seemed pretty in sync. Feel free to point out where these major differences were. Every message you posted was in all three sections in exactly the same words except for changing to iPod/mobile phone/Apple TV as appropriate for the various sections.
I really don't think these messages hint at any future functions on either the iPhone or the AppleTV.
Im not going to force you to agree with me LOL. You do not need to.
Edit to add:
AppleTV has Bluetooth in it but its not used. So I think Apple is saying some software update will enable this hardware to work (like the Wireless N).
iTunes files are littered with reference to functions the ATV has yet to implement. Generally Apple does not put in these references until the functionality it supports is implemented. That the references are still there implies, to me, that they had to pull people off the development for some reason and they just left the localized files intact. It may not be just Leopard that had people pulled - iTunes and AppleTV both will interact with iPhone so I speculates that they are helping with the iPhone and then will come back to the ATV, Im not sure but Apple might even use the same developers for iTunes/AppleTV/iPhone because its in the same department.
I wouldn't be surprised if the end goal is a full Leopard (10.5) for Macs, and 2 "lite" Leopards for the AppleTV and for the iPhone (much smaller footprints, perhaps no Darwin?).
The AppleTV came too early to get Leopard lite and they have created a simpler system based on 10.4.7. The iPhone will be the first version of Leopard we see - it simply can not handle the bigger OS like the AppleTV has, so it MUST use the lite version.
IF correct (big IF)... this implies
1) AppleTV OS creators -could- now be focussed on the iPhone OS
2) We've seen a close approximation of the AppleTV OS - there IS more (whatever Leopard offers is possible, whether known or secret).
3) All the new hacks may stop working when the AppleTV OS comes out
4) We could see the AppleTV OS from as early as the iPhone (if they are both "Lite")... up to a month after Leopard.
Watching the screen saver was what got me wondering about Leopard-for-AppleTV. The screen saver is great, but it's a poor imitation of what Core Animation is capable of. I'm betting for some very interesting functions here (as well as in future iPhoto versions)
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system.
There is much functionality they could add to the AppleTV.
However... it quickly becomes a far more complicated interface. Even now, how can you find a movie preview you're interested in watching? Let alone renting from a catalog of movies. How would you find a youTube video you wanted to see?
I'm of 2 minds - more functionality is great, but the simplicity is key to a new TV paradigm. They need to do both - but put simplicity first.
Ok, I'll say it. I'm excited about the whole idea of Apple finally doing what Jobs said they would do almost two years ago, leveraging the OS.
This is really much bigger than petty squabbles about one thing or the other.
These devices will become more over time, that's exciting.
Apple could put the OS into other devices as well. An OMPC, or whatever they call those little things. Even a cheap educational computer like the one the UN is working on.
Many things can result from this. That's worth talking about.
We don't know what Apple is planning, but they sure are planning something. I still think it is very important that when asked about the mods that are out for the ATv already, Apple essentially shrugged, and said that if you buy it, you can mod it.
Doesn't anyone here find that significant, other than myself?
There is much functionality they could add to the AppleTV.
However... it quickly becomes a far more complicated interface. Even now, how can you find a movie preview you're interested in watching? Let alone renting from a catalog of movies. How would you find a youTube video you wanted to see?
I'm of 2 minds - more functionality is great, but the simplicity is key to a new TV paradigm. They need to do both - but put simplicity first.
What functions would you really want that are possible given the current hardware set-up? USB Web cam & iChat? Keyboard, mouse, and web browser? Mail? Answering machine? Sure the hardware will probably grow in the future, but the OS should be able to handle most of what people want right now, short of DVR, as is. Apple would need to unlock the USB port and keyboard control which is probably accessible by their tech team for trouble shooting already. The software they could do themselves as free downloads, like iTunes, or let 3d party developers add to Apple TV with programs and plug-ins as Apple as well as hardware companies work on increasing the driver support which is usually part of incremental OS upgrades or install disks from the hardware company anyway.
What it needs most is (HD) content and a way to get in to the Apple TV. IPTV, Subscription video, video rentals, etc. The delivery methods over the internet are just starting out now. We will probably know more by the end of the year, hopefully sooner. I don't think Apple can fill all the needs of content for Apple TV to be successful so I suspect some sort of "plug-ins" that would allow adding google video, YouTube, and others into the mix. The other way they could do this would be to sell the internet companies the software that supports Apple TV streaming that is used for movie previews which would need minimal to no changes to the Apple TV OS.
The title here is a little misleading; they're not "building" new features in, they're rolling them out via software updates. If I had to guess, I'd say a typical such update would be, for instance, the ability to read RSS feeds on AppleTV or an additional application for iPhone.
One thing many are forgetting in their criticism of AppleTV and iPhone is that both of those are platforms quite a bit more open than, say, iPod. I expect that AppleTV and iPhone will be updated with both free AND for-pay updates which will bring significant improvements. The logistic and technical issues with both are much easier to overcome than with iPod - development will be done for OS X, not for the iPod platform, and both devices have much greater input and output capabilities than iPod.
The word "upgrade" implies upgrading existing features. The title is correct. Yes, they are delivering these new features via the software upgrade program but do not mistake the delivery method for the feature type. Apple can add new features and app even if delivering via software upgrade program. I am a big critic of the iphone (i think it is too pricey) but i like this.. Give users value for paying such a high price. Hmm, makes the success of the apple iphone a bit more certain. I still would not be getting one but i have to mute my criticism a little bit (of course, what these new features are is of interest.. if they are just small additions, then a big yawn.. if major new features, then excellent).
A specification that isn't finalized and you want it turned on for free? How many cell phones have you had that are not locked in with your provider? The phone can be opened up but you don't get that for free and they aren't based upon some specification in flux.
Actually, he's not joking. other than obeying some accounting rule, why couldn't apple have turned it on for free?. How do you know the price of the product didn't already include the feature and apple is double charging?. What?.. u so trusting of apple that you can't question?. You have no idea if the price of the product didn't already include the cost of turning on the specification and maybe the $2 is just a way for apple to grab more money.. are you jobs close relative or something?.
It's hard to tell if this is a case of them adding value to the product after people have purchased it, or shipping a product before it's complete and finishing it afterwards via software updates...
In the case of ATv, it's really as though they shipped an incomplete product package and now are (hopefully) going to finish it by increasing it's limited functionality.
Their press releases always have such a wonderful slant on them. What if Windows released a statement saying that Vista would include free updates to functionality - would you all be so glowing in your response? I mean, SP1 and SP2 greatly improved the feature set, useability, etc. of XP... isn't that the same thing?
Hmm, although i think you meant microsoft released a statement (not windows).. this never occured to me.. yeah, it would be tough to know if apple is foisting an unfinished product on the public.. i guess the public will find out when stuff works/don work... but interesting thought nevertheless.
The word "upgrade" implies upgrading existing features. The title is correct. Yes, they are delivering these new features via the software upgrade program but do not mistake the delivery method for the feature type. Apple can add new features and app even if delivering via software upgrade program. I am a big critic of the iphone (i think it is too pricey) but i like this.. Give users value for paying such a high price. Hmm, makes the success of the apple iphone a bit more certain. I still would not be getting one but i have to mute my criticism a little bit (of course, what these new features are is of interest.. if they are just small additions, then a big yawn.. if major new features, then excellent).
Update implies improving existing features.
Upgrade implies adding features as well as improving the existing ones.
Actually, he's not joking. other than obeying some accounting rule, why couldn't apple have turned it on for free?. How do you know the price of the product didn't already include the feature and apple is double charging?. What?.. u so trusting of apple that you can't question?. You have no idea if the price of the product didn't already include the cost of turning on the specification and maybe the $2 is just a way for apple to grab more money.. are you jobs close relative or something?.
This has already been discussed to death. Apple did what they did because they handled it improperly from the beginning, and they were left with a distastful task of charging their customers for that feature.
Now they are doing it in a way that won't require them to do that again.
Hmm, although i think you meant microsoft released a statement (not windows).. this never occured to me.. yeah, it would be tough to know if apple is foisting an unfinished product on the public.. i guess the public will find out when stuff works/don work... but interesting thought nevertheless.
It's simple.
If it does what Apple says it does, then it's complete. If it doesn't, then it's faulty, and shouldn't have been released at all.
Upgrade implies adding features as well as improving the existing ones.
That second definition of upgrade is very broad.. what if apple then gives you tetris for free? (assuming it's not included in the first iphone shipment)... is that an upgrade?. what exactly then is not an upgrade?
Comments
But seriously, the iPhone and AppleTV are first generation products that are going to have noticeable inadequacies. Apple had better provide updated software with expanded feature sets. This is exactly what they did with OS X and the iPod when they were new.
If you compare the sections that have similar strings you will notice they all actually do the functions in the real world except for the games on the phone.
I'm not sure what that means, but they obviously don't do the functions if you are assuming they are for future product updates. Do any of the iTunes-equipped phones allow transfer of voice memos back to the iTunes computer? (I actually don't know the answer to that one) Does the AppleTV do voice memos? No, it doesn't...
I know a lot of runners that would love to see there progress on their TV's- there is a lot that can be done with this in the future.
Yes, but the messages you grabbed talked about the Nike + iPod voice kit. I'm assuming that is the software that does the voice over stuff with the iPod Nanos and the Nike+ kit. What good would that do on the AppleTV? I suppose you could run around the living room with your Nano and have the audio come out of your TV, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Ever connected to another computer on the network? You have to eject it when you are done.
To be honest, I haven't done that with a Mac. I've connect to shared drives with PC's but generally haven't ejected/disconnected afterwards. Again, why would you eject the AppleTV? You would never have to because it should pretty much always be on the same network as the host computer. I understand why such a message exists for the iPod and mobile phones, because they do get removed from the network frequently.
Well that would be true, however if you go and look at the actual file its not kept in sync between the different sections at all.
I did look at the actual file. I didn't read every line in the iPod/mobile phones/AppleTV sections, but they seemed pretty in sync. Feel free to point out where these major differences were. Every message you posted was in all three sections in exactly the same words except for changing to iPod/mobile phone/Apple TV as appropriate for the various sections.
I really don't think these messages hint at any future functions on either the iPhone or the AppleTV.
Sarbanes-Oxley is... complex. Very broadly speaking, it was supposed to reinstate confidence in accounting practices in the US by introducing new standards and regulations. It has numerous provisions, all presumably designed to make business and accounting more, well, accountable. This specific issue with Apple is, as pointed out, a consequence of their reading of what they need to report and how.
Such pedantry did't apply to their accounting for stock options.
To slightly misquote Ralph Waldo Emerson, demanding consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind ...
We don't know that the ATv isn't finished. According to the reviews I've read, it seems to do just what it's been advertised to do.
This is an open system, just as the iPhone, and Apple's computers are, and to a certain extent the iPods are as well. They are designed to be upgraded.
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system. These are not really new features, but for the most part already there in the OS and only need to be expanded on much the way Apple adds new printer and camera drivers with each incremental update to OS X.
Right now neither the Apple TV nor the yet to be released iPhone are open systems. An Open system implies that there is a development kit available (no "hacking required") and that a developer can release software written with that development kit without approval from Apple and the consumer can install said programs. We do not know that this will happen with either the iPhone or Apple TV. Hopefully they will release a development kit for both of these systems because it will increase their appeal to consumers and help them gain market share in their intended markets.
Such pedantry did't apply to their accounting for stock options.
To slightly misquote Ralph Waldo Emerson, demanding consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind ...
S/O didn't exist back then. It would have been difficult to adhere to standards that weren't around.
Back then, the CEO was not responsible for accounting methods and accuracy. S/O has attempted to make them more responsible by having them sign off on the financial statement.
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system. These are not really new features, but for the most part already there in the OS and only need to be expanded on much the way Apple adds new printer and camera drivers with each incremental update to OS X.
Right now neither the Apple TV nor the yet to be released iPhone are open systems. An Open system implies that there is a development kit available (no "hacking required") and that a developer can release software written with that development kit without approval from Apple and the consumer can install said programs. We do not know that this will happen with either the iPhone or Apple TV. Hopefully they will release a development kit for both of these systems because it will increase their appeal to consumers and help them gain market share in their intended markets.
There are two parts to a system being open.
The first and most important is that it be upgradable in the first place. Both the iPhone and the ATv fit that definition perfectly. The iPod sort of does.
The second, as you say, requires support from the manufacturer. So far, that hasn't come?as far as we know. What we do know is that Apple has said that third party software for the iPhone is likely, so there is obviously a way to do that, kit or no kit.
As far as the ATv is concerned, there is already plenty of third party stuff available?no kit required.
Apple even recently stated that once someone buys an ATV, it was theirs to fiddle with. That certainly implies that it is open.
I think it's at least some of the latter. Nothing wrong with that per se, just call it what it is. Because when I first saw the link to this news, I took it as an answer to my top iPhone issue: the rules about third-party software and installing your own. i.e. There will apparently be no installing whatever you like at will, as you would say the latest greatest open source phone browser/media player, or most of the things Mac users grab and try at macupdate.com
For legitimate enough reasons, Apple will provide links to Apple-approved add-ons to be developed by Apple-approved third parties, if I'm understanding the shape of things to come. That's fine, it's their prerogative and all -- but for a whole fleet of would-be iPhone buyers, it could be a deal-breaker, at least for a while.
Thus I thought this news was some official expansion on Apple's own plans for an expanded iPhone download site, perhaps letting all-comers develop and distribute third-party iPhone software via a central Apple site. (Like they do with OS X software downloads at Apple.com)
Rather, this does sound more like Microsoft making a feature out of the latest security hole update program.
As someone who's reluctantly avoided iPod because he can't surrender geek add-ons to buy the whole ranch, the apparent all-or-nothing bargain is going to be a real struggle when the day comes to get a fancy new phone.
The upside? The iPhone could still do enough things so well that it's worth -- like the iPod -- almost any tradeoff Apple asks me to make.
I don't know about Adobe but Apple's explanation is BS.
That is the most sensible thing that has been said on this issue in this thread!
I'm not sure what that means, but they obviously don't do the functions if you are assuming they are for future product updates. Do any of the iTunes-equipped phones allow transfer of voice memos back to the iTunes computer? (I actually don't know the answer to that one) Does the AppleTV do voice memos? No, it doesn't...
AppleTV may transfer your voice memo's to its hard drive int he future - thats the point of speculating what this all means. I do not currently have a phone that works with iTunes so maybe someone else can answer that.
Yes, but the messages you grabbed talked about the Nike + iPod voice kit. I'm assuming that is the software that does the voice over stuff with the iPod Nanos and the Nike+ kit. What good would that do on the AppleTV? I suppose you could run around the living room with your Nano and have the audio come out of your TV, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
There is a lot more to the Nike + iPod experiance.
Go to the nike site and see how it works. Please take note of your runs, history, community etc.
http://www.nike.com/nikeplus/
To be honest, I haven't done that with a Mac. I've connect to shared drives with PC's but generally haven't ejected/disconnected afterwards. Again, why would you eject the AppleTV? You would never have to because it should pretty much always be on the same network as the host computer. I understand why such a message exists for the iPod and mobile phones, because they do get removed from the network frequently.
If you connect to a computer over the network you do at some point disconnect from it for many many reasons.
I did look at the actual file. I didn't read every line in the iPod/mobile phones/AppleTV sections, but they seemed pretty in sync. Feel free to point out where these major differences were. Every message you posted was in all three sections in exactly the same words except for changing to iPod/mobile phone/Apple TV as appropriate for the various sections.
I really don't think these messages hint at any future functions on either the iPhone or the AppleTV.
Im not going to force you to agree with me LOL. You do not need to.
Edit to add:
AppleTV has Bluetooth in it but its not used. So I think Apple is saying some software update will enable this hardware to work (like the Wireless N).
Picture of bluetooth working once its been hacked: http://www.pbase.com/jhapeman/image/76522598
iTunes files are littered with reference to functions the ATV has yet to implement. Generally Apple does not put in these references until the functionality it supports is implemented. That the references are still there implies, to me, that they had to pull people off the development for some reason and they just left the localized files intact. It may not be just Leopard that had people pulled - iTunes and AppleTV both will interact with iPhone so I speculates that they are helping with the iPhone and then will come back to the ATV, Im not sure but Apple might even use the same developers for iTunes/AppleTV/iPhone because its in the same department.
I wouldn't be surprised if the end goal is a full Leopard (10.5) for Macs, and 2 "lite" Leopards for the AppleTV and for the iPhone (much smaller footprints, perhaps no Darwin?).
The AppleTV came too early to get Leopard lite and they have created a simpler system based on 10.4.7. The iPhone will be the first version of Leopard we see - it simply can not handle the bigger OS like the AppleTV has, so it MUST use the lite version.
IF correct (big IF)... this implies
1) AppleTV OS creators -could- now be focussed on the iPhone OS
2) We've seen a close approximation of the AppleTV OS - there IS more (whatever Leopard offers is possible, whether known or secret).
3) All the new hacks may stop working when the AppleTV OS comes out
4) We could see the AppleTV OS from as early as the iPhone (if they are both "Lite")... up to a month after Leopard.
Watching the screen saver was what got me wondering about Leopard-for-AppleTV. The screen saver is great, but it's a poor imitation of what Core Animation is capable of. I'm betting for some very interesting functions here (as well as in future iPhoto versions)
Apple TV doesn't really need much to add value to the product. It can receive streams from the internet already, and through that they could add "free" and or "subscription" support for YouTube , Joust, and other internet "Broadcasters". It also has a plug-in architecture which could be used to allow others such as Joust and YouTube to add the support independently, all that is required for that which is not currently available is the development kit and a channel to install said plug-ins without "hacking" the system.
There is much functionality they could add to the AppleTV.
However... it quickly becomes a far more complicated interface. Even now, how can you find a movie preview you're interested in watching? Let alone renting from a catalog of movies. How would you find a youTube video you wanted to see?
I'm of 2 minds - more functionality is great, but the simplicity is key to a new TV paradigm. They need to do both - but put simplicity first.
This is really much bigger than petty squabbles about one thing or the other.
These devices will become more over time, that's exciting.
Apple could put the OS into other devices as well. An OMPC, or whatever they call those little things. Even a cheap educational computer like the one the UN is working on.
Many things can result from this. That's worth talking about.
We don't know what Apple is planning, but they sure are planning something. I still think it is very important that when asked about the mods that are out for the ATv already, Apple essentially shrugged, and said that if you buy it, you can mod it.
Doesn't anyone here find that significant, other than myself?
There is much functionality they could add to the AppleTV.
However... it quickly becomes a far more complicated interface. Even now, how can you find a movie preview you're interested in watching? Let alone renting from a catalog of movies. How would you find a youTube video you wanted to see?
I'm of 2 minds - more functionality is great, but the simplicity is key to a new TV paradigm. They need to do both - but put simplicity first.
What functions would you really want that are possible given the current hardware set-up? USB Web cam & iChat? Keyboard, mouse, and web browser? Mail? Answering machine? Sure the hardware will probably grow in the future, but the OS should be able to handle most of what people want right now, short of DVR, as is. Apple would need to unlock the USB port and keyboard control which is probably accessible by their tech team for trouble shooting already. The software they could do themselves as free downloads, like iTunes, or let 3d party developers add to Apple TV with programs and plug-ins as Apple as well as hardware companies work on increasing the driver support which is usually part of incremental OS upgrades or install disks from the hardware company anyway.
What it needs most is (HD) content and a way to get in to the Apple TV. IPTV, Subscription video, video rentals, etc. The delivery methods over the internet are just starting out now. We will probably know more by the end of the year, hopefully sooner. I don't think Apple can fill all the needs of content for Apple TV to be successful so I suspect some sort of "plug-ins" that would allow adding google video, YouTube, and others into the mix. The other way they could do this would be to sell the internet companies the software that supports Apple TV streaming that is used for movie previews which would need minimal to no changes to the Apple TV OS.
The title here is a little misleading; they're not "building" new features in, they're rolling them out via software updates. If I had to guess, I'd say a typical such update would be, for instance, the ability to read RSS feeds on AppleTV or an additional application for iPhone.
One thing many are forgetting in their criticism of AppleTV and iPhone is that both of those are platforms quite a bit more open than, say, iPod. I expect that AppleTV and iPhone will be updated with both free AND for-pay updates which will bring significant improvements. The logistic and technical issues with both are much easier to overcome than with iPod - development will be done for OS X, not for the iPod platform, and both devices have much greater input and output capabilities than iPod.
The word "upgrade" implies upgrading existing features. The title is correct. Yes, they are delivering these new features via the software upgrade program but do not mistake the delivery method for the feature type. Apple can add new features and app even if delivering via software upgrade program. I am a big critic of the iphone (i think it is too pricey) but i like this.. Give users value for paying such a high price. Hmm, makes the success of the apple iphone a bit more certain. I still would not be getting one but i have to mute my criticism a little bit (of course, what these new features are is of interest.. if they are just small additions, then a big yawn.. if major new features, then excellent).
You're joking, right?
A specification that isn't finalized and you want it turned on for free? How many cell phones have you had that are not locked in with your provider? The phone can be opened up but you don't get that for free and they aren't based upon some specification in flux.
Actually, he's not joking. other than obeying some accounting rule, why couldn't apple have turned it on for free?. How do you know the price of the product didn't already include the feature and apple is double charging?. What?.. u so trusting of apple that you can't question?. You have no idea if the price of the product didn't already include the cost of turning on the specification and maybe the $2 is just a way for apple to grab more money.. are you jobs close relative or something?.
It's hard to tell if this is a case of them adding value to the product after people have purchased it, or shipping a product before it's complete and finishing it afterwards via software updates...
In the case of ATv, it's really as though they shipped an incomplete product package and now are (hopefully) going to finish it by increasing it's limited functionality.
Their press releases always have such a wonderful slant on them. What if Windows released a statement saying that Vista would include free updates to functionality - would you all be so glowing in your response? I mean, SP1 and SP2 greatly improved the feature set, useability, etc. of XP... isn't that the same thing?
Hmm, although i think you meant microsoft released a statement (not windows).. this never occured to me.. yeah, it would be tough to know if apple is foisting an unfinished product on the public.. i guess the public will find out when stuff works/don work... but interesting thought nevertheless.
The word "upgrade" implies upgrading existing features. The title is correct. Yes, they are delivering these new features via the software upgrade program but do not mistake the delivery method for the feature type. Apple can add new features and app even if delivering via software upgrade program. I am a big critic of the iphone (i think it is too pricey) but i like this.. Give users value for paying such a high price. Hmm, makes the success of the apple iphone a bit more certain. I still would not be getting one but i have to mute my criticism a little bit (of course, what these new features are is of interest.. if they are just small additions, then a big yawn.. if major new features, then excellent).
Update implies improving existing features.
Upgrade implies adding features as well as improving the existing ones.
Actually, he's not joking. other than obeying some accounting rule, why couldn't apple have turned it on for free?. How do you know the price of the product didn't already include the feature and apple is double charging?. What?.. u so trusting of apple that you can't question?. You have no idea if the price of the product didn't already include the cost of turning on the specification and maybe the $2 is just a way for apple to grab more money.. are you jobs close relative or something?.
This has already been discussed to death. Apple did what they did because they handled it improperly from the beginning, and they were left with a distastful task of charging their customers for that feature.
Now they are doing it in a way that won't require them to do that again.
Hmm, although i think you meant microsoft released a statement (not windows).. this never occured to me.. yeah, it would be tough to know if apple is foisting an unfinished product on the public.. i guess the public will find out when stuff works/don work... but interesting thought nevertheless.
It's simple.
If it does what Apple says it does, then it's complete. If it doesn't, then it's faulty, and shouldn't have been released at all.
So far, the former seems to be true.
Update implies improving existing features.
Upgrade implies adding features as well as improving the existing ones.
That second definition of upgrade is very broad.. what if apple then gives you tetris for free? (assuming it's not included in the first iphone shipment)... is that an upgrade?. what exactly then is not an upgrade?