Define "better". I'm talking about a device to interact with your TV and use Android\\iPhone applications and games. (EDIT: obviously most games\\apps would need to be rebuilt, but they would be very similar. Like the iPad is to the iPhone)
Move's (an Natal's for that matter) way of doing things is too expensive for a TV remote. The remote itself still needs to be "smart" (i.e. Bluetooth\\Wi-Fi and accelerometer) so you wouldn't save any money there. Plus you add the cost of a camera and all the extra CPU cycles of decoding the received image.
And all for what? Some more accuracy in mapping 1-to-1 movement and depth perception?
Move\\Natal might be better for games and more accurate, but I'm not sure their technology is ready to be embedded into TVs just yet.
The wiimote has a camera (actually a IR sensor) at the front of the controller that it uses to see the location of the sensor bar located next to the TV. Sony Move has a camera next to the TV that it uses to see the location of the sphere at the end of the controller. The technology is similar but by mounting the camera next to the TV and pointing it into the room you get better results. It is much easier to get the correct position and orientation in 3D space and you don't have the problems of drift.
Finally Apple has some competition in this area. Hopefully it will stimulate some upgrades and enhancements to the Apple TV product.
Why is it that whenever someone comes out with a product that Apple has out already that the new guy is ONLY competing with Apple? Aren't there other players in the game? yeah there but Apple being in the mix must make for better headlines huh?
I like Apple, but to me this is good news - competition is good for everyone. This will hopefully push Apple to put more money and development into Apple TV and stop them from being lazy with it and move it out of "hobby" status. Welcome, Google.
You don't know what you're even talking about. You sound like a sound bite.
'HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET APPLE TO UP ITS GAME' Blah blah!!!!!!
The wiimote has a camera (actually a IR sensor) at the front of the controller that it uses to see the location of the sensor bar located next to the TV. Sony Move has a camera next to the TV that it uses to see the location of the sphere at the end of the controller. The technology is similar but by mounting the camera next to the TV and pointing it into the room you get better results. It is much easier to get the correct position and orientation in 3D space and you don't have the problems of drift.
I'm not sure what your point is? I already have a good understanding of how the Wiimote, Natal and PSMove all work.
I also understand that although their functions are similar two of the technologies are a lot more sophisticated than the other, and that unfortunately this extra complexity comes at a relatively high cost (both in dollars and CPU cycles).
My point is that using something like the Wiimote and a touch UI would be a very cool (and very cheap... this is important!) way of interacting with the system Google have proposed. It would also allow a lot of Android apps and games to be ported to Google TV.
The same applies to Apple. If they released Apple TV 2 with something similar to the iPhone\\iPad UI and a Wiimote-like device they could open up a lot of potential application and game ports from the iStore.
That's what I'm getting at. So what exactly was your point?
This will fail for the same reason Apple TV fails. Most people who would consider this will also easily figure out that you can just hook up a bigger monitor or tv to any old computer.
Been there, done that.
I built a whole media server computer and hooked it up to my TV.
It had some noise problems, and other problems. It was cool, but it was a kludge.
A simple dedicated desk-top box, with a modern low-wattage fan-less CPU would be better, especially with optimized software.
I have an AppleTV and have bought movies and TV shows from the iTunes store. However, with the multiple hardware partners I can see GoogleTV becoming the market leader. I am therefore starting to worry about content I have bought as it uses DRM and therefore cannot be played on a non-Apple device.
New format: the IP owners get to sell you the content yet again.
Stupid followup if you will. Are version numbers always different from platform to platform? Is it a must that the GTV version would be different from the desktop version?
You are entirely correct. These guys are just blowing smoke based upon limited knowledge.
The server knows which browser version made the request. It has no idea which platform the browser is running on. And the browser can be spoofed, if desired.
There are plenty of places to look up the information your browser sends to the server. This isn't confidential stuff. Nor is it anything new. Nor is it magic.
You guys are getting excited over nothing. Cable companies will ruin this. Content providers will block it. They enjoy those shitty little boxes that they force on us.
It's really too bad Apple don't think the living room is worthy of their full attention, or even any attention at all. Apple TV needs a radical overhaul.
Forget about that. Apple is now a Mobile Device company. The living room is dead.
Sounds ok, but very vague for a product announcement. I see them trying to make a seamless media experience for the living room, where everything is available for viewing, but absolutely no mention of whether or not it can store its own video, or stream video from a networked mac or pc.
Plus, my Fios TV package is not difficult to navigate. Once you set up favorite channels, you only have to see a handful.
Honestly, the best thing that could happen to my living room would be an iPad app that let's me find shows and control my TV.
Edit: Also notice how they joke about confusing complications in the living room with 5 or more set top boxes piling up on each other.....when in the end, this is just another box to throw on the pile, it doesn't replace anything. :-/
This begs the question of whether or not a browser manufacturer could in fact make it send whatever they liked (i.e. could you make a browser for desktop that sends the same header as the iPhone does)? What I'm getting at is, could you trick the server into doing what you want and hence, stop someone like Hulu being able to block you?
Me, personally, I find it ironic that Apple neglected a built-in USB port on the iPad, which lots of people would use, and included one on the ATV, which nobody can even figure out what the heck it is for!
Comments
Define "better". I'm talking about a device to interact with your TV and use Android\\iPhone applications and games. (EDIT: obviously most games\\apps would need to be rebuilt, but they would be very similar. Like the iPad is to the iPhone)
Move's (an Natal's for that matter) way of doing things is too expensive for a TV remote. The remote itself still needs to be "smart" (i.e. Bluetooth\\Wi-Fi and accelerometer) so you wouldn't save any money there. Plus you add the cost of a camera and all the extra CPU cycles of decoding the received image.
And all for what? Some more accuracy in mapping 1-to-1 movement and depth perception?
Move\\Natal might be better for games and more accurate, but I'm not sure their technology is ready to be embedded into TVs just yet.
The wiimote has a camera (actually a IR sensor) at the front of the controller that it uses to see the location of the sensor bar located next to the TV. Sony Move has a camera next to the TV that it uses to see the location of the sphere at the end of the controller. The technology is similar but by mounting the camera next to the TV and pointing it into the room you get better results. It is much easier to get the correct position and orientation in 3D space and you don't have the problems of drift.
Finally Apple has some competition in this area. Hopefully it will stimulate some upgrades and enhancements to the Apple TV product.
Why is it that whenever someone comes out with a product that Apple has out already that the new guy is ONLY competing with Apple? Aren't there other players in the game? yeah there but Apple being in the mix must make for better headlines huh?
I like Apple, but to me this is good news - competition is good for everyone. This will hopefully push Apple to put more money and development into Apple TV and stop them from being lazy with it and move it out of "hobby" status. Welcome, Google.
You don't know what you're even talking about. You sound like a sound bite.
'HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET APPLE TO UP ITS GAME' Blah blah!!!!!!
The wiimote has a camera (actually a IR sensor) at the front of the controller that it uses to see the location of the sensor bar located next to the TV. Sony Move has a camera next to the TV that it uses to see the location of the sphere at the end of the controller. The technology is similar but by mounting the camera next to the TV and pointing it into the room you get better results. It is much easier to get the correct position and orientation in 3D space and you don't have the problems of drift.
I'm not sure what your point is? I already have a good understanding of how the Wiimote, Natal and PSMove all work.
I also understand that although their functions are similar two of the technologies are a lot more sophisticated than the other, and that unfortunately this extra complexity comes at a relatively high cost (both in dollars and CPU cycles).
My point is that using something like the Wiimote and a touch UI would be a very cool (and very cheap... this is important!) way of interacting with the system Google have proposed. It would also allow a lot of Android apps and games to be ported to Google TV.
The same applies to Apple. If they released Apple TV 2 with something similar to the iPhone\\iPad UI and a Wiimote-like device they could open up a lot of potential application and game ports from the iStore.
That's what I'm getting at. So what exactly was your point?
The purpose of the AppleTV is to stream the iTunes content from your Mac. And it does that very well.
Naw. The purpose of AppleTV is to sell stuff from the iStore. Period.
Does anyone long for the days when Microsoft was the ravenous rat and the "Me Too" company?
Wonder what happened to MS?
:
Apple does not give Microsoft significant competition in any significant (to Microsoft) area.
On my iPad, I can't play mpeg. It's got to be m4v plus a few other formats that Apple uses. Why? I can't think of a single useful reason.
What makes Apple products great is the features that they leave out. It enhances the User Experience.
This just in:
Android-powered coffee maker
Android-powered blow-up doll
Android-powered pr0n videos
Android-powered landfills
Android-powered <insert next useless Android-powered appliance here>
And of course, an Android-powered Android.
Did I miss anything?
</yawn>
An Android-powered brain?
What are the implications for Apple if that is the case?
Apple will continue to make boatloads of money producing appliance-like devices that work easily for people who dislike computers.
Their market penetration will continue in the low double-digits, and their profits will continue to flow.
This will fail for the same reason Apple TV fails. Most people who would consider this will also easily figure out that you can just hook up a bigger monitor or tv to any old computer.
Been there, done that.
I built a whole media server computer and hooked it up to my TV.
It had some noise problems, and other problems. It was cool, but it was a kludge.
A simple dedicated desk-top box, with a modern low-wattage fan-less CPU would be better, especially with optimized software.
The fact that Android will allow itself to be licenced and built into TV's will inevitably push Apple to make their own TV sets.
Apple to swallow Sony in 3, 2, 1 ...
Sony is highly diversified. Apple is the opposite.
Selling one product will not affect Sony overall.
I have an AppleTV and have bought movies and TV shows from the iTunes store. However, with the multiple hardware partners I can see GoogleTV becoming the market leader. I am therefore starting to worry about content I have bought as it uses DRM and therefore cannot be played on a non-Apple device.
New format: the IP owners get to sell you the content yet again.
I want an APPLE SEARCH ENGINE!!!!
Apple has never been able to do decent search. They could never catch up.
Stupid followup if you will. Are version numbers always different from platform to platform? Is it a must that the GTV version would be different from the desktop version?
You are entirely correct. These guys are just blowing smoke based upon limited knowledge.
The server knows which browser version made the request. It has no idea which platform the browser is running on. And the browser can be spoofed, if desired.
There are plenty of places to look up the information your browser sends to the server. This isn't confidential stuff. Nor is it anything new. Nor is it magic.
It's really too bad Apple don't think the living room is worthy of their full attention, or even any attention at all. Apple TV needs a radical overhaul.
Forget about that. Apple is now a Mobile Device company. The living room is dead.
Plus, my Fios TV package is not difficult to navigate. Once you set up favorite channels, you only have to see a handful.
Honestly, the best thing that could happen to my living room would be an iPad app that let's me find shows and control my TV.
Edit: Also notice how they joke about confusing complications in the living room with 5 or more set top boxes piling up on each other.....when in the end, this is just another box to throw on the pile, it doesn't replace anything. :-/
This begs the question of whether or not a browser manufacturer could in fact make it send whatever they liked (i.e. could you make a browser for desktop that sends the same header as the iPhone does)? What I'm getting at is, could you trick the server into doing what you want and hence, stop someone like Hulu being able to block you?
Yes. The end user can do that too.
What is clunky about USB?
Me, personally, I find it ironic that Apple neglected a built-in USB port on the iPad, which lots of people would use, and included one on the ATV, which nobody can even figure out what the heck it is for!
Ironic.
Google is like a ten headed hydra. It wants to get into everything. None of its products are exceptionally good.
Google Search is exceptionally good.
So is Google Maps.
Google Earth.
Google Voice.
Goog411.
YouTube.
Need I go on?