This is something I have wanted for ages, truly universal remote, It need's to talk to the appliances. It's about time world finally get's rid of those shitty IR remotes, RF remotes are a step to the right direction, but they still aren't standard. Next thing we need is appliances to start talking with each other. Why the hell if im having a home theather with DVD, TV and stereo system, I have to use theree different volume controls????? I should just be able to push play from one remote and the system should figure out if its a DVD put my tv on and to the right channel, and also turn on my stereos. Thats really not so hard to do.
I don't know, why would you have to use three different volume controls? Your DVD player has its own volume settings? That seems whacked. I certainly don't have some high-end theater system, but my TV remote easily controls my DVD player, HD receiver, stereo, and VCR (yes, I got one of them suckers too!). One control, mute the tv, flip a switch turn on stereo, flip switch, turn on DVD player, hit play.
Sure, it can't do all the features, but no universal remote will completely replace the remote of these devices.
I suggest that we look to the forth coming release of The Salling Clicker for evidence. It will "greatly expand Clicker?s capabilities with support for new devices and new functionality."
We could ask what kind of new functionality can it possibly offer? The program is completely scriptable, so it doesn't seem like there is anything else it could gives us. But, if we look to a "new device" that would allow for "new functionality" that is hardware based, then that would provide for new features.
Joseph is billing v 3.0 as a "major new release" so...
Anyone remember that "tablet" patent application Apple got a couple months back?
Yeah, and then there was that patent outlining the principles and design of docking an iPod into portable computers. And then there was that patent on antenna and connector interfaces for docking an iPod into a special housing/case. And then there was that patent on controlling streamed content from limited sources like slow hard drives that would also spin down to save on battery life and the hard drive's life.
And then there was that release of iTunes(4.9) that not only gave us podcasting but also vodcasting.
Say you had downloaded one of those videocasts to your iPod and wanted to also watch the content. Maybe in the future we could just snap the iPod into a handheld/next generation iBook/iTablet/remote control type thing with the decoding power and a viewable screen and then watch that videocast.
I think it's funny how Bill Gates has all of a sudden started trumpeting the Tablet PC again. I thought he was going to let it slowly and quietly die out so as not to bring any more attention to his failure (he should anyway, its been 4 years and the Windows Tablet has gone no where). The last couple weeks, it's all he talks about, "I still believe in the Talet PC", blah, blah, blah. Yeah, hhhhhh, as soon as you got wind that Apple was making one.
There's no reason you couldn't have a smooth touch screen but wherever the buttons appear onscreen, the remote vibrates when your finger is in a button and thumps a little when pressed. Force feedback mixed with touch screen, why not? If it's cheap enough for PS2/XBOX controllers and cell phones, I think Apple could make it work.
Thump when you pass over the edge of a button.
Vibrate slightly when you are inside a button (and fade out once you stop moving).
There's no reason you couldn't have a smooth touch screen but wherever the buttons appear onscreen, the remote vibrates when your finger is in a button and thumps a little when pressed. Force feedback mixed with touch screen, why not? If it's cheap enough for PS2/XBOX controllers and cell phones, I think Apple could make it work.
Thump when you pass over the edge of a button.
Vibrate slightly when you are inside a button (and fade out once you stop moving).
Thump when you press a button.
Or they could be super silly and have real buttons but with little LCDs on each of them that change based on which device is selected.
This remote will probably cost like $300 anyway, so it's moot for guys like me to suggest features..
For now I would be happy with Griffen Technology or Belkin or Apple for that matter coming up with an iPod accessory similar to iTrip except instead of putting out radio frequencies. it would actually find my stereo hooked up to my airport express and allow me to play my music wirelessy to that stereo. thus making my ipod my universal remote. (for music anyways).
WHY CANT THIS BE DONE? I wish I had access to capital. I would invent it myself.
Say you had downloaded one of those videocasts to your iPod and wanted to also watch the content. Maybe in the future we could just snap the iPod into a handheld/next generation iBook/iTablet/remote control type thing with the decoding power and a viewable screen and then watch that videocast.
Or better yet, rather than using this new fangled remote to turn on the television, then turn on the DVD, then switch it over to select it and then hitting play, you could just hit the play button for the iPod and it beams the content to the TV. OK, THAT probably won't happen.
Guys, streaming media wirelessly from an iPod is not The Way.
- You don't want the media on the controller:
- Wears out the iPod battery
- Annoying lag to wait for Airport Express to decompress the signal
- If the iPod is the remote -and- portable player, they you are stuck without a remote if your wife goes for a jog with your iPod.
- Why risk damaging the iPod's HDD, since remotes get thrown around so much.
No, better to have an iPod-like remote that only downloads the playlist/Library data from a remote Mac/PC or some new media center thingy or new Airport with a HDD in it or some such.
This way the drive can be flash and smaller. And the battery life is maximized and the signal passes instantly.
My idea was rooted in the fact that last weekend I was cleaning the house and listening to tunes. Every room i moved to i just moved my powerbook with me and directed my tune selction from there. Thats when it hit me. Why cant my ipod connect to my airport express? why do i have to carry around my laptop? Why cant i attatch something to the bottom of my ipod, then in menu go to airport connections > select my air port express in the living room > and presto my ipod would play over the speakers in my living room. This seems pretty easy to me. Im not talking about it being the end all, work all remote. I just want to play music to a stereo hooked up to my air port express wirelessly from my ipod like i do from my laptop..
Sorry, but no "touchscreen" remote will ever feel as good in my hand as a good, dedicated remote with physical buttons and a good layout.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Buttons do feel better than a touchscreen. You have the tactile feel of pushing something and feeling resistance.
On the other hand most Universal Remotes are a complete mess of buttons meant to cover nearly every possible scenario.
The advantage of a touch screen is the ability to change the screen to meet the needs of different appliances, with out the unergonomic confusing buttons cluttering the face of the remote.
Plus Apple owning the patent on the click wheel, could place this feature on their remote and cover some of the functions that too many buttons traditionally do.
Quote:
However, I do believe they should integrate this technology into a 8-10 inch tablet, that serves as a "couch web/email client," as well as an AV remote.
I don't know. I'm more a fan of the hand held remote. Sony has those big touch screen remotes you have to operate with two hands. They are too large, and bulky.
Quote:
Wait, you want a kick-ass home theater and plasma TV, then use an underpowered limited MacMini with this? For what? Its got no video inputs, lame audio output, only works if your big screen TV has a DVI port that meets current specs (sorry, mine doesn't). And then its just got a lame 40 GB slow hard drive and a lame G4 processor. Not really going to have room on this thing to store movies or the like, nor the power to do HD TV.
You assume the Mac mini won't evolve from what it is today. In fact there is a rumor floating around that Mac mini's won't be using a G4 at all by next year. We're waiting for conformation on that one.
As far as video/audio input output it doesn't get any better than DVI to HDMI, pretty much everything else is a lesser option. Also Apple likes the simplicity of one wire doing the job of many.
There's no reason you couldn't have a smooth touch screen but wherever the buttons appear onscreen, the remote vibrates when your finger is in a button and thumps a little when pressed.
Or better yet, the remote gives you an electric-shock when your finger clicks a button.
As far as video/audio input output it doesn't get any better than DVI to HDMI, pretty much everything else is a lesser option. Also Apple likes the simplicity of one wire doing the job of many.
The mac mini has a DVI input ?? Wow that must really be something.
The truth is: most people don't need and wont buy a digital TV right now, including me.
The mac mini is a TERRIBLE A/V solution as it is right now.
It needs to have all those silly plugs that are on the back of even $50 DVD players these days, and it needed them when it came out.
Component, S-Video, RCA audio, Optical Audio, and that's just the OUTPUTS. For inputs, it needs S-Video, RCA audio, Optical audio (since it's cheap to put in, anyway), and possibly RF with an HD tuner.
Yes, I know you can just buy an EyeTV500, but then that crappy G4 and worthless 5400 RPM HD are going to neuter the damn thing (NO Hi-Def FOR YOU!).
Luckily, I happen to own a G5 powermac, otherwise A/V would be a fruitless endevor on my mac. I'd just buy a $50 upgrade to my PC and do some software tomfoolery, which would still cost me less than the Mac Mini.
Or they could be super silly and have real buttons but with little LCDs on each of them that change based on which device is selected.
This remote will probably cost like $300 anyway, so it's moot for guys like me to suggest features..
I don't think that is as far off as it sounds. Take an iPod click wheel, small color screen for menus and maybe 6-8 rtransparent buttons that sit atop another lcd screen, maybe it can be done.
Wait, you want a kick-ass home theater and plasma TV, then use an underpowered limited MacMini with this? For what? Its got no video inputs, lame audio output, only works if your big screen TV has a DVI port that meets current specs (sorry, mine doesn't). And then its just got a lame 40 GB slow hard drive and a lame G4 processor. Not really going to have room on this thing to store movies or the like, nor the power to do HD TV.
Why is it everyone's always looking to merge some device into their systems just because they think it's Apple or something, not because it'll actually be useful.
And don't get your hopes up on Apple releasing one of these things. Apple, like any company, files patents for everything they do, whether they actually decide to implement it or not.
And I have to agree with Kolchak. Buttons, people need buttons. Hell, one of the biggest complaints on the iPod line was when Apple went to the 3G model with the non-clicking buttons that people could hit without realizing it. Plus, how do you feel your way in your darkened room to hit the volume keys or the pause button on a touch screen? You'd always have to look at it to make sure you're pressing in the right area!
or I could get the model with the 80GB HD, or upgrade it myself, or add a fw drive or...or...or...
Me wanting to use this might have something to do with my current PII system hooked up to my TV. I don't need video input, and I could buy an external sound card (probably would anyway for surround sound). And "lame" G4 processor is still perfectly adequate for playing mp3's and video (not HD).
If tactile feedback is problem with lcd remotes (never used one myself) then I believe apple would use something very similar to this . If a remote simulated some sort of click or weird vibration for each button it wouldnt be a problem. I really dont think its much of an issue anyway. I know at least with my Home Theater remote that has a gazillion different buttons on it I dont ever look at it or feel for the buttons I just know where they are. If an lcd remote kept the buttons for each individual control "widget" in the same spot on the remote, people would insticively learn where these functions are over time.
[B]The mac mini has a DVI input ?? Wow that must really be something.
If that was in responce to what I said. You are reaching for an argument, because I never said The Mac mini had DVI inputs. I was speaking to the concept in general.
Quote:
The truth is: most people don't need and wont buy a digital TV right now, including me.
I can agree with that. The technology is too expensive and not good enough right now. At this point they continue to come with flatscreen technology far better than the previous.
Quote:
The mac mini is a TERRIBLE A/V solution as it is right now.
It needs to have all those silly plugs that are on the back of even $50 DVD players these days, and it needed them when it came out.
Also if you read through official Apple documentation, nowhere does it read that Apple made the mini with the intent of it being an A/V solution.
Comments
Originally posted by Project2501
This is something I have wanted for ages, truly universal remote, It need's to talk to the appliances. It's about time world finally get's rid of those shitty IR remotes, RF remotes are a step to the right direction, but they still aren't standard. Next thing we need is appliances to start talking with each other. Why the hell if im having a home theather with DVD, TV and stereo system, I have to use theree different volume controls????? I should just be able to push play from one remote and the system should figure out if its a DVD put my tv on and to the right channel, and also turn on my stereos. Thats really not so hard to do.
I don't know, why would you have to use three different volume controls? Your DVD player has its own volume settings? That seems whacked. I certainly don't have some high-end theater system, but my TV remote easily controls my DVD player, HD receiver, stereo, and VCR (yes, I got one of them suckers too!). One control, mute the tv, flip a switch turn on stereo, flip switch, turn on DVD player, hit play.
Sure, it can't do all the features, but no universal remote will completely replace the remote of these devices.
We could ask what kind of new functionality can it possibly offer? The program is completely scriptable, so it doesn't seem like there is anything else it could gives us. But, if we look to a "new device" that would allow for "new functionality" that is hardware based, then that would provide for new features.
Joseph is billing v 3.0 as a "major new release" so...
Originally posted by Kesh
Anyone remember that "tablet" patent application Apple got a couple months back?
Yeah, and then there was that patent outlining the principles and design of docking an iPod into portable computers. And then there was that patent on antenna and connector interfaces for docking an iPod into a special housing/case. And then there was that patent on controlling streamed content from limited sources like slow hard drives that would also spin down to save on battery life and the hard drive's life.
And then there was that release of iTunes(4.9) that not only gave us podcasting but also vodcasting.
Say you had downloaded one of those videocasts to your iPod and wanted to also watch the content. Maybe in the future we could just snap the iPod into a handheld/next generation iBook/iTablet/remote control type thing with the decoding power and a viewable screen and then watch that videocast.
Thump when you pass over the edge of a button.
Vibrate slightly when you are inside a button (and fade out once you stop moving).
Thump when you press a button.
Originally posted by johnq
There's no reason you couldn't have a smooth touch screen but wherever the buttons appear onscreen, the remote vibrates when your finger is in a button and thumps a little when pressed. Force feedback mixed with touch screen, why not? If it's cheap enough for PS2/XBOX controllers and cell phones, I think Apple could make it work.
Thump when you pass over the edge of a button.
Vibrate slightly when you are inside a button (and fade out once you stop moving).
Thump when you press a button.
Or they could be super silly and have real buttons but with little LCDs on each of them that change based on which device is selected.
This remote will probably cost like $300 anyway, so it's moot for guys like me to suggest features..
WHY CANT THIS BE DONE? I wish I had access to capital. I would invent it myself.
Originally posted by rongold
Say you had downloaded one of those videocasts to your iPod and wanted to also watch the content. Maybe in the future we could just snap the iPod into a handheld/next generation iBook/iTablet/remote control type thing with the decoding power and a viewable screen and then watch that videocast.
Or better yet, rather than using this new fangled remote to turn on the television, then turn on the DVD, then switch it over to select it and then hitting play, you could just hit the play button for the iPod and it beams the content to the TV.
- You don't want the media on the controller:
- Wears out the iPod battery
- Annoying lag to wait for Airport Express to decompress the signal
- If the iPod is the remote -and- portable player, they you are stuck without a remote if your wife goes for a jog with your iPod.
- Why risk damaging the iPod's HDD, since remotes get thrown around so much.
No, better to have an iPod-like remote that only downloads the playlist/Library data from a remote Mac/PC or some new media center thingy or new Airport with a HDD in it or some such.
This way the drive can be flash and smaller. And the battery life is maximized and the signal passes instantly.
My idea was rooted in the fact that last weekend I was cleaning the house and listening to tunes. Every room i moved to i just moved my powerbook with me and directed my tune selction from there. Thats when it hit me. Why cant my ipod connect to my airport express? why do i have to carry around my laptop? Why cant i attatch something to the bottom of my ipod, then in menu go to airport connections > select my air port express in the living room > and presto my ipod would play over the speakers in my living room. This seems pretty easy to me. Im not talking about it being the end all, work all remote. I just want to play music to a stereo hooked up to my air port express wirelessly from my ipod like i do from my laptop..
Sorry, but no "touchscreen" remote will ever feel as good in my hand as a good, dedicated remote with physical buttons and a good layout.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Buttons do feel better than a touchscreen. You have the tactile feel of pushing something and feeling resistance.
On the other hand most Universal Remotes are a complete mess of buttons meant to cover nearly every possible scenario.
The advantage of a touch screen is the ability to change the screen to meet the needs of different appliances, with out the unergonomic confusing buttons cluttering the face of the remote.
Plus Apple owning the patent on the click wheel, could place this feature on their remote and cover some of the functions that too many buttons traditionally do.
However, I do believe they should integrate this technology into a 8-10 inch tablet, that serves as a "couch web/email client," as well as an AV remote.
I don't know. I'm more a fan of the hand held remote. Sony has those big touch screen remotes you have to operate with two hands. They are too large, and bulky.
Wait, you want a kick-ass home theater and plasma TV, then use an underpowered limited MacMini with this? For what? Its got no video inputs, lame audio output, only works if your big screen TV has a DVI port that meets current specs (sorry, mine doesn't). And then its just got a lame 40 GB slow hard drive and a lame G4 processor. Not really going to have room on this thing to store movies or the like, nor the power to do HD TV.
You assume the Mac mini won't evolve from what it is today. In fact there is a rumor floating around that Mac mini's won't be using a G4 at all by next year. We're waiting for conformation on that one.
As far as video/audio input output it doesn't get any better than DVI to HDMI, pretty much everything else is a lesser option. Also Apple likes the simplicity of one wire doing the job of many.
Originally posted by johnq
There's no reason you couldn't have a smooth touch screen but wherever the buttons appear onscreen, the remote vibrates when your finger is in a button and thumps a little when pressed.
Or better yet, the remote gives you an electric-shock when your finger clicks a button.
Originally posted by johnq
Thump when you pass over the edge of a button.
Vibrate slightly when you are inside a button (and fade out once you stop moving).
Thump when you press a button.
Is this the famous iBrator?
Originally posted by TenoBell
As far as video/audio input output it doesn't get any better than DVI to HDMI, pretty much everything else is a lesser option. Also Apple likes the simplicity of one wire doing the job of many.
The mac mini has a DVI input ?? Wow that must really be something.
The truth is: most people don't need and wont buy a digital TV right now, including me.
The mac mini is a TERRIBLE A/V solution as it is right now.
It needs to have all those silly plugs that are on the back of even $50 DVD players these days, and it needed them when it came out.
Component, S-Video, RCA audio, Optical Audio, and that's just the OUTPUTS. For inputs, it needs S-Video, RCA audio, Optical audio (since it's cheap to put in, anyway), and possibly RF with an HD tuner.
Yes, I know you can just buy an EyeTV500, but then that crappy G4 and worthless 5400 RPM HD are going to neuter the damn thing (NO Hi-Def FOR YOU!).
Luckily, I happen to own a G5 powermac, otherwise A/V would be a fruitless endevor on my mac. I'd just buy a $50 upgrade to my PC and do some software tomfoolery, which would still cost me less than the Mac Mini.
Originally posted by slughead
Or they could be super silly and have real buttons but with little LCDs on each of them that change based on which device is selected.
This remote will probably cost like $300 anyway, so it's moot for guys like me to suggest features..
I don't think that is as far off as it sounds. Take an iPod click wheel, small color screen for menus and maybe 6-8 rtransparent buttons that sit atop another lcd screen, maybe it can be done.
Originally posted by Louzer
Wait, you want a kick-ass home theater and plasma TV, then use an underpowered limited MacMini with this? For what? Its got no video inputs, lame audio output, only works if your big screen TV has a DVI port that meets current specs (sorry, mine doesn't). And then its just got a lame 40 GB slow hard drive and a lame G4 processor. Not really going to have room on this thing to store movies or the like, nor the power to do HD TV.
Why is it everyone's always looking to merge some device into their systems just because they think it's Apple or something, not because it'll actually be useful.
And don't get your hopes up on Apple releasing one of these things. Apple, like any company, files patents for everything they do, whether they actually decide to implement it or not.
And I have to agree with Kolchak. Buttons, people need buttons. Hell, one of the biggest complaints on the iPod line was when Apple went to the 3G model with the non-clicking buttons that people could hit without realizing it. Plus, how do you feel your way in your darkened room to hit the volume keys or the pause button on a touch screen? You'd always have to look at it to make sure you're pressing in the right area!
or I could get the model with the 80GB HD, or upgrade it myself, or add a fw drive or...or...or...
Me wanting to use this might have something to do with my current PII system hooked up to my TV. I don't need video input, and I could buy an external sound card (probably would anyway for surround sound). And "lame" G4 processor is still perfectly adequate for playing mp3's and video (not HD).
Don't be bitter...
Originally posted by slughead
[B]The mac mini has a DVI input ?? Wow that must really be something.
If that was in responce to what I said. You are reaching for an argument, because I never said The Mac mini had DVI inputs. I was speaking to the concept in general.
The truth is: most people don't need and wont buy a digital TV right now, including me.
I can agree with that. The technology is too expensive and not good enough right now. At this point they continue to come with flatscreen technology far better than the previous.
The mac mini is a TERRIBLE A/V solution as it is right now.
It needs to have all those silly plugs that are on the back of even $50 DVD players these days, and it needed them when it came out.
Also if you read through official Apple documentation, nowhere does it read that Apple made the mini with the intent of it being an A/V solution.