God forbid they start going there with their remotes. As it stands their current remote is actually lacking buttons. It might be interesting if the remote just displayed some useful info on it though. That said it doesn't look likely, 'cause battery life would suck.
The problem I always had with remotes, especially DVR remotes that come from your cable or satellite provider, are the over use of physical buttons. Sure, the remote lets you control your DVD, set-top box, audio stuff, etc. from one remote but why does it need all the buttons right there? I'll tell you why; the technology wasn't there a few years ago to simplify it. It is now. What I want is a context aware remote that displays only the interface elements based on what I'm doing at the time. Visual favorites, being able to check the guide on the remote instead of on the main display, set up recordings on the remote without covering all or most of the screen.
I wouldn't wear an iWatch. I thought we'd got over digital watches back in the 80's when people realised that whilst they told the time accurately, and had loads of functions nobody used, that wasn't enough to counter the fact that they look crap! I'll stick with my Breitling!
That aside, am I the only one getting roundly sick of all these leaks of Apple stuff. I know speculating on what Apple are going to release is fun, but I miss the days when Steve Jobs would do the, "one more thing" bit, and reveal something I'd never seen before.
I like how here, and in every article you can find about this rumour it's referred to as:
Quote:
... a small touchscreen ....
both in the headline and in the first paragraph.
Yet inside each article it says (somewhere):
Quote:
... it is unknown whether it is actually a touchscreen ...
I remember when this site prided itself on it's accuracy.
The source is claiming it to be a touchscreen. There's no evidence that AI is aware of to confirm or deny it though. AI isn't saying that they know it's a touchscreen, but why should they not believe the source if they've been dead-on before?
The problem I always had with remotes, especially DVR remotes that come from your cable or satellite provider, are the over use of physical buttons. Sure, the remote lets you control your DVD, set-top box, audio stuff, etc. from one remote but why does it need all the buttons right there? I'll tell you why; the technology wasn't there a few years ago to simplify it. It is now. What I want is a context aware remote that displays only the interface elements based on what I'm doing at the time. Visual favorites, being able to check the guide on the remote instead of on the main display, set up recordings on the remote without covering all or most of the screen.
Logitech have had that for years. It kind of sucks IMO.
I tend to navigate the TV without looking at the remote. When the remote screen keeps changing you have to keep looking between the remote and the TV. I'm also not sure of the benefits of checking the guide on a 3cm screen in my hand when I have a 50" TV screen sitting right in front of me.
There are no doubt a lot of ways a small touch screen can be used on a remote. On their cheaper remotes Logitech use it for activities and favorites which works really well. There are unfortunately limits to what it can achieve unfortunately.
I'd love Apple to create a Wiimote clone to control the Apple TV. In all my years I've never come across a device to control a TV that works quite as well as on the Nintendo Wii... and those guys aren't even UI designers!
Remotes have to be tactile. And TV remotes don't need screens. The TV is plenty.
C.
Most Universal/Media remotes (expensive ones) have a screen... A combo of buttons and screen.
Assuming that there wouldn't be tactile buttons makes sense if its a touchscreen (but they don't KNOW if it is or not)
And we're assuming they theres only going to be "one" of these screens? Maybe its a remote with two screens, one for each thumb...? Just throwing it out there...
I'm with Carniphage. I also doubt it is for a context aware button on a keyboard, as Apple's external keyboards are run off batteries, and they don't like power draw from touch screens. The Bluetooth keyboard battery life is already terrible IMHO when compared to say, Logitech optical bluetooth mice from 5 years ago (with optical sensors, lasers, buttons etc). My keyboard struggles to reach 3 months off 3 AAs, whereas my logitech gets 6-8 months off two.
Some are speculating in that it is actually a display for a future Apple TV remote.
Time will tell I guess. I actually have no idea what it might be good for other than what has already been posted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Bingo. Not just @TV, but for all Apple products, and a universal remote.
Yes, that was my first thought, too!
Apple has a way of looking out there, where there is chaos, and focusing on bringing order with a single, simple solution. The Apple solution is so "obvious" (after they introduce it).
Current Solution:
Most of our coffee tables, end tables, areas between the couch cushions, are littered with remote controls, that:
-- do a poor job at controlling one device
-- are non-intuitive within themselves
-- are non standard across other remotes
And, you always pick up the wrong one!
Alternate Solution 1:
Get a tool belt like Norm Abrams on New Yankee Workshop. But then, the one with the tool belt rules-- not a bad thing, if You're the one with the tool belt.
Alternate Solution 2:
Set all the remotes in a central location-- the coffee table. But then, others must get up, walk over to the coffee table to use the remotes-- kinda' defeats the purpose.
Alternate Solution 3:
Replace all those individual remotes with an Universal Remote-- which combines the poor characteristics of the individual remotes into one large, expensive device. This sits on (dominates) the coffee table, and suffers the same disadvantage, as others must get up and walk over to the coffee table to use it.
Alternate Solution 4:
Get multiple sets of individual or universal remotes and strategically distribute them around the room. This adds to the confusion and clutter, and, likely, will require more furniture and a second mortgage.
The Real (Apple) Solution:
A single, solid state (no moving parts), programmable device.
-- You could to have several around-- they are interchangeable.
-- Small reliable and inexpensive
-- Can control n+1 AV devices
-- Comfortably fits in one hand
-- Intuitive to use
-- Can use on-screen (TV) navigation and/or on remote navigation
Hmm...
Take, Apple's Magic Mouse,* remove the laser and button function, and add a small screen, some IR... Voila!
* Note to @melgross: this is the "Magic Mouse". The one without the dirty scroll wheel!
Comments
The world is waiting for Apple to bring a notification system to the lock screen.
Perhaps they are going to bring notifications to a watch screen?
C.
Terrible idea.
God forbid they start going there with their remotes. As it stands their current remote is actually lacking buttons. It might be interesting if the remote just displayed some useful info on it though. That said it doesn't look likely, 'cause battery life would suck.
The problem I always had with remotes, especially DVR remotes that come from your cable or satellite provider, are the over use of physical buttons. Sure, the remote lets you control your DVD, set-top box, audio stuff, etc. from one remote but why does it need all the buttons right there? I'll tell you why; the technology wasn't there a few years ago to simplify it. It is now. What I want is a context aware remote that displays only the interface elements based on what I'm doing at the time. Visual favorites, being able to check the guide on the remote instead of on the main display, set up recordings on the remote without covering all or most of the screen.
P... or a wristbound product it dubbed "iWatch." ...
Never in a million years. You might as well say that Ford is going to come out with a new version of the Model T.
Watches are last century. Fewer people of any stripe wear them year by year, and you will notice hardly anyone under 40 even owns one.
...
Here we go.
Apple exploring invisible buttons
Nope.
from the article: ... "Apple's described solution would have a capacitor underneath an aluminum surface with invisible holes ..."
That aside, am I the only one getting roundly sick of all these leaks of Apple stuff. I know speculating on what Apple are going to release is fun, but I miss the days when Steve Jobs would do the, "one more thing" bit, and reveal something I'd never seen before.
... a small touchscreen ....
both in the headline and in the first paragraph.
Yet inside each article it says (somewhere):
... it is unknown whether it is actually a touchscreen ...
I remember when this site prided itself on it's accuracy.
Few possibilties:
1. It could be an Apple TV remote...that is square?
2. Will it be built in the new MacBookPro's trackpad. But why would you display there and what would you display?
3. Some completely new iProduct nothing to do with Macs or iPods.
I need clues!
Nope.
from the article: ... "Apple's described solution would have a capacitor underneath an aluminum surface with invisible holes ..."
An LCD under the magic aluminium would make a nice way to customize the display, would it not?
Terrible idea.
You are right.
NOT A WATCH
Even if taking notifications to your wrist was a smart move, an always-on LCD would draw too much power.
NOT A REMOTE
Remotes have to be tactile. And TV remotes don't need screens. The TV is plenty.
NOT A TRACKPAD
Apple trackpads are bigger than netbook trackpads.
NOT A NANO
They are not going to make the screen even smaller.
Using Sherlock Holmes-like deduction I conclude that it must be for....
...something else.
C.
I need clues!
No offense intended ... but this is a sentence that is just begging for the following reply:
So what are you saying ... that you're "clueless"?
My apologies in advance ... but some things just can't be passed up.
I like how here, and in every article you can find about this rumour it's referred to as:
... a small touchscreen ....
both in the headline and in the first paragraph.
Yet inside each article it says (somewhere):
... it is unknown whether it is actually a touchscreen ...
I remember when this site prided itself on it's accuracy.
The source is claiming it to be a touchscreen. There's no evidence that AI is aware of to confirm or deny it though. AI isn't saying that they know it's a touchscreen, but why should they not believe the source if they've been dead-on before?
The problem I always had with remotes, especially DVR remotes that come from your cable or satellite provider, are the over use of physical buttons. Sure, the remote lets you control your DVD, set-top box, audio stuff, etc. from one remote but why does it need all the buttons right there? I'll tell you why; the technology wasn't there a few years ago to simplify it. It is now. What I want is a context aware remote that displays only the interface elements based on what I'm doing at the time. Visual favorites, being able to check the guide on the remote instead of on the main display, set up recordings on the remote without covering all or most of the screen.
Logitech have had that for years. It kind of sucks IMO.
I tend to navigate the TV without looking at the remote. When the remote screen keeps changing you have to keep looking between the remote and the TV. I'm also not sure of the benefits of checking the guide on a 3cm screen in my hand when I have a 50" TV screen sitting right in front of me.
There are no doubt a lot of ways a small touch screen can be used on a remote. On their cheaper remotes Logitech use it for activities and favorites which works really well. There are unfortunately limits to what it can achieve unfortunately.
I'd love Apple to create a Wiimote clone to control the Apple TV. In all my years I've never come across a device to control a TV that works quite as well as on the Nintendo Wii... and those guys aren't even UI designers!
You are right.
NOT A WATCH
Even if taking notifications to your wrist was a smart move, an always-on LCD would draw too much power.
NOT A REMOTE
Remotes have to be tactile. And TV remotes don't need screens. The TV is plenty.
NOT A TRACKPAD
Apple trackpads are bigger than netbook trackpads.
NOT A NANO
They are not going to make the screen even smaller.
Using Sherlock Holmes-like deduction I conclude that it must be for....
...something else.
C.
Non-touch-screen new iPod shuffle display.
You are right.
NOT A REMOTE
Remotes have to be tactile. And TV remotes don't need screens. The TV is plenty.
C.
Most Universal/Media remotes (expensive ones) have a screen... A combo of buttons and screen.
Assuming that there wouldn't be tactile buttons makes sense if its a touchscreen (but they don't KNOW if it is or not)
And we're assuming they theres only going to be "one" of these screens? Maybe its a remote with two screens, one for each thumb...? Just throwing it out there...
New iProduct? Living room oriented?
Some are speculating in that it is actually a display for a future Apple TV remote.
Time will tell I guess. I actually have no idea what it might be good for other than what has already been posted.
Bingo. Not just @TV, but for all Apple products, and a universal remote.
Yes, that was my first thought, too!
Apple has a way of looking out there, where there is chaos, and focusing on bringing order with a single, simple solution. The Apple solution is so "obvious" (after they introduce it).
Current Solution:
Most of our coffee tables, end tables, areas between the couch cushions, are littered with remote controls, that:
-- do a poor job at controlling one device
-- are non-intuitive within themselves
-- are non standard across other remotes
And, you always pick up the wrong one!
Alternate Solution 1:
Get a tool belt like Norm Abrams on New Yankee Workshop. But then, the one with the tool belt rules-- not a bad thing, if You're the one with the tool belt.
Alternate Solution 2:
Set all the remotes in a central location-- the coffee table. But then, others must get up, walk over to the coffee table to use the remotes-- kinda' defeats the purpose.
Alternate Solution 3:
Replace all those individual remotes with an Universal Remote-- which combines the poor characteristics of the individual remotes into one large, expensive device. This sits on (dominates) the coffee table, and suffers the same disadvantage, as others must get up and walk over to the coffee table to use it.
Alternate Solution 4:
Get multiple sets of individual or universal remotes and strategically distribute them around the room. This adds to the confusion and clutter, and, likely, will require more furniture and a second mortgage.
The Real (Apple) Solution:
A single, solid state (no moving parts), programmable device.
-- You could to have several around-- they are interchangeable.
-- Small reliable and inexpensive
-- Can control n+1 AV devices
-- Comfortably fits in one hand
-- Intuitive to use
-- Can use on-screen (TV) navigation and/or on remote navigation
Hmm...
Take, Apple's Magic Mouse,* remove the laser and button function, and add a small screen, some IR... Voila!
* Note to @melgross: this is the "Magic Mouse". The one without the dirty scroll wheel!
.