PDA

View Full Version : about those 2nd-gen Intel Core restrictions for AirPlay




sebseb81
Feb 17, 2012, 07:07 PM
I read somewhere (lost track where) that to use AirPlay on ML, you need a second-generation Intel Core CPU (i.e. i3, i5, i7). First question, I assume that a late 2010 MBA would thus not be able to do AirPlay?

Secondly, could anyone explain to me why an Intel Core 2 Duo chip (like the one found in 2010 MBA) would not be capable of doing AirPlay? Especially since an iPad 2 with its A5 chip can do so? I'm not trying to be facetious or sarcastic or anything, I just don't understand what the great technical difficulty is with this. Does it have to do with the higher resolution of a Mac? Something else?

Thanks in advance for any answers to this question.



Gilj
Feb 17, 2012, 07:13 PM
Not sure, but might be this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video

InuNacho
Feb 17, 2012, 07:22 PM
Does it have to do with the higher resolution of a Mac? Something else?

Apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware.

nick7138
Feb 17, 2012, 09:18 PM
I read somewhere (lost track where) that to use AirPlay on ML, you need a second-generation Intel Core CPU (i.e. i3, i5, i7). First question, I assume that a late 2010 MBA would thus not be able to do AirPlay?

Secondly, could anyone explain to me why an Intel Core 2 Duo chip (like the one found in 2010 MBA) would not be capable of doing AirPlay? Especially since an iPad 2 with its A5 chip can do so? I'm not trying to be facetious or sarcastic or anything, I just don't understand what the great technical difficulty is with this. Does it have to do with the higher resolution of a Mac? Something else?

Thanks in advance for any answers to this question.

Apple has pointed out that it is not a fully implemented feature. I'd say look forward to future compatibility on more devices. This will likely show up in Developer Preview 2.

sebseb81
Feb 19, 2012, 09:56 PM
Apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware.

This has occurred to me but I'm looking for non-cynical interpretations! Something that would give me hope.


Apple has pointed out that it is not a fully implemented feature. I'd say look forward to future compatibility on more devices. This will likely show up in Developer Preview 2.

Like this! Hope you are right.

pdjudd
Feb 19, 2012, 10:56 PM
Like this! Hope you are right.

I think that is the case. DP1 is an early release and itís almost certainly based on the beta version of the ATV software. Iím sure that for now, Apple is targeting the latest and greatest hardware and they will roll out support to all the machines that can support the feature.

JohnDoe98
Feb 19, 2012, 11:28 PM
I think that is the case. DP1 is an early release and it’s almost certainly based on the beta version of the ATV software. I’m sure that for now, Apple is targeting the latest and greatest hardware and they will roll out support to all the machines that can support the feature.

I do hope so but that isn't always Apple's MO. When Apple released HW acceleration they left out the 8600M GT cards from getting the update. It wouldn't surprise me if this mirroring would rely on such ability. So I'm worried the 8600M GT cards, while sufficient to run ML, won't be enough to get airplay mirroring.

Maniamac
Feb 20, 2012, 12:00 AM
I hate to be the bearer of bad news.

It is true that the feature is not fully implemented in DP1, as Apple has not yet provided this functionality to all Macs with second-generation Intel Core CPUs.

However, Airplay Mirroring WILL require a second-generation Intel Core CPU upon 10.8's release.

Something similar happened with Airdrop in Lion. In Lion DP1, Apple noted that the feature was not yet fully implemented. Those missing the functionality were hopeful that "not fully implemented" meant that Apple would extend Airdrop to all Macs compatible with Lion in subsequent previews. It turns out that "not fully implemented" meant that Lion DP1 did not provide Airdrop to all Macs capable of simultaneous infrastructure and personal area ad-hoc networking, which is the requirement for Airdrop. Apple did bring Airdrop to THOSE Macs in subsequent previews, but Macs without the required wireless chip did not gain that ability.

Apple's implementation of Airplay Mirroring relies upon Intel Quick Sync, which includes hardware H. 264 encoding. Second-generation Intel Core CPUs have it onboard; Intel Core 2 Duos do not. In a future DP, Apple will bring Airplay Mirroring to those Macs with second-generation Intel Core CPUs that did not have it in DP1. Those with Core 2 Duos won't be getting the feature.

In my opinion, Apple has at times over-engineered a feature to exclude Macs that should in theory be perfectly capable of it. Honestly, I'm not thinking that this is one of those times, though (and while I'm a huge Apple fan, I'm certainly no Apple apologist). I feel really badly for someone that bought a $2800 MacBook Pro at the end of 2009 who, not even three years later, is finding him- or herself "left out." But I think that in the case of Airplay Mirroring, The Powers That Be asked themselves, "Do we pick greater compatibility or the best user experience?" No stranger to trade-offs (*cough* iPhone 4 antenna *cough*), Apple picked the best user experience. And as anyone who has used 10.8's Airplay Mirroring will tell you, it is WICKED fast.

If anyone is wondering how I know about Airplay Mirroring's requirement--this is what Apple told the journos and devs invited to see 10.8 the week prior to seeding. That I know of, among the journalists invited, only Jason Snell bothered to note this requirement in his write-up: http://www.macworld.com/article/165407/2012/02/hands_on_with_apples_new_os_x_mountain_lion.html.

Hope this clears everything up.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 12:07 AM
Hope this clears everything up.

It does!

Wouldn't surprise me if 1080p mirroring will require Apple TV 3 and Ivy Bridge CPUs.

sebseb81
Feb 20, 2012, 08:40 AM
Apple's implementation of Airplay Mirroring relies upon Intel Quick Sync, which includes hardware H. 264 encoding. Second-generation Intel Core CPUs have it onboard; Intel Core 2 Duos do not. In a future DP, Apple will bring Airplay Mirroring to those Macs with second-generation Intel Core CPUs that did not have it in DP1. Those with Core 2 Duos won't be getting the feature.


Thanks for your lengthy reply Maniamac. It's probably better to know this now then to get my hopes up. I was wondering if you had an answer to the second part of my question: why the A5 can handle AirPlay Mirroring but not an Intel Core 2 Duo on a late 2010 MBA? Does that also have to do with Intel Quick Sync or some similar feature that is missing in C2D?

KPOM
Feb 20, 2012, 09:14 AM
This has occurred to me but I'm looking for non-cynical interpretations! Something that would give me hope.

Like this! Hope you are right.

As others have pointed out, the most logical explanation is that it will use QuickSync, which is exclusive to the newer Intel processors. While I'm sure Apple wants to promote hardware sales, for the most part, there has been some logic to the dropping of support for older models in previous versions of OS X. Snow Leopard dropped Power PC, Lion dropped 32-bit CPUs, and Mountain Lion is completing the switch to the 64-bit kernel and taking greater advantage of the Sandy Bridge chips. I wouldn't be surprised if 10.9 requires Core i-series processors, but we'll find out in 2013.

Maniamac
Feb 20, 2012, 12:01 PM
Thanks for your lengthy reply Maniamac. It's probably better to know this now then to get my hopes up. I was wondering if you had an answer to the second part of my question: why the A5 can handle AirPlay Mirroring but not an Intel Core 2 Duo on a late 2010 MBA? Does that also have to do with Intel Quick Sync or some similar feature that is missing in C2D?

The Core 2 Duo is powerful enough. If you check out the AirParrot app (which doesn't yet stream sound but soon will), you'll see that the Core 2 Duo, with a 320M like your MBA has, is able to do something like Airplay Mirroring "fine." Does it run without making the CPU break a sweat and with near zero latency, as does 10.8's implementation? No. So, it's not that the Core 2 Duo isn't powerful enough to sling your Mac's video and audio over to your Apple TV. It's that Apple is leveraging hardware that the C2D doesn't have in its implementation to make it work well; it's all in the way Apple is coding it.

Apple is left either with something like AirParrot, which would work for everyone that can run 10.8 but provide a comparatively subpar user experience, or an implementation with less compatibility but an ideal UX. They chose the latter, obviously.

Now, you could argue that Apple should use hardware H. 264 encoding for those machines capable of it, but at least code a fall-back path for C2D's with Nvidia GPUs that effectively does in software what Sandy Bridge CPUs do in hardware. But that's another argument...Apple's legacy support (at least on the Mac side) has never been exceptional. They'd rather spend their time optimizing their software for newer hardware. But 1) Apple has made it clear in the past that they would rather omit a feature than include one that works less than ideally, like Airplay Mirroring would on a C2D. 2) That's the price paid for iterating and innovating as aggressively as Apple. Now that OS X is on an annual cycle, Mac users are gonna have to get used to the idea of losing compatibility with new tech sooner than they'd like.

JohnDoe98
Feb 20, 2012, 12:33 PM
Thanks for your lengthy reply Maniamac. It's probably better to know this now then to get my hopes up. I was wondering if you had an answer to the second part of my question: why the A5 can handle AirPlay Mirroring but not an Intel Core 2 Duo on a late 2010 MBA? Does that also have to do with Intel Quick Sync or some similar feature that is missing in C2D?

To answer why the A5 can do it but C2D can't, I'm only guessing, but the size of the screen that the A5 has to encode is much smaller than the size of the screen a C2D would have to?

Eidorian
Feb 20, 2012, 12:36 PM
Not sure, but might be this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_VideoAnand was hoping for low CPU usage via QuickSync...

The Core 2 Duo is powerful enough. If you check out the AirParrot app (which doesn't yet stream sound but soon will), you'll see that the Core 2 Duo, with a 320M like your MBA has, is able to do something like Airplay Mirroring "fine." Does it run without making the CPU break a sweat and with near zero latency, as does 10.8's implementation? No. So, it's not that the Core 2 Duo isn't powerful enough to sling your Mac's video and audio over to your Apple TV. It's that Apple is leveraging hardware that the C2D doesn't have in its implementation to make it work well; it's all in the way Apple is coding it.

Apple is left either with something like AirParrot, which would work for everyone that can run 10.8 but provide a comparatively subpar user experience, or an implementation with less compatibility but an ideal UX. They chose the latter, obviously.

Now, you could argue that Apple should use hardware H. 264 encoding for those machines capable of it, but at least code a fall-back path for C2D's with Nvidia GPUs that effectively does in software what Sandy Bridge CPUs do in hardware. But that's another argument...Apple's legacy support (at least on the Mac side) has never been exceptional. They'd rather spend their time optimizing their software for newer hardware. But 1) Apple has made it clear in the past that they would rather omit a feature than include one that works less than ideally, like Airplay Mirroring would on a C2D. 2) That's the price paid for iterating and innovating as aggressively as Apple. Now that OS X is on an annual cycle, Mac users are gonna have to get used to the idea of losing compatibility with new tech sooner than they'd like....but then you get this.

I would wait for the final release.

AlanShutko
Feb 20, 2012, 12:46 PM
I believe the iPad 2 and iPhone 4s have hardware h.264 encoders. Here's something that hints at it on the iPad 2:

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/03/15/imovie-on-ipad-2-beats-most-macs-in-benchmarks/

Eidorian
Feb 20, 2012, 12:51 PM
I believe the iPad 2 and iPhone 4s have hardware h.264 encoders. Here's something that hints at it on the iPad 2:

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/03/15/imovie-on-ipad-2-beats-most-macs-in-benchmarks/Everything since nVidia 8 series or AMD HD 2000 Series has integrated h.264 decoding hardware along with CUDA/OpenCL support. VCE is making a show on HD 7000. You will need Quicksync otherwise.

AlanShutko
Feb 20, 2012, 02:08 PM
Correct, but I was specifically talking about hardware encoding, not decoding.

Eidorian
Feb 20, 2012, 02:19 PM
Correct, but I was specifically talking about hardware encoding, not decoding.

the iPad 2 has a built-in H.264 encoder that's similar to the Elgato Turbo.264 HD USB dongle used to accelerate H.264 encoding on the Mac.Of course, I did not read the article at all...

Not to mention Quicktime encoding speeds have a history of being miserably slow to the point that Elgato found it worthwhile to release such a product. Have they stepped up lately or are leveraging GPGPU?

marc11
Feb 21, 2012, 05:42 PM
According to Intel, if Apple is really using the built in h.264 encoder for screen sharing then at least the i7 used in the 2010 MBP have this tech included. However what is not clear are the graphics requirements. Intel lists HD graphics required but I wonder if any superior card would suffice or if you need HD graphics?

I suppose it doesn't matter since Intel is not listing HD3000 but just HD graphics I cannot see why the 2010 i7 machines should not have AirPlay as they meet Intels listed specs. Now what will Apple do???? I am hoping they give it to us "old" MBP owners from way back as Feb 2011!!!

sebseb81
Feb 21, 2012, 07:03 PM
The Core 2 Duo is powerful enough. If you check out the AirParrot app (which doesn't yet stream sound but soon will), you'll see that the Core 2 Duo, with a 320M like your MBA has, is able to do something like Airplay Mirroring "fine."


Did not know about this app, thanks for the reference.


Apple's legacy support (at least on the Mac side) has never been exceptional. They'd rather spend their time optimizing their software for newer hardware. But 1) Apple has made it clear in the past that they would rather omit a feature than include one that works less than ideally, like Airplay Mirroring would on a C2D. 2) That's the price paid for iterating and innovating as aggressively as Apple. Now that OS X is on an annual cycle, Mac users are gonna have to get used to the idea of losing compatibility with new tech sooner than they'd like.

Yes, I know about Apple's approach to legacy support. Still, the late 2010 MBA was selling as late as July 2011, and now it won't be able to run the latest version of OS X just a year later? Could be a record. Though I have to admit that the C2D on that model MBA was rather an anomaly, and you combine that with this new pace Apple is on target for OS X releases, and it shouldn't come as that much of a surprise.

The good (and possibly bad) thing is that Apple also seems to be changing somewhat in the other direction when it comes to legacy support for iOS devices. Letting iOS 5 run on the 3GS was kind of a stretch considering the usual Apple policy.

TheGdog
Feb 21, 2012, 07:44 PM
Now that OS X is on an annual cycle, Mac users are gonna have to get used to the idea of losing compatibility with new tech sooner than they'd like.

Thats what I was thinking, but here is my opinion on that. I bought my computer to serve my current needs and I will get a new one when it no longer does. Airplay mirroring is really cool, but I did not have it before and I don't need it. There is nothing wrong with not using the newest OS and developers will be supporting several versions at a time. Heck, there are still applications that run on tiger. As long as iCloud continues to work with older Mac OS versions (which it will) you aren't losing anything by not using the current OS. You just will not have the newest goodies from apple.

jayhawk11
Feb 22, 2012, 12:09 AM
*Snip*
Letting iOS 5 run on the 3GS was kind of a stretch considering the usual Apple policy.

It's only an anomaly if you don't pay attention to chipsets. The 3G never should have been on iOS 4; for all intents and purposes, it was an original iPhone with a 3G baseband. The 3GS was a legitimate jump forward and continues to show that by running iOS 5 well, nearly 3 years after it was announced.

Capeman
Feb 22, 2012, 01:44 AM
Still, the late 2010 MBA was selling as late as July 2011, and now it won't be able to run the latest version of OS X just a year later

Yes, it will. It just won't do AirPlay Mirroring.

satcomer
Feb 22, 2012, 03:50 AM
Does the OS X hint 10.7: Enable AirDrop on Macs without supported wireless hardware (http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20110913213649565) yet to see if it helps?

Fofer
Jun 18, 2012, 02:22 PM
Just found this little tidbit on Apple's own pages, detailing Mountain Lion:

"AirPlay Mirroring requires a second-generation Apple TV or later. Supports the following Mac models:

iMac (Mid 2011 or newer)
Mac mini (Mid 2011 or newer)
MacBook Air (Mid 2011 or newer)
MacBook Pro (Early 2011 or newer)"

http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/

Grrrr. I have 2.66 Ghz Intel Core i7 MacBook Pro, but it is mid-2010. I wonder what the technical difference, if any, there is between these models?

There better be a terminal hack to enable it for me, it's the only ML feature I was looking forward to... yeesh.

JacaByte
Jun 18, 2012, 02:37 PM
You have an Arrandale processor, not an Ivy Bridge processor. My understanding is that Arrandale processors lack QuickSync hardware transcoders, which AirPlay relies on to function.

marc11
Jun 18, 2012, 05:16 PM
You have an Arrandale processor, not an Ivy Bridge processor. My understanding is that Arrandale processors lack QuickSync hardware transcoders, which AirPlay relies on to function.

I was pretty sure I read on intels website that the first gen i7 did support Quicksync and I was questioning why Apple didn't include them. I need to recheck that.

I don't know how Air Parrot dies it but it works pretty good and if they can do it, certainly Apple could do it too and better.

Fofer
Jun 18, 2012, 06:54 PM
Something similar happened with Airdrop in Lion. In Lion DP1, Apple noted that the feature was not yet fully implemented. Those missing the functionality were hopeful that "not fully implemented" meant that Apple would extend Airdrop to all Macs compatible with Lion in subsequent previews. It turns out that "not fully implemented" meant that Lion DP1 did not provide Airdrop to all Macs capable of simultaneous infrastructure and personal area ad-hoc networking, which is the requirement for Airdrop. Apple did bring Airdrop to THOSE Macs in subsequent previews, but Macs without the required wireless chip did not gain that ability.


That sounds great and all, but how does that reconcile with the fact that this aforementioned Terminal (ie: software) hack brings AirDrop to other Macs?

http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20110913213649565


Apple's implementation of Airplay Mirroring relies upon Intel Quick Sync, which includes hardware H. 264 encoding. Second-generation Intel Core CPUs have it onboard; Intel Core 2 Duos do not. In a future DP, Apple will bring Airplay Mirroring to those Macs with second-generation Intel Core CPUs that did not have it in DP1. Those with Core 2 Duos won't be getting the feature.


Well, apparently we've learned it's not just that. I have an Intel Core i7, but it's from mid-2010, and not early-2011, and apparently I won't be able to use this feature, either.

----------

You have an Arrandale processor, not an Ivy Bridge processor. My understanding is that Arrandale processors lack QuickSync hardware transcoders, which AirPlay relies on to function.

Ivy Bridge are the ones that JUST came out at WWDC, right? So this feature works only with Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge. I guess I thought since I had an i7, I had a Sandy Bridge. At the very least, I thought I'd be able to use Mountain Lion Airplay Mirroring. Very disappointed today to learn that's not the case. <sigh>

Mackilroy
Jun 18, 2012, 09:32 PM
Well, apparently we've learned it's not just that. I have an Intel Core i7, but it's from mid-2010, and not early-2011, and apparently I won't be able to use this feature, either.
It is, there's just multiple generations of CPUs that all use the Core i3/i5/i7 moniker.

Ivy Bridge are the ones that JUST came out at WWDC, right? So this feature works only with Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge. I guess I thought since I had an i7, I had a Sandy Bridge. At the very least, I thought I'd be able to use Mountain Lion Airplay Mirroring. Very disappointed today to learn that's not the case. <sigh>
Yes, Ivy Bridge just came out. Sandy Bridge was before that, and Arrandale, which you have, was before that. It's unfortunate, but that's technology for you.

haravikk
Jun 19, 2012, 05:22 AM
I'm pretty annoyed by this restriction. It means that no Mac Pro models are able to use AirPlay, even though most should have the necessary performance to do the encoding without QuickSync.

I mean, I do transcoding of video regularly and am happily able to transcode a video faster than it would normally play; and that's with the video stream being decoded then encoded to the most optimal H.264 settings I can configure*, so I can't imagine that encoding video to send wirelessly would be anything near as demanding as that.

We've had video chat/Facetime for a while now, and on machines without QuickSync support. I could understand if full 1080p resolution wasn't an option for some machines, but the lack of support in this case is just far too arbitrary.


*In my case my encoding options are limited by what Quicktime will actually play, but they're still pretty demanding and my machine copes admirably.

JohnDoe98
Jun 19, 2012, 06:09 AM
I'm pretty annoyed by this restriction. It means that no Mac Pro models are able to use AirPlay, even though most should have the necessary performance to do the encoding without QuickSync.

I mean, I do transcoding of video regularly and am happily able to transcode a video faster than it would normally play; and that's with the video stream being decoded then encoded to the most optimal H.264 settings I can configure*, so I can't imagine that encoding video to send wirelessly would be anything near as demanding as that.

We've had video chat/Facetime for a while now, and on machines without QuickSync support. I could understand if full 1080p resolution wasn't an option for some machines, but the lack of support in this case is just far too arbitrary.


*In my case my encoding options are limited by what Quicktime will actually play, but they're still pretty demanding and my machine copes admirably.

Well, the problem it seems to me is you have to encode in real time and fast enough to beam it over wireless without any lag showing up. It isn't clear your device would be up to that task. Perhaps at 480p or something, but at that point why even bother, it'll look like crap on the ATV.

haravikk
Jun 19, 2012, 10:39 AM
Well, the problem it seems to me is you have to encode in real time and fast enough to beam it over wireless without any lag showing up. It isn't clear your device would be up to that task. Perhaps at 480p or something, but at that point why even bother, it'll look like crap on the ATV.
That's my point though; I regularly use my machine to transcode 1080p video faster than it would normally play, which means it should be perfectly capable of handling AirPlay since it's encoding only.

QuickSync or not, the real requirement for the feature is that the machine be able to encode at least as fast as the frame-rate of the content; otherwise any lag will be the result of the wireless transmission (which QuickSync can't do anything about). A number of machines without the QuickSync feature should be perfectly able to handle it, as we've able to use webcams for a while now, which is essentially the same technology (encode fast enough to transmit smoothly).

JohnDoe98
Jun 19, 2012, 01:52 PM
That's my point though; I regularly use my machine to transcode 1080p video faster than it would normally play, which means it should be perfectly capable of handling AirPlay since it's encoding only.


But encoding a video faster than you can play the video is not the same as encoding the entire system faster than it displays it's content. Also, what happens when you try and encode Flash video from websites? I bet your computer would choke up on that.

haravikk
Jun 19, 2012, 02:37 PM
But encoding a video faster than you can play the video is not the same as encoding the entire system faster than it displays it's content. Also, what happens when you try and encode Flash video from websites? I bet your computer would choke up on that.
I'm not even sure what you mean by "encoding the entire system"; a virtual screen is functionally no different than a video file when it comes to encoding it into a video stream, as both are simply a continual series of frames.

AirPlay I believe is limited to the AppleTV's supported resolutions, so no larger than 1080p, so encoding the contents of a screen should be no different than encoding a 1080p video-file, except that obviously with the video file you have the advantage that you can encode faster than real-time on a fast enough machine.

JohnDoe98
Jun 19, 2012, 02:57 PM
I'm not even sure what you mean by "encoding the entire system"; a virtual screen is functionally no different than a video file when it comes to encoding it into a video stream, as both are simply a continual series of frames.

AirPlay I believe is limited to the AppleTV's supported resolutions, so no larger than 1080p, so encoding the contents of a screen should be no different than encoding a 1080p video-file, except that obviously with the video file you have the advantage that you can encode faster than real-time on a fast enough machine.


Ok my last post was poorly worded, but the point is it has to encode anything you do in the system, like for instance flash. If those tasks are relatively intense, like when you are using pro apps, there might not be sufficient resources left over to handle that encode in real time. Video playback is typically one of the easier things the system does (flash excluded). When you are encoding your 1080p files, open Activity Monitor and take a picture of what % of your cpu is in use? Are the fans already kicking in at full speed? Also, try doing some other work at the same time and let me know if your encode is still outpacing playback times.

nlflint
Jun 27, 2012, 06:07 PM
The Core 2 Duo is powerful enough. If you check out the AirParrot app (which doesn't yet stream sound but soon will), you'll see that the Core 2 Duo, with a 320M like your MBA has, is able to do something like Airplay Mirroring "fine." Does it run without making the CPU break a sweat and with near zero latency, as does 10.8's implementation? No. So, it's not that the Core 2 Duo isn't powerful enough to sling your Mac's video and audio over to your Apple TV. It's that Apple is leveraging hardware that the C2D doesn't have in its implementation to make it work well; it's all in the way Apple is coding it.

Apple is left either with something like AirParrot, which would work for everyone that can run 10.8 but provide a comparatively subpar user experience, or an implementation with less compatibility but an ideal UX. They chose the latter, obviously.

Now, you could argue that Apple should use hardware H. 264 encoding for those machines capable of it, but at least code a fall-back path for C2D's with Nvidia GPUs that effectively does in software what Sandy Bridge CPUs do in hardware. But that's another argument...Apple's legacy support (at least on the Mac side) has never been exceptional. They'd rather spend their time optimizing their software for newer hardware. But 1) Apple has made it clear in the past that they would rather omit a feature than include one that works less than ideally, like Airplay Mirroring would on a C2D. 2) That's the price paid for iterating and innovating as aggressively as Apple. Now that OS X is on an annual cycle, Mac users are gonna have to get used to the idea of losing compatibility with new tech sooner than they'd like.

I've been using the latest version of AirParrot on my Mid-2009 Macbook pro 13". I use it to send free full-screen Hulu to my AppleTV but it has flaws. First it uses a lot of CPU power. After a few minutes of playing, my CPU fan is on full blast and the computer is very hot. Second problem is performance. The video not buttery smooth, it has lag and jitter in the video. The jitter is not present when I look at the laptop screen. I turned the quality down 2 notches and it helped the jitter, but now there is serious artifacting.

AirParrot is not the best solution, and is evidence that AirPlay cannot 'just work' on a Core2Duo MacBook Pro. There will be performance and battery issues if Apple did implement airplay on older laptops.

chevalier433
Jun 27, 2012, 11:04 PM
apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware. +1

Fofer
Jun 28, 2012, 01:42 AM
I've been using the latest version of AirParrot on my Mid-2009 Macbook pro 13". I use it to send free full-screen Hulu to my AppleTV but it has flaws. First it uses a lot of CPU power. After a few minutes of playing, my CPU fan is on full blast and the computer is very hot. Second problem is performance. The video not buttery smooth, it has lag and jitter in the video. The jitter is not present when I look at the laptop screen. I turned the quality down 2 notches and it helped the jitter, but now there is serious artifacting.

AirParrot is not the best solution, and is evidence that AirPlay cannot 'just work' on a Core2Duo MacBook Pro. There will be performance and battery issues if Apple did implement airplay on older laptops.

I tried AirParrot too, and while it seemed to work okay for AirPlay Mirroring, it had a very specific and annoying side-effect, even when I wasn't using it (on my mid-2010 MacBook Pro, 2.66 Intel Core i7.) The screen would flash black every few minutes. Very noticeable and annoying, unacceptable for daily use. (This issue might be related to this report. (http://theotcspace.com/2012/03/11/airparrot-bug-warning/)) Only after removing AirParrot's components:
\System\Library\Extensions\AirParrotDriver.kext
\System\Library\Extensions\APExtFramebuffer.kext
...and restarting, did the problem go away.


As a side note, I also got the opportunity to test out Mountain Lion's full-screen Airplay Mirroring on a mid-2011 MacBook Pro and an AppleTV 3. It worked fine for presentation (Keynote/Powerpoint) style things, demos of the Finder, etc. But when I tried to watch actual video I wouldn't exactly describe it as "smooth as butter." I mean, the video played, and the audio was in sync, but it certainly didn't feel like 30fps. It was watchable, but there was a jittery quality about it that I think would be annoying after a few minutes. Granted, this is a beta OS at this point and I hope/suppose it will get better. But what I saw recently didn't blow me away, at least as it relates to being able to AirPlay video like HBO GO from a web browser. Technically it works, but there's something just a tad "herky-jerky" about it that I think would make it uncomfortable to watch for a full show.

----------

Apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware.

Given what I experienced above, with actual hardware that CAN run this new feature, I'm fairly certain that's the case.

blackhand1001
Jun 28, 2012, 01:53 AM
I do hope so but that isn't always Apple's MO. When Apple released HW acceleration they left out the 8600M GT cards from getting the update. It wouldn't surprise me if this mirroring would rely on such ability. So I'm worried the 8600M GT cards, while sufficient to run ML, won't be enough to get airplay mirroring.

surprised the your time bomb 8600m gt hasn't died yet.

JohnDoe98
Jun 28, 2012, 05:05 AM
surprised the your time bomb 8600m gt hasn't died yet.

It did die once, but Apple replaced the logic board. Anyway, I've sold that and got a RMBP so I don't need to worry about the replacement board dying on me, though Nvidia may well have fixed the problem on the replacement board.

gatortpk
Jul 11, 2012, 03:29 AM
Yes, I know about Apple's approach to legacy support. Still, the late 2010 MBA was selling as late as July 2011, and now it won't be able to run the latest version of OS X just a year later? Could be a record. Though I have to admit that the C2D on that model MBA was rather an anomaly, and you combine that with this new pace Apple is on target for OS X releases, and it shouldn't come as that much of a surprise.

The good (and possibly bad) thing is that Apple also seems to be changing somewhat in the other direction when it comes to legacy support for iOS devices. Letting iOS 5 run on the 3GS was kind of a stretch considering the usual Apple policy.

You make both good points (However the late 2010 MBA is supported for Mountain Lion, it just doesn't support AirPlay Mirroring).

And now the iPhone 3GS even runs iOS 6! But I suppose that's because, Apple is still selling the iPhone 3GS and because many features in iOS 6 are not available in the iPhone 3GS. Also, remember the 3GS was the first great improvement in the iPhone internals, and the iPhone 4 isn't really much faster, it just got a better screen and newer case. The CPU and GPU in the 3GS and iPhone 4 are pretty much identical, just slightly higher speed and different packaging (the A4 SoC) in the iPhone 4.

kvdv
Jul 25, 2012, 11:02 AM
Apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware.

I'm pretty sure that Apple thinks that Airplay might persuade people to buy a new MBP. And they might be right.

hYu
Jul 28, 2012, 04:18 AM
Apple trying to get you to spend money on a new hardware.

Which realistic business doesn't try to get you to buy/upgrade to their newer and better products?

Try starting your own multi billion dollar business first before you yammer on about how Apple is greedy and a cult religion and communists etc.

If anything, Apple is the most capitalistic company out there; they make better and better products each year while still managing to reduce the price. Remember the first MacBook Air, it was almost $2K!

Besides, after reading Steve Jobs biography and also reading a lot of books building wealth etc. I don't think Apple has anything to do with trying to swindle your money from you. They've got enough money.

Their huge cash reserves are a result of doing as many of the right things as they possibly can, helping as many people as they can get what they want from a product or service and also carefully investing and reinvesting the profits they make. All great successful businesses, companies and individuals do this.

All great businesses, companies and individuals also have critics as well.
Those that don't have critics ARE NOT SUCCESSFUL.