As a way to add video channels to the AppleTV, that might be pretty nice. It wouldn't be the same kind of apps though.
I understand it's not what you are saying here but The 'apps for Apple TV would be nice' concept oft' mentioned here puzzles me. You'd need an input device, say an iPad? However this already mirrors via AirPlay and has apps .... Are the 'apps for Apple TV' advocates suggesting some other input device so that they can duplicate the functions of an iPad? Can you explain the logic her, I must be missing something.
As a way to add video channels to the AppleTV, that might be pretty nice. It wouldn't be the same kind of apps though.
Oh, yeah, I've no problem with Apple reinventing television just as they have so many other industries, but the idea that absolutely everyone else is pushing–"It runs iOS, so it should have an App Store where apps JUST LIKE the ones done on iDevices can be put"–is just nonsense.
I understand it's not what you are saying here but The 'apps for Apple TV would be nice' concept oft' mentioned here puzzles me. You'd need an input device, say an iPad? However this already mirrors via AirPlay and has apps .... Are the 'apps for Apple TV' advocates suggesting some other input device so that they can duplicate the functions of an iPad? Can you explain the logic her, I must be missing something.
I'll quote myself: "As a way to add video channels". To clarify further: As in, simple apps that don't require much input. Maybe call them video applets or something like that. Netflix and YouTube are two examples that are built-in, but there are other services that provide video, such as Vimeo, Hulu and Amazon Prime, which would be more useful to me than the major league sports options. I'm fine with those apps being there, the current offerings are a bit limited.
Pretty awesome my 2.93 i7 2010 iMac w/ 12 GB Ram (The 2nd fastest iMac ever made- including every 2011 model except 1) won't run what a 2011 11" 2GB Ram MacBook Air can. I love their reasoning.... it wasn't designed for H.264....
I understand that for a sales/company aspect they are just wanting sales, but wow... as a consumer that sucks. At least make it run on all Mountain Lion qualified computers....
I've experimented with this using my iPhone 4S and it's rather novel--audio/visual streaming would seem to be a bit redundant in a way--but would be nice to leave my Mac Mini where it's at on my desk while I plop down on my couch w/my keyboard & trackpad.
This looks like a configuration that would work, but I've tried a few others that I thought would work only to find that at the point the signal went from digital to analog it "broke". The cables "fit", but the signal didn't translate. For example, among the combinations I tried was an Apple brand mini-displayport --> DVI cable, followed by a DVI --> VGA cable and a VGA --> svideo, or a mini-displayport --> VGA, followed by a VGA --> svideo. In these cases the VGA was able to display perfectly on an old 15" flat screen computer monitor, but the signal would never convert to either svideo or composite to feed the big-screen. I'm open to a cabled solution, but I'm really leery at this point of going down that path after so much time spent and a whole bunch of failure/disappointment, including lots of time with SwitchResX. I read about it enough to basically understand the problem, just never found a readily available solution. Definitely open to more input though.
The solution that agramonte mentioned was wireless, which especially piqued my interest as I wasn't (am not) aware of this kind of product.
What's the betting that the same people bashing the idea of adding more relevant apps to the Apple TV would do an about-turn if this was a new feature announced by Apple?
I can think of multiple apps I'd love to have on my Apple TV. Thing is I don't for one second believe Apple would ever allow them, as it goes against the entire business model of why they have the apple tv in the first place. I am thinking apps like Slingplayer, BBC iplayer, Sky Go, 4OD (you would have regional equivalents as well) and a media player that could play a movie from a NAS without the need to route it through airplay on a laptop. I can't see that ever happening though, Apple TV is there as a vessel for itunes / iOS content, simple as.
Actually I can think of many, your assumption that I cannot is baseless. For example, in the UK catchup television if very popular. BBC, ITV etc would all make apps for the Apple TV, they've already done so for the other iDevices and have seen mass adoption.
To my knowledge no version of OS X to date has been released with features only available to the current generation of machines.
Apple has correctly limited the base of machines to only those that could cope with the upgrade and correctly jettisoned PPC hardware on Snow Leopard and Core Due machines in Lion.
But this stinks of the iOS strategy, I have no problem with this on a £200 iPod touch or an iPad but think it is reprehensible on a £1500 18 month old computer!
I can report that on a MBP i7 2010 AirParrot works flawlessly driving a a 720p movie in .mkv format using VLC full screen to either of my Apple TVs, one a v2 one a v3. Audio and picture excellent, no lag no stutter. Tested on Lion and ML GM. I have yet to test 1080p.
Have anyone tried AirPlay Mirroring on MacPro mid 2010 3.33GHz, or have an idea will it work on this kind of computer when Mountain Lion is installed?
Yep and so far mid 2010 MBP doesn't support it running GM 10.8. AirParrot works flawlessly though. I did hit a snag where AirParrot failed but this was cured on a frsh instal of the OS. My old HD had been updated through several OS X versions and had some really old crap in the user prefs etc. that must have been conflicting.
Agreed, I was amazed when it worked with a 1080p .mkv movie running in VLC without a hitch. You do have to add the extra sound drivers too but it is simple and they work flawlessly too. I have two Apple TVs a mk 2 and 3 they both work great from AirParrot.
Actually I can think of many, your assumption that I cannot is baseless. For example, in the UK catchup television if very popular. BBC, ITV etc would all make apps for the Apple TV, they've already done so for the other iDevices and have seen mass adoption.
What's the betting that the same people bashing the idea of adding more relevant apps to the Apple TV would do an about-turn if this was a new feature announced by Apple?
I can think of multiple apps I'd love to have on my Apple TV. Thing is I don't for one second believe Apple would ever allow them, as it goes against the entire business model of why they have the apple tv in the first place. I am thinking apps like Slingplayer, BBC iplayer, Sky Go, 4OD (you would have regional equivalents as well) and a media player that could play a movie from a NAS without the need to route it through airplay on a laptop. I can't see that ever happening though, Apple TV is there as a vessel for itunes / iOS content, simple as.
Apple is definitely going to open AppleTV for apps... When they launch the AppleTV HDTV.
They want to storm into the TV market: huge beautiful screen, integrated AppleTV, iTunes, Netflix, full apps, etc. 4 HDMI ports means you can do whatever the heck else yo want like connecting cable, Tivo, what nots.
AppleTV has Netflix. Not outside the US though?
Anyway, AppleTV HDTV will be big. It will triple the current AppleTV sell rate.
Actually I can think of many, your assumption that I cannot is baseless. For example, in the UK catchup television if very popular. BBC, ITV etc would all make apps for the Apple TV, they've already done so for the other iDevices and have seen mass adoption.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc54321
What's the betting that the same people bashing the idea of adding more relevant apps to the Apple TV would do an about-turn if this was a new feature announced by Apple?
I can think of multiple apps I'd love to have on my Apple TV. Thing is I don't for one second believe Apple would ever allow them, as it goes against the entire business model of why they have the apple tv in the first place. I am thinking apps like Slingplayer, BBC iplayer, Sky Go, 4OD (you would have regional equivalents as well) and a media player that could play a movie from a NAS without the need to route it through airplay on a laptop. I can't see that ever happening though, Apple TV is there as a vessel for itunes / iOS content, simple as.
Apple is definitely going to open AppleTV for apps... When they launch the AppleTV HDTV.
They want to storm into the TV market: huge beautiful screen, integrated AppleTV, iTunes, Netflix, full apps, etc. 4 HDMI ports means you can do whatever the heck else yo want like connecting cable, Tivo, what nots.
AppleTV has Netflix. Not outside the US though?
Anyway, AppleTV HDTV will be big. It will triple the current AppleTV sell rate.
Integration with a display doesn't seem like what will drive the adoption rate. Remember, pretty much everyone already uses a set top box with their tv. Cable, satellite, fios, and dvrs nearly always require a separate box.
Instead, I think it is all about the content. Copyright holders have competing distribution strategies and don't want to license content to companies like apple. The TV and movie industry doesn't want Apple to take over like happened with music. Thus, for Apple to succeed, it seems like the real stumbling block is with licensing content for whatever delivery hardware they choose to offer.
Interestingly, airplay somewhat bypasses this hurdle. Besides offering awesome interaction for tablet and iphone owners in their home theater, it also makes available content that would otherwise be held up by licensing squabbles.
Integration with a display doesn't seem like what will drive the adoption rate. Remember, pretty much everyone already uses a set top box with their tv. Cable, satellite, fios, and dvrs nearly always require a separate box.
Instead, I think it is all about the content. Copyright holders have competing distribution strategies and don't want to license content to companies like apple. The TV and movie industry doesn't want Apple to take over like happened with music. Thus, for Apple to succeed, it seems like the real stumbling block is with licensing content for whatever delivery hardware they choose to offer.
Interestingly, airplay somewhat bypasses this hurdle. Besides offering awesome interaction for tablet and iphone owners in their home theater, it also makes available content that would otherwise be held up by licensing squabbles.
Good point. Steve in the past already stated he doesn't want to play the licensing game, outside of iTunes Store.
But, Apple feels they have the content they need to go with, ie. iTunes Store and Netflix.
Good point with the other content, and this is where Apple will blow away non-critical set top boxes... I.E. Apps. Because Airplay is great but it still doesn't fit in 1080p nicely. As such, making an AppleTV HDTV out of the box do tons of stuff like the iPhone and iPad, will be very significant.
Then of course, the sheer matter of an Apple HDTV being a TV with an Apple logo, will make people just buy it, particularly outside the US (and I'm sure in the US too).
In terms of licensing there will be some argy bargy with Apple HDTV apps but the app market itself is so lucrative there will be a gold rush of sorts to the Apple HDTV app store.
Good point. Steve in the past already stated he doesn't want to play the licensing game, outside of iTunes Store.
But, Apple feels they have the content they need to go with, ie. iTunes Store and Netflix.
Good point with the other content, and this is where Apple will blow away non-critical set top boxes... I.E. Apps. Because Airplay is great but it still doesn't fit in 1080p nicely. As such, making an AppleTV HDTV out of the box do tons of stuff like the iPhone and iPad, will be very significant.
Then of course, the sheer matter of an Apple HDTV being a TV with an Apple logo, will make people just buy it, particularly outside the US (and I'm sure in the US too).
In terms of licensing there will be some argy bargy with Apple HDTV apps but the app market itself is so lucrative there will be a gold rush of sorts to the Apple HDTV app store.
In the long run, I think Apps are the wrong direction and should be avoided if possible. That is, if working under the assumption that the AppleTV is primarily for getting content onto a TV screen.
Browsing of video libraries isn't something people want split between a billion different methods of access. Custom interaction types are less appealing when dealing with normal living room, bedroom, dorm room, and public TV usage. This is in comparison to a personal device with an infinite number of purposes. There isn't that many different ways of organizing and presenting a list of videos. What really drives this home is the limiting nature of remote controls. We don't want every company coming up with non-standard ways of using the directional pad, menu and enter buttons.
To really make these things appeal to the masses, content should be integrated such that it is easy to browse and search. This is similar to the music store. People don't prefer different apps just for accessing music from different bands. People are willing to adopt a handful of apps for the specialty or niche interests. But overall, a unified method of accessing content seems preferable.
Of course, this is a generalization. But I think it holds true for the majority of use cases. I do play video off of the web via airplay. But this tends to involve short clips, like hors d'oeuvres instead of a main course. There is an almost infinite number of video clips on the internet and he web seems preferable over apps for this type of use. There just isn't enough unique functionality that can't be accomplished via the web. But for feature length programming such as TV shows and movies, these belong in a unified interface accessible either from a phone/tablet or via a remote's directional pad.
Interaction with TVs is quite distinct as compared to traditional computers or touch devices. Cursors that depend on a mouse or other pointing device, are not well suited to a screen that is sitting across the room. This is precisely why people prefer user interfaces such as typically found on set top boxes. Granted, most STB interfaces are poorly implemented. But the optimal interaction technique is pretty well established. Supporting custom apps would likely be a detriment as many companies would try to do something unique despite it being sub-optimal.
Touch screens do provide a great auxiliary interaction option. For this reason, I hope that the AppleTV is not opened up 3rd party apps beyond those carefully coordinated with Apple. The preferable solution is airplay from touch devices.
I'm curious though, what do you mean by "airplay doesn't fit in 1080p nicely"? It plays 1080p pixel-for-pixel just fine. The technology is in place. All that needs to happen is for copyright holders to get off their asses and embrace rather than hinder the new distribution channel.
Comments
I understand it's not what you are saying here but The 'apps for Apple TV would be nice' concept oft' mentioned here puzzles me. You'd need an input device, say an iPad? However this already mirrors via AirPlay and has apps .... Are the 'apps for Apple TV' advocates suggesting some other input device so that they can duplicate the functions of an iPad? Can you explain the logic her, I must be missing something.
Oh, yeah, I've no problem with Apple reinventing television just as they have so many other industries, but the idea that absolutely everyone else is pushing–"It runs iOS, so it should have an App Store where apps JUST LIKE the ones done on iDevices can be put"–is just nonsense.
I'll quote myself: "As a way to add video channels". To clarify further: As in, simple apps that don't require much input. Maybe call them video applets or something like that. Netflix and YouTube are two examples that are built-in, but there are other services that provide video, such as Vimeo, Hulu and Amazon Prime, which would be more useful to me than the major league sports options. I'm fine with those apps being there, the current offerings are a bit limited.
Pretty awesome my 2.93 i7 2010 iMac w/ 12 GB Ram (The 2nd fastest iMac ever made- including every 2011 model except 1) won't run what a 2011 11" 2GB Ram MacBook Air can. I love their reasoning.... it wasn't designed for H.264....
I understand that for a sales/company aspect they are just wanting sales, but wow... as a consumer that sucks. At least make it run on all Mountain Lion qualified computers....
I've experimented with this using my iPhone 4S and it's rather novel--audio/visual streaming would seem to be a bit redundant in a way--but would be nice to leave my Mac Mini where it's at on my desk while I plop down on my couch w/my keyboard & trackpad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
Monoprice will likely be your best bet...
Get a inexpensive mini display portl cable and then use this hdmi to component adapter...
Total cost should be under 50 bucks...
Link: http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10114&cs_id=1011410&p_id=8125&seq=1&format=2
Link: http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311&seq=1&format=2
Thanks for the reply.
This looks like a configuration that would work, but I've tried a few others that I thought would work only to find that at the point the signal went from digital to analog it "broke". The cables "fit", but the signal didn't translate. For example, among the combinations I tried was an Apple brand mini-displayport --> DVI cable, followed by a DVI --> VGA cable and a VGA --> svideo, or a mini-displayport --> VGA, followed by a VGA --> svideo. In these cases the VGA was able to display perfectly on an old 15" flat screen computer monitor, but the signal would never convert to either svideo or composite to feed the big-screen. I'm open to a cabled solution, but I'm really leery at this point of going down that path after so much time spent and a whole bunch of failure/disappointment, including lots of time with SwitchResX. I read about it enough to basically understand the problem, just never found a readily available solution. Definitely open to more input though.
The solution that agramonte mentioned was wireless, which especially piqued my interest as I wasn't (am not) aware of this kind of product.
What's the betting that the same people bashing the idea of adding more relevant apps to the Apple TV would do an about-turn if this was a new feature announced by Apple?
I can think of multiple apps I'd love to have on my Apple TV. Thing is I don't for one second believe Apple would ever allow them, as it goes against the entire business model of why they have the apple tv in the first place. I am thinking apps like Slingplayer, BBC iplayer, Sky Go, 4OD (you would have regional equivalents as well) and a media player that could play a movie from a NAS without the need to route it through airplay on a laptop. I can't see that ever happening though, Apple TV is there as a vessel for itunes / iOS content, simple as.
Actually I can think of many, your assumption that I cannot is baseless. For example, in the UK catchup television if very popular. BBC, ITV etc would all make apps for the Apple TV, they've already done so for the other iDevices and have seen mass adoption.
To my knowledge no version of OS X to date has been released with features only available to the current generation of machines.
Apple has correctly limited the base of machines to only those that could cope with the upgrade and correctly jettisoned PPC hardware on Snow Leopard and Core Due machines in Lion.
But this stinks of the iOS strategy, I have no problem with this on a £200 iPod touch or an iPad but think it is reprehensible on a £1500 18 month old computer!
Air Parrot...works like a charm
Yep and so far mid 2010 MBP doesn't support it running GM 10.8. AirParrot works flawlessly though. I did hit a snag where AirParrot failed but this was cured on a frsh instal of the OS. My old HD had been updated through several OS X versions and had some really old crap in the user prefs etc. that must have been conflicting.
Apple is definitely going to open AppleTV for apps... When they launch the AppleTV HDTV.
They want to storm into the TV market: huge beautiful screen, integrated AppleTV, iTunes, Netflix, full apps, etc. 4 HDMI ports means you can do whatever the heck else yo want like connecting cable, Tivo, what nots.
AppleTV has Netflix. Not outside the US though?
Anyway, AppleTV HDTV will be big. It will triple the current AppleTV sell rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sr2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek
Actually I can think of many, your assumption that I cannot is baseless. For example, in the UK catchup television if very popular. BBC, ITV etc would all make apps for the Apple TV, they've already done so for the other iDevices and have seen mass adoption.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc54321
What's the betting that the same people bashing the idea of adding more relevant apps to the Apple TV would do an about-turn if this was a new feature announced by Apple?
I can think of multiple apps I'd love to have on my Apple TV. Thing is I don't for one second believe Apple would ever allow them, as it goes against the entire business model of why they have the apple tv in the first place. I am thinking apps like Slingplayer, BBC iplayer, Sky Go, 4OD (you would have regional equivalents as well) and a media player that could play a movie from a NAS without the need to route it through airplay on a laptop. I can't see that ever happening though, Apple TV is there as a vessel for itunes / iOS content, simple as.
Apple is definitely going to open AppleTV for apps... When they launch the AppleTV HDTV.
They want to storm into the TV market: huge beautiful screen, integrated AppleTV, iTunes, Netflix, full apps, etc. 4 HDMI ports means you can do whatever the heck else yo want like connecting cable, Tivo, what nots.
AppleTV has Netflix. Not outside the US though?
Anyway, AppleTV HDTV will be big. It will triple the current AppleTV sell rate.
Integration with a display doesn't seem like what will drive the adoption rate. Remember, pretty much everyone already uses a set top box with their tv. Cable, satellite, fios, and dvrs nearly always require a separate box.
Instead, I think it is all about the content. Copyright holders have competing distribution strategies and don't want to license content to companies like apple. The TV and movie industry doesn't want Apple to take over like happened with music. Thus, for Apple to succeed, it seems like the real stumbling block is with licensing content for whatever delivery hardware they choose to offer.
Interestingly, airplay somewhat bypasses this hurdle. Besides offering awesome interaction for tablet and iphone owners in their home theater, it also makes available content that would otherwise be held up by licensing squabbles.
Good point. Steve in the past already stated he doesn't want to play the licensing game, outside of iTunes Store.
But, Apple feels they have the content they need to go with, ie. iTunes Store and Netflix.
Good point with the other content, and this is where Apple will blow away non-critical set top boxes... I.E. Apps. Because Airplay is great but it still doesn't fit in 1080p nicely. As such, making an AppleTV HDTV out of the box do tons of stuff like the iPhone and iPad, will be very significant.
Then of course, the sheer matter of an Apple HDTV being a TV with an Apple logo, will make people just buy it, particularly outside the US (and I'm sure in the US too).
In terms of licensing there will be some argy bargy with Apple HDTV apps but the app market itself is so lucrative there will be a gold rush of sorts to the Apple HDTV app store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sr2012
Good point. Steve in the past already stated he doesn't want to play the licensing game, outside of iTunes Store.
But, Apple feels they have the content they need to go with, ie. iTunes Store and Netflix.
Good point with the other content, and this is where Apple will blow away non-critical set top boxes... I.E. Apps. Because Airplay is great but it still doesn't fit in 1080p nicely. As such, making an AppleTV HDTV out of the box do tons of stuff like the iPhone and iPad, will be very significant.
Then of course, the sheer matter of an Apple HDTV being a TV with an Apple logo, will make people just buy it, particularly outside the US (and I'm sure in the US too).
In terms of licensing there will be some argy bargy with Apple HDTV apps but the app market itself is so lucrative there will be a gold rush of sorts to the Apple HDTV app store.
In the long run, I think Apps are the wrong direction and should be avoided if possible. That is, if working under the assumption that the AppleTV is primarily for getting content onto a TV screen.
Browsing of video libraries isn't something people want split between a billion different methods of access. Custom interaction types are less appealing when dealing with normal living room, bedroom, dorm room, and public TV usage. This is in comparison to a personal device with an infinite number of purposes. There isn't that many different ways of organizing and presenting a list of videos. What really drives this home is the limiting nature of remote controls. We don't want every company coming up with non-standard ways of using the directional pad, menu and enter buttons.
To really make these things appeal to the masses, content should be integrated such that it is easy to browse and search. This is similar to the music store. People don't prefer different apps just for accessing music from different bands. People are willing to adopt a handful of apps for the specialty or niche interests. But overall, a unified method of accessing content seems preferable.
Of course, this is a generalization. But I think it holds true for the majority of use cases. I do play video off of the web via airplay. But this tends to involve short clips, like hors d'oeuvres instead of a main course. There is an almost infinite number of video clips on the internet and he web seems preferable over apps for this type of use. There just isn't enough unique functionality that can't be accomplished via the web. But for feature length programming such as TV shows and movies, these belong in a unified interface accessible either from a phone/tablet or via a remote's directional pad.
Interaction with TVs is quite distinct as compared to traditional computers or touch devices. Cursors that depend on a mouse or other pointing device, are not well suited to a screen that is sitting across the room. This is precisely why people prefer user interfaces such as typically found on set top boxes. Granted, most STB interfaces are poorly implemented. But the optimal interaction technique is pretty well established. Supporting custom apps would likely be a detriment as many companies would try to do something unique despite it being sub-optimal.
Touch screens do provide a great auxiliary interaction option. For this reason, I hope that the AppleTV is not opened up 3rd party apps beyond those carefully coordinated with Apple. The preferable solution is airplay from touch devices.
I'm curious though, what do you mean by "airplay doesn't fit in 1080p nicely"? It plays 1080p pixel-for-pixel just fine. The technology is in place. All that needs to happen is for copyright holders to get off their asses and embrace rather than hinder the new distribution channel.