PDA

View Full Version : Macs older than 2011 can't use Airplay Mirroring in ML




kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 09:23 AM
http://www.cultofmac.com/177259/why-cant-macs-older-than-2011-use-airplay-mirroring-in-mountain-lion/

Wow....this sucks.

-Kevin



AppleInLVX
Jul 5, 2012, 09:50 AM
http://www.cultofmac.com/177259/why-cant-macs-older-than-2011-use-airplay-mirroring-in-mountain-lion/

Wow....this sucks.

-Kevin

Whaaaaaaaaat?! This is the feature I was looking forward to the most. I have a late 2010 i5 27" iMac. If this doesn't work I'm going to be royally pissed. :mad:

chevalier433
Jul 5, 2012, 09:57 AM
Yeah.. every year apple want us to buy a new mac those of us who have quad core iMac i don't see any reason not to be supported.

pdjudd
Jul 5, 2012, 11:54 AM
Whaaaaaaaaat?! This is the feature I was looking forward to the most. I have a late 2010 i5 27" iMac. If this doesn't work I'm going to be royally pissed. :mad:

It has to be a Mid 2011 iMac due to the hardware features.

MarcBook
Jul 5, 2012, 11:59 AM
Oh man, this sucks, but I'm really glad that I held off on my MacBook Pro purchase until the Sandy Bridge refresh...

AppleInLVX
Jul 5, 2012, 03:42 PM
It has to be a Mid 2011 iMac due to the hardware features.

Then this is the first time since I joined the Apple faithful that I can honestly say they've lost my respect. I don't care HOW much you plan for obsolescence, there is no way that new software should not be backward compatible for at least a couple years. That's *************.

I suppose that I will have to do something I thought I'd never have to do and jailbreak the Apple TV or crack the OS with the inevitable non-Apple 'fix' to correct this seriously idiotic Apple contrived blunder.

Thanks Cupertino. That's strike 1. :mad::mad::mad:

AlanShutko
Jul 5, 2012, 03:53 PM
Then this is the first time since I joined the Apple faithful that I can honestly say they've lost my respect.

That's because you don't know WHY they're not supporting it, you're just assuming it's because they didn't want to. Read this thread, it's because they require Intel QuickSync support.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1325897

UKBeast
Jul 5, 2012, 04:16 PM
That's because you don't know WHY they're not supporting it, you're just assuming it's because they didn't want to. Read this thread, it's because they require Intel QuickSync support.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1325897

Airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ?

kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 04:20 PM
Airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ?

One word.....Hollywood.

NEVERMIND....looks like it's more processor based encoding rather than DRM

-Kevin

mopatops
Jul 5, 2012, 04:33 PM
AirPlay Requires a special part of the processor (Intel QuickSync) whereas AirParrot is software based. On pre-2011 Macs Apple would have to use a similar process as AirParrot which is more intensive and likely to ramp up the fans. It's entirely possible to implement, but Apple are known to not release something that doesn't work to their standards.

AlanShutko
Jul 5, 2012, 04:39 PM
Airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ?

As people in the thread posted, use Airparrot and you'll find out. It's a bit jerky and has a high CPU load.

kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 04:48 PM
As someone pointed out in the other thread....here's the official list of supported Macs for Airplay:

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)

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

-Kevin

Sky Blue
Jul 5, 2012, 04:57 PM
http://www.cultofmac.com/177259/why-cant-macs-older-than-2011-use-airplay-mirroring-in-mountain-lion/

Wow....this sucks.

-Kevin

Yes, this has been known since Feb.

kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 04:58 PM
Yes, this has been known since Feb.

Thanks....didn't know it until now.

-Kevin

mopatops
Jul 5, 2012, 05:14 PM
One word.....Hollywood.

NEVERMIND....looks like it's more processor based encoding rather than DRM

-Kevin

Maybe I'm ignorant but does DRM stand for something other than digital rights management?

kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 05:16 PM
Maybe I'm ignorant but does DRM stand for something other than digital rights management?

It does stand for Digital Radio Mondiale....but that's not what I was referring to. Regardless....I read an incorrect article claiming Quicksync is DRM.

-Kevin

SandboxGeneral
Jul 5, 2012, 05:19 PM
This was really about the only reason I wanted to upgrade to ML. :mad: Now I am considering downgrading to Snow Leopard, because I didn't really gain anything from from Lion.

kbmb
Jul 5, 2012, 05:23 PM
This was really about the only reason I wanted to upgrade to ML. :mad: Now I am considering downgrading to Snow Leopard, because I didn't really gain anything from from Lion.

Yeah and what sucks is neither of these pages mention the restriction:
http://www.apple.com/osx/whats-new/
http://www.apple.com/osx/whats-new/features.html

You have to view the tech specs page for it.

I see a trend with Apple....announce all these new features....but wait to read the specs pages to see if you "really" get them.

-Kevin

mopatops
Jul 5, 2012, 05:48 PM
It does stand for Digital Radio Mondiale....but that's not what I was referring to. Regardless....I read an incorrect article claiming Quicksync is DRM.

-Kevin
Fair enough. :)

clukas
Jul 5, 2012, 05:50 PM
this sucks. In this case Im glad I did not purchase an Apple TV.

chevalier433
Jul 5, 2012, 07:16 PM
airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ? +1

TheGdog
Jul 5, 2012, 07:52 PM
Airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ?

If airparrot works so well then why not just use that? If it does not work all that great then there's your answer!

I have never used it but based on the posts that I have read it is not all that great. Don't blame apple for taking advantage of newer hardware. Its clearly a hardware limitation, there has already been a long thread about this.

blueroom
Jul 5, 2012, 08:13 PM
AirParrot is a sloth compared to what AirPlay with hardware support can do.

chevalier433
Jul 6, 2012, 05:21 AM
If airparrot works so well then why not just use that? If it does not work all that great then there's your answer!

I have never used it but based on the posts that I have read it is not all that great. Don't blame apple for taking advantage of newer hardware. Its clearly a hardware limitation, there has already been a long thread about this. You think apple couldn't optimize the software to support older hardware even with slower performance sure can but its all about marketing and money.

mopatops
Jul 6, 2012, 05:49 AM
You think apple couldn't optimize the software to support older hardware even with slower performance sure can but its all about marketing and money.
I agree that while Apple are a business and do exclude new features from old products to drive people to upgrade, (read Siri, iCloud requiring Lion etc) it seems that this is not the case here. As stated by multiple posters, you only need to look at AirParrot to see how AirPlay would perform on pre-2011 Macs. It's not a matter of optimisation, it just can't run at an acceptable quality if it is software based.

trondah
Jul 6, 2012, 06:57 AM
People like chevalier433 is never satisfied, no matter what we say Apple is evil and greedy. Go ahead and call me an apologist, but I think it's great they are taking advantage of hardware to do this and not use poor performance software solutions to do it. I'd rather they focus on making Mountain Lion as good as it can be than cater for outdated hardware.

GermanyChris
Jul 6, 2012, 03:51 PM
has anyone of you actually used quick sync? It's not that special it uses the built in graphics on Sandy Bridge to transcode media. It works OK until you use the onboard graphics to drive your display then it becomes much less OK.

chevalier433
Jul 6, 2012, 06:22 PM
People like chevalier433 is never satisfied, no matter what we say Apple is evil and greedy. Go ahead and call me an apologist, but I think it's great they are taking advantage of hardware to do this and not use poor performance software solutions to do it. I'd rather they focus on making Mountain Lion as good as it can be than cater for outdated hardware.

Firstly i never used airparot so i don't know how it perform or was it capable of doing secondly i don't think my iMac mid-2010 i7 is outdated hardware,has not powerful enough processor or apple cannot optimize it to run airplay.Μy opinion is you cannot exclude a 1 and half year old 2500 Euro top performance machine in terms of marketing.
Apple was not like that,customers were their first priority.

Krazy Bill
Jul 6, 2012, 06:44 PM
Go ahead and call me an apologist...Ok.

Seriously? 2010 hardware that's incapable of Airplay when 3rd parties can provide this functionality?

Right. Folks should not be pissed. All is well.

mopatops
Jul 6, 2012, 06:55 PM
Ok.

Seriously? 2010 hardware that's incapable of Airplay when 3rd parties can provide this functionality?

Right. Folks should not be pissed. All is well.

As already mentioned several times, 3rd party software implementations of AirPlay are laggy and not up to the standard found in Apple products. There is nothing to stop you using AirParrot if you really wish to.

Μy opinion is you cannot exclude a 1 and half year old 2500 Euro top performance machine in terms of marketing.
Apple was not like that,customers were their first priority.

So you'd rather they waited 3 years before introducing AirPlay just so the last 3 years worth of Macs could get the feature? Or are you saying you'd rather Apple implemented a software version for pre-2011 Macs, despite the fact it wouldn't work very well?

chevalier433
Jul 6, 2012, 07:25 PM
As already mentioned several times, 3rd party software implementations of AirPlay are laggy and not up to the standard found in Apple products. There is nothing to stop you using AirParrot if you really wish to.



So you'd rather they waited 3 years before introducing AirPlay just so the last 3 years worth of Macs could get the feature? Or are you saying you'd rather Apple implemented a software version for pre-2011 Macs, despite the fact it wouldn't work very well?
Generally there is a reason on waiting,to build an OS not like lion 10.7first release.Personally I don't think airplay need 3 year development to support 2 year old quad core processors.
To get my point macbook pro with 512MB VRAM is capable of run lion but is not run as smooth and fast as iMac with 1GB VRAM.

mopatops
Jul 7, 2012, 12:46 AM
Personally I don't think airplay need 3 year development to support 2 year old quad core processors.

Which brings us back to the point that a software version of AirPlay lags.

Have you ever encoded video on your Mac? That's basically what AirPlay is - a real time h.264 encode which is sent to the Apple TV - something that a 2 year old quad core processor isn't capable of without performance issues. Develop a software solution for those processors for as many years as you like and you still won't end up with a lag free experience.


To get my point macbook pro with 512MB VRAM is capable of run lion but is not run as smooth and fast as iMac with 1GB VRAM.
As I said in a previous post, I don't deny that Apple hold features from older machines unnecessarily. I am still simply pointing out that this is not the case with AirPlay being limited to 2011 onward computers.

Puevlo
Jul 7, 2012, 01:02 AM
Don't worry. This is an artificial constraint imposed by the trolls and warlocks of Apple. It will be unlocked with a simple software fix.

swingerofbirch
Jul 7, 2012, 01:05 AM
It seems to me (unless I'm missing something) that the lag shouldn't be any worse than what you get with screen sharing. I screen share between a 2010 MBP and 2006 iMac and it's pretty smooth, even when playing video, and I don't notice it taking up too much of the CPU. Isn't this just screensharing (+ sound), except with a TV instead of another Mac?

chevalier433
Jul 7, 2012, 04:22 AM
Which brings us back to the point that a software version of AirPlay lags.

Have you ever encoded video on your Mac? That's basically what AirPlay is - a real time h.264 encode which is sent to the Apple TV - something that a 2 year old quad core processor isn't capable of without performance issues. Develop a software solution for those processors for as many years as you like and you still won't end up with a lag free experience.



As I said in a previous post, I don't deny that Apple hold features from older machines unnecessarily. I am still simply pointing out that this is not the case with AirPlay being limited to 2011 onward computers.

Actually i edit AVC-Intra HD video from panasonic ag-hpx371 professionally, not ultra high compressed mp4 video apple TV use so i encode video all the time and i know my 1 and half year processor is capable.

UKBeast
Jul 7, 2012, 07:14 AM
Which brings us back to the point that a software version of AirPlay lags.

Have you ever encoded video on your Mac? That's basically what AirPlay is - a real time h.264 encode which is sent to the Apple TV - something that a 2 year old quad core processor isn't capable of without performance issues. Develop a software solution for those processors for as many years as you like and you still won't end up with a lag free experience.



As I said in a previous post, I don't deny that Apple hold features from older machines unnecessarily. I am still simply pointing out that this is not the case with AirPlay being limited to 2011 onward computers.


I have got 2.4ghz C2D 2010 13inch not the i5 or i7 simply c2d which is older and much less faster than the chevalier has. With airparrot I can get acceptable performance and quality, I mean it is not very very smooth but it is good enough to run Google Earth, surf web, mirroring presentations, looking at photos, using some apps like photoshop, iphoto and so on. The only problem is running 1080p mkv video files reduces my overall performance and the fans ramp up. And to solve that to relax cpu I ran the file with quciktime h264 accelerated feature on and sacrifice a bit from quality adjustable from the app.

Now the point is why do I have to use 3rd pary app while apple is already releasing the os with the same feature included but locked to 2 year old very very antique historic from dinosaurs times macbooks ?

Apple is turning to PCs windows installed in 90s and 00s, with every os upgrade it is getting resource and hardware hungry.

If I pay £1300 for a computer, I want to be able to use it for at least 5 years while benefitting from new coming apps, features. This is why I switched from Win-PC to osx-mac.

chevalier433
Jul 7, 2012, 10:22 AM
I have got 2.4ghz C2D 2010 13inch not the i5 or i7 simply c2d which is older and much less faster than the chevalier has. With airparrot I can get acceptable performance and quality, I mean it is not very very smooth but it is good enough to run Google Earth, surf web, mirroring presentations, looking at photos, using some apps like photoshop, iphoto and so on. The only problem is running 1080p mkv video files reduces my overall performance and the fans ramp up. And to solve that to relax cpu I ran the file with quciktime h264 accelerated feature on and sacrifice a bit from quality adjustable from the app.

Now the point is why do I have to use 3rd pary app while apple is already releasing the os with the same feature included but locked to 2 year old very very antique historic from dinosaurs times macbooks ?

Apple is turning to PCs windows installed in 90s and 00s, with every os upgrade it is getting resource and hardware hungry.

If I pay £1300 for a computer, I want to be able to use it for at least 5 years while benefitting from new coming apps, features. This is why I switched from Win-PC to osx-mac. Airparrot is badly written software if apple technicians supported your processor with airplay you would have better performance.
Some dudes don't understand that we work for our living and cannot can afford to buy a new top line mac every year to play apples marketing game.

Mr. Retrofire
Jul 7, 2012, 10:54 AM
Airparrot can do without quicksync why cannot tim cook ?
He wants a guaranteed realtime, not a maybe realtime video stream. If you use the CPU, you cannot guarantee realtime video encoding/decoding. The GPU (the IGP in this case), and the Quick Sync unit can encode/decode 1080p H.264 streams (two streams in realtime) even if you use all CPU cores on your system.

Mr. Retrofire
Jul 7, 2012, 11:11 AM
I agree that while Apple are a business and do exclude new features from old products to drive people to upgrade, (read Siri, iCloud requiring Lion etc) it seems that this is not the case here.
Correct. The answer is, that Apple did not develop the Intel processors and the IGPs, which means they had no opportunity to exclude certain hardware features in older processors.

UKBeast
Jul 7, 2012, 02:09 PM
He wants a guaranteed realtime, not a maybe realtime video stream. If you use the CPU, you cannot guarantee realtime video encoding/decoding. The GPU (the IGP in this case), and the Quick Sync unit can encode/decode 1080p H.264 streams (two streams in realtime) even if you use all CPU cores on your system.



not everybody is using airplay for video streaming and for all other tasks apart from video watching a simple core2duo is strong enough for many other tasks i listed i know cuz i am using them, though if he wants the customers realtime video watching through airplay, why does not he open apple tv to support other video files like mkv, avi, flv.. ? Then we will not need to do airplay nor we have to keep an ios device or a macbook running itunes runing on your hand to watch on your tv? This is just like showing your left ear with your right hand round over your head.

No matter what people say, apple is slowly changing its way to microsoft vista pc marketting strategy

Every year new computer, new hardware, new os (maybe new)

Moonloop
Jul 7, 2012, 02:24 PM
My €3500 17" 2010 Macbook Pro with 8gb RAM still has 18 months of its Applecare left to go . Apple Trade-in now values it at €647 on its website . I no longer qualify for Mountain Lion's ' Airplay' promise after less than 18 months in the Apple 'family' .

The drive to generate future bonuses for Mr. Cook and co. has replaced my 'reasonable expectation of a fit for purpose laptop ' for at least the life of the Applecare and I am now regretting buying into Mac as I am not fortunate enough to be able to spend this kind of money every 18-36 months .

As for Apple's predilection for high-end hardware , that would only be a mitigating factor if it could be used for Flac , Bluray or came with a simple dvd drive or tolerated , without Jailbreaking , other types of Ringtones or alternatively sourced Audio/Video material which came with HD Audio to match the HD Picture Quality and didn't come up with silly ' Mastered for iTunes ' labels in preference to genuine and easily available audio excellence because Apple's 'cut' isn't big enough .

I have purchased iPad 1, 2 , 3 and iPhone 4S but now regret what I've spent not because I haven't enjoyed the kit initially at least , but because I feel I am being led down a road that will make disappointment inevitable .

I don't have a problem with reinvesting , I just don't believe that this timetable was unavoidable and have lost my faith in Apple .

Good Luck to those of you who have not ......

~M~

Mr. Retrofire
Jul 7, 2012, 10:15 PM
...nonsense...
Apple did nothing. They buy the processors, which have certain features. If your computer does not have Quick Sync, it is certainly not Apples fault.

Imaginethe
Jul 8, 2012, 12:37 AM
Hardware develops each year, new features are enabled because of said hardware, so the feature gets pushed where it can.

This isn't just apple, this is any technical company. If we had to hold off on new features until everyone else hardware caught technology and software becomes stagnant.

Frustrating mirroring won't work on older models, yes, but obviously requires somethat is in Sandy Bridge or the chipset that was used 2011 onwards.

Moccasin
Jul 8, 2012, 01:40 AM
Having bought the late-2010 MBA in April last year, I have become rather used to being locked out of features. Thunderbolt and backlit keyboard for example. That said, the machine works fine and I understand progress has to happen.

From all accounts, this feature is based on new hardware not in my machine. I don't really see that this is Apple's fault. Its based on a hardware feature and if you really want to use mirroring on an old machine, AirParrot does it for you.

It's annoying but technology is always moving on. I needed a new machine urgently at the time and so bought my first Mac.

I'm more annoyed that, without a thunderbolt port, my planned expansion path (Mini with ATD) cannot be phased to reduce the load on my credit card.

Moonloop
Jul 8, 2012, 04:58 AM
Apple did nothing. They buy the processors, which have certain features. If your computer does not have Quick Sync, it is certainly not Apples fault.

Why not ? They designed it . Poor chip selection ? Mac Pro owners have not had a major chip improvement in nearly 4 years so they know :

a) One is coming

b) that they cannot reasonably expect to gain every OSX improvement unless they upgrade/repurchase .

My Macbook Pro was delivered Christmas 2010 . I have narrowly missed out on Thunderbolt and now Airplay . Next year I will probably have to pay Apple to take my ' high-end' laptop away on trade-in :D

~M~

Concorde Rules
Jul 8, 2012, 05:49 AM
Have you ever encoded video on your Mac? That's basically what AirPlay is - a real time h.264 encode which is sent to the Apple TV - something that a 2 year old quad core processor isn't capable of without performance issues. Develop a software solution for those processors for as many years as you like and you still won't end up with a lag free experience.

Your telling me my 2.66ghz quad 2009 Mac Pro wasn't capable of transcoding in real-time from blu-ray quality files? Rubbish.

Any quad core mac is capable of doing that. My Mac Pro now can do two streams of 1080p in real time.

Unfortunately Apple has gone down the route of using Quicksync (Which ironically can't play 23.976 fps content properly - google this).

It'll be hacked, I guarantee it.

Mr. Retrofire
Jul 8, 2012, 08:18 AM
Your telling me my 2.66ghz quad 2009 Mac Pro wasn't capable of transcoding in real-time from blu-ray quality files? Rubbish.
Not at all. Or how many percent of the Apple customers have a Mac Pro?

Concorde Rules
Jul 8, 2012, 08:27 AM
Not at all. Or how many percent of the Apple customers have a Mac Pro?

2010 iMacs had quad cores too.

Either way, they could have done it in software, but Quicksync obviously uses less power/better experience on laptops.

I'd very much like the ability to Airplay from my Mac Pro tbh. I paid enough for it.

CyBeRino
Jul 8, 2012, 09:43 AM
That said, the machine works fine and I understand progress has to happen.

Finally some sense is made.

This is exactly it: your older machine still works fine. It will do everything it does today with ML, and a few things more. But newer machines with better hardware can do a little more. That's how these things are.

You buy a machine with certain specifications. You can't expect every newer feature to work with those specifications. Most new features, sure. But some features will require a faster processor or gpu to work smoothly (often animations aren't as smooth on older hardware), some require hardware features to work at all (think airdrop), etc. This is one of those features where hardware features are required.

These features are required because while it's true that any quad-core mac can encode an h.264 video in real-time, most wouldn't be able to do much else at the same time. So the experience would suck. So then given a choice between 'do it suckily' or 'don't do it' on that hardware, the choice is really quite easy.

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 11:23 AM
Finally some sense is made.

This is exactly it: your older machine still works fine. It will do everything it does today with ML, and a few things more. But newer machines with better hardware can do a little more. That's how these things are.

You buy a machine with certain specifications. You can't expect every newer feature to work with those specifications. Most new features, sure. But some features will require a faster processor or gpu to work smoothly (often animations aren't as smooth on older hardware), some require hardware features to work at all (think airdrop), etc. This is one of those features where hardware features are required.

These features are required because while it's true that any quad-core mac can encode an h.264 video in real-time, most wouldn't be able to do much else at the same time. So the experience would suck. So then given a choice between 'do it suckily' or 'don't do it' on that hardware, the choice is really quite easy.

The issue is that it's an artificial limitation. The code could be there to transcode via software or quick sync if present. Ro trans code real time just isnt that taxing. My G5 can transcode faster than real time. It's not available so Apple can sell more hardware.

JohnDoe98
Jul 8, 2012, 11:35 AM
The issue is that it's an artificial limitation. The code could be there to transcode via software or quick sync if present. Ro trans code real time just isnt that taxing. My G5 can transcode faster than real time. It's not available so Apple can sell more hardware.

BS. First off there is a difference between transcoding and encoding. But let's ignore that for a second. Go ahead and post a video of your G5 transcoding a 1080p at or faster than real-time. We'll wait.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 8, 2012, 11:40 AM
The issue is that it's an artificial limitation. The code could be there to transcode via software or quick sync if present. Ro trans code real time just isnt that taxing. My G5 can transcode faster than real time. It's not available so Apple can sell more hardware.

Your G5 can transcode 320x240 MPEG video faster than realtime. Your G5 CANNOT transcode h.264 1080p video faster than realtime. That's complete, absolute, and utter BS. My MBP is almost certainly faster than your G5 (only the dual 2.5 GHz model comes close) and it can't transcode h.264 1080p video faster than realtime.

Show us the proof. I'll eat my hat if you're right.

jeanlain
Jul 8, 2012, 12:17 PM
Not to mention that a perfect airplay experience would mirror the desktop at 50-60 fps with no latency.

Icy1007
Jul 8, 2012, 12:22 PM
Apple Isn't going to compromise on performance with AirPlay just so people with older Macs can use it. They never implement multiple methods like quicksync and software based AirPlay.

CyBeRino
Jul 8, 2012, 12:44 PM
The issue is that it's an artificial limitation. The code could be there to transcode via software or quick sync if present. Ro trans code real time just isnt that taxing. My G5 can transcode faster than real time. It's not available so Apple can sell more hardware.

Bull sh​i​t.

First of all, this is not truly an artificial limitation. It would've been if the newer Macs had also done this in software: then there would be no reason to not let similarly- or better-performing Macs do the same. Or Macs with a certain amount of cores, or whatever. In reality, the feature builds upon the newer Macs' abilities to do the encoding of video in hardware, which means it requires very little of the CPU. So you really can video a 1080p video and AirPlay the entire screen to an AppleTV. Or, as was demoed in the latest WWDC keynote, play a 3D game and do the same. (Honestly I was most impressed by that, before learning this was a hardware accelerated feature.) If you don't accelerate the encoding, the machine isn't going to be able to do those two things at the same time properly.

Second: your G5 cannot encode a 1080p60 H.264 video in real time. I happen to have a G5 under my desk at work and have been encoding DVD video on it just last week (that's MPEG-2, which is decidedly easier to encode than H.264, let alone at 1080p). That was slightly faster than real-time, but not by enough to make encoding 1080p60 h.264 anywhere near real-time.

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 12:45 PM
Who said 1080p??

There is s difference code and encode but we're not talking about encoding

I'm going to try the 1080p where can i download some

pdjudd
Jul 8, 2012, 12:51 PM
Apple Isn't going to compromise on performance with AirPlay just so people with older Macs can use it. They never implement multiple methods like quicksync and software based AirPlay.

That’s a good point. After the iOS 4 on the 3G issues Apple is less willing to compromise things. I doubt they want to advertise Airplay as something other than a yes or no thing. I doubt that Apple will want to say “yes” but in reality it won’t allow you to watch video or whatever since your Mac cannot render things right.

It is one of the disadvantages of optimizing your software to available hardware. Some things just won’t be available as your computer gets older. We are talking a generation of improvements offering a specific feature that Apple decided to exploit.

CyBeRino
Jul 8, 2012, 01:00 PM
Who said 1080p??


Since that is what airplay sends to an AppleTV, everyone did.

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 01:12 PM
Last I read it'll send anything up to 1080. I don't own anything 1080 so if it only sends 1080 it'll really be useless to me.

JohnDoe98
Jul 8, 2012, 01:31 PM
Last I read it'll send anything up to 1080. I don't own anything 1080 so if it only sends 1080 it'll really be useless to me.

Your G5 can't even encode 720p in real time, and anything below that is frankly not even worth it. And yes encoding, not transcoding, is the issue since you need to mirror, i.e. send, the desktop and everything you do on it to the Apple TV. If all you care is about videos, itunes already airplays the stream.

----------

Apple Isn't going to compromise on performance with AirPlay just so people with older Macs can use it. They never implement multiple methods like quicksync and software based AirPlay.

If people are ok with mediocre mirroring they can just use Air Parrot. Your are absolutely right, Apple is doing it right, this time.

NewbieCanada
Jul 8, 2012, 01:34 PM
When I buy something, I buy it for what it can do today and for what the manufacturer has announced it can do tomorrow. Not for what someone may invent for different hardware in the future.

Making this work on older Macs would have meant an entirely separate development effort, as well as destroying the business of an independent developer. And much like Air Parrot, it wouldn't have worked very well.

chevalier433
Jul 8, 2012, 01:35 PM
Apple Isn't going to compromise on performance with AirPlay just so people with older Macs can use it. They never implement multiple methods like quicksync and software based AirPlay. You are not serious if you mean Mac pro's and iMacs with quad cores compromise performance.
Some of you mean that macbook air can run airplay mirroring and Mac pro cannot..let me think yeah ok sure.

CyBeRino
Jul 8, 2012, 01:38 PM
You are not serious if you mean Mac pro's and iMacs with quad cores compromise performance.

Yes, it does. You appear to have no idea how much computational effort is actually needed to encode h.264 video.

And while it may seem odd that the MacBook Air can do it and the Mac Pro with its decidedly more giant brain can't, it is just because that MacBook Air has hardware specifically made to do it, whereas the Mac Pro need to run software on its decidedly less efficient general purpose CPU.

A next iteration of Mac Pro might have the hardware necessary to do it. (It also might not, as the Mac Pros run on Xeon processors which are made for different purposes than the Core series is.)

chevalier433
Jul 8, 2012, 01:49 PM
Yes, it does. You appear to have no idea how much computational effort is actually needed to encode h.264 video.

And while it may seem odd that the MacBook Air can do it and the Mac Pro with its decidedly more giant brain can't, it is just because that MacBook Air has hardware specifically made to do it, whereas the Mac Pro need to run software on its decidedly less efficient general purpose CPU.

A next iteration of Mac Pro might have the hardware necessary to do it. (It also might not, as the Mac Pros run on Xeon processors which are made for different purposes than the Core series is.)

I laughing know do you know how much computational effort need to encode AVC Intra 1080 which i edit every day and you tell me about ultra high compressed amateur h.264 probably you don't know.
There are solutions if they want GPU accelerated for older iCores or even software accelerated why not for example premiere cs5.5 run very well in software mode .

JohnDoe98
Jul 8, 2012, 02:48 PM
.

trondah
Jul 8, 2012, 04:00 PM
You bought the generation right before Quick Sync, deal with it. The people buying before Thunderbolt or even MDP without sound probably had the same feeling.

Airparrot exists and apparently sucks, so I don't get what the fuzz is about. Airplay was never a promised feature when you bought your Mac's. To the guy who bought Applecare, sorry but it doesn't guarantee you new features lol.

Personally I sell my Macbook every year and buy the latest (currently MBA). The loss is worth it to me. My laptop is renewed with features and resale value. I eventually got MDP with sound, Thunderbolt, backlit keyboard, USB3, and now Quick Sync. Hardware is outdated very fast, that's always been the case. Like someone else put it, buy for the features you need today.


It seems to me (unless I'm missing something) that the lag shouldn't be any worse than what you get with screen sharing. I screen share between a 2010 MBP and 2006 iMac and it's pretty smooth, even when playing video, and I don't notice it taking up too much of the CPU. Isn't this just screensharing (+ sound), except with a TV instead of another Mac?

You missed everything. There's enough information in the thread not to come to your quick and wrong conclusion.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 8, 2012, 04:22 PM
Who said 1080p??

Apple did. Airplay is designed to send a 1080p signal to the AppleTV. If you don't know what sizes and qualities we're talking about for a certain feature, don't claim your computer can do it.

I'm going to try the 1080p where can i download some

Download a 1080p video off of YouTube or something. Absolutely no way are you going to transcode it faster than realtime, though. It's not possible.

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 04:45 PM
Apple did. Airplay is designed to send a 1080p signal to the AppleTV. If you don't know what sizes and qualities we're talking about for a certain feature, don't claim your computer can do it.



Download a 1080p video off of YouTube or something. Absolutely no way are you going to transcode it faster than realtime, though. It's not possible.

Again up to 1080 not only 1080..

AppleDApp
Jul 8, 2012, 04:47 PM
Again up to 1080 not only 1080..

Why watch anything less then 1080p

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 05:00 PM
Why watch anything less then 1080p

Because I have about 600 titles in 480 and exactly 0 in 720 or 1080..


ttp://www.slashgear.com/apple-unveils-airplay-mirroring-1080p-streaming-to-tv-11233215/

Apple has just demoed a new AirPlay Mirroring feature that can be used to easily push 1080p content wirelessly to your TV from your Mac running the upcoming OS X Mountain Lion. This means no more fiddling with an HDMI cable to get the same result. Audio can also be mirrored this way to AirPlay-enabled stereo systems and speakers.

But besides streaming audio and video content from your Mac to other AirPlay-enabled devices, the introduction of Game Center on OS X Mountain Lion, also means that games can be streamed or mirrored. With AirPlay and Game Center now integrated into the Mac, users can play against other Mac users or even iPhone and iPad users.


With this integration, Apple can push more multiplayer games that work across both OS X and iOS so that users can play against each other whether they’re on a Mac computer, an iPhone, or an iPad. Apple demoed the fun in action on stage at WWDC 2012 with a racing game.

==============================================

i.e. this is to replace hooking the mac up to the TV with wires..so say I'm watching a you tube video I'd like my wife or daughter to see I can mirror my screen to the Apple TV...

1080P is a capability, I'll bet that you cannot stream 1080p to an older apple TV either. It's an apple TV limitation not an inherent computer limitation. computers that are being included in the OK to use list are less powerful than in the not ok list. Quick sync is not that powerful, it's cool made my uberfast hack sillyfast in windows. This is another artificial limitation so folks will upgrade HW.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 8, 2012, 05:03 PM
Again up to 1080 not only 1080..

I don't know what you mean by that comment. If you're referring to what Airplay will send, it'll scale the video up (not sure on which side that happens). Still, you claimed your G5 could transcode the video without making any kind of qualification, so we all called you out on it.

PlaceofDis
Jul 8, 2012, 05:07 PM
this is disappointing to me. i really wish there wasn't this sort of limitation on such a great feature.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 8, 2012, 05:15 PM
1080P is a capability, I'll bet that you cannot stream 1080p to an older apple TV either. It's an apple TV limitation not an inherent computer limitation. computers that are being included in the OK to use list are less powerful than in the not ok list. Quick sync is not that powerful, it's cool made my uberfast hack sillyfast in windows. This is another artificial limitation so folks will upgrade HW.

The older AppleTVs don't do 1080p, so you're right that Airplay won't go to them either.

It's an inherent computer limitation. QuickSync is more than just a silly hack. If you tried to use Airplay on your G5, even if it could handle it, which it can't, you wouldn't be able to do a single other thing on it. This is what Apple is avoiding. Even a Mac Pro would suffer significant slowdowns, and most consumer-level Macs would be pretty much unusable while streaming.

Sounds like a silly hack to me...

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 05:20 PM
I don't know what you mean by that comment. If you're referring to what Airplay will send, it'll scale the video up (not sure on which side that happens). Still, you claimed your G5 could transcode the video without making any kind of qualification, so we all called you out on it.

You didn't call anything..

And second two posts later I said that I wasn't talking about 1080p but was going to try anyway. You folks are the one insisting on 1080.

I just did 720p downloaded from You Tube with kigo 2:35 video 46 seconds to MP4 but it was webm..

Webm isn't really what were talking about nor is it 1080p so tomorrow I'm going to look around at work to find a 1080 clip and try again.

----------

The older AppleTVs don't do 1080p, so you're right that Airplay won't go to them either.

It's an inherent computer limitation. QuickSync is more than just a silly hack. If you tried to use Airplay on your G5, even if it could handle it, which it can't, you wouldn't be able to do a single other thing on it. This is what Apple is avoiding. Even a Mac Pro would suffer significant slowdowns, and most consumer-level Macs would be pretty much unusable while streaming.

Sounds like a silly hack to me...

Hack=Hackintosh

Airplay won't work on anything less than the H67 chipset which dates from Jan 2011

You need to research this stuff.

matbal
Jul 8, 2012, 05:36 PM
Did some reading and it seems like a reasonable limitation to me. It seems that Intel's QuickSync blows away (Ivy Bridge is supposed to be even faster) Nvidia's CUDA and AMD/ATI's Stream, let alone software encoding. AirPlay mirror really needs the fastest hardware possible. Think about it, it requires encoding a video stream, transmitting the stream through the network, and finally decoding the stream and sending it to the TV. Fractions of a second count and software encoding just can't do it quick enough. A quick graph from tom's hardware comparing them:

http://media.bestofmicro.com/5/N/274955/original/CyberLink%20MediaEspresso.png

AppleDApp
Jul 8, 2012, 05:57 PM
Apple has just demoed a new AirPlay Mirroring feature that can be used to easily push 1080p content wirelessly to your TV from your Mac running the upcoming OS X Mountain Lion. This means no more fiddling with an HDMI cable to get the same result. Audio can also be mirrored this way to AirPlay-enabled stereo systems and speakers.

Correct me if I'm wrong. So you still need the computer in near the TV? seems like a pain for Apple Desktops.

GermanyChris
Jul 8, 2012, 06:07 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong. So you still need the computer in near the TV? seems like a pain for Apple Desktops.

I don't know? I was thinking it'd be cool to keep it on the couch and stream to the TV in the living room, In my case thats about 8'. The really cool implementation would be Mac Mini streamin wirelessly to the TV from the wireless connection to the NAS. You could put the mini on the shelf and just connect the power cable. :D

AlanShutko
Jul 8, 2012, 06:18 PM
I laughing know do you know how much computational effort need to encode AVC Intra 1080 which i edit every day and you tell me about ultra high compressed amateur h.264 probably you don't know.

For AirPlay, you WANT ultra-compressed h.264 because you are probably sending it over a wireless network to a device with hardware h.264 decoding. You would not be using an intermediate codec at a nominal 50 Mbit/s.

So yes, it does take more computation to get a good looking 1Mb/s stream than a 50Mb/s stream.

matbal
Jul 8, 2012, 06:23 PM
Distance shouldn't matter as long as they're both on the same network and have decent connections.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 8, 2012, 06:45 PM
And second two posts later I said that I wasn't talking about 1080p but was going to try anyway. You folks are the one insisting on 1080.

You'd have to be able to transcode h.264 1080p faster than realtime in order to make Airplay work, which is why we're insisting on 1080p. In addition, you'd have to be able to do so with extremely little impact on the speed of the computer in doing other tasks.

I just did 720p downloaded from You Tube with kigo 2:35 video 46 seconds to MP4 but it was webm..

What's kigo? MP4 doesn't matter since h.264 is the format Airplay uses. If you're going to do a test, use the same format...

Hack=Hackintosh

I'm supposed to know this how?

Airplay won't work on anything less than the H67 chipset which dates from Jan 2011

You need to research this stuff.

Why do you think I don't know this? I've given you plenty of evidence I do.

AppleDApp
Jul 8, 2012, 06:50 PM
I don't know? I was thinking it'd be cool to keep it on the couch and stream to the TV in the living room, In my case thats about 8'. The really cool implementation would be Mac Mini streamin wirelessly to the TV from the wireless connection to the NAS. You could put the mini on the shelf and just connect the power cable. :D

In my case my imac and tv are no where near each other.

JohnDoe98
Jul 8, 2012, 07:28 PM
AirPlay mirror really needs the fastest hardware possible. Think about it, it requires encoding a video stream, transmitting the stream through the network, and finally decoding the stream and sending it to the TV.

Not quite. It has to encode and send it through the network, but the Apple TV will do the decoding of the encoded stream, just like it works when you currently airplay a video through iTunes. It just sends the video and the Apple TV decodes it. That's why the Apple TV 2 will only mirror up to 720p because it can't decode any higher.

Ddyracer
Jul 8, 2012, 07:34 PM
As usual, apple is locking out us users with the older macs.

Senseotech
Jul 8, 2012, 07:39 PM
As usual, apple is locking out us users with the older macs.

Have you honestly not read a SINGLE post in this thread?

Ddyracer
Jul 8, 2012, 07:41 PM
Have you honestly not read a SINGLE post in this thread?

I have.

Senseotech
Jul 8, 2012, 07:42 PM
I have.

So you've read that its down to a feature of the actual hardware, a feature your older Mac doesn't have?

Ddyracer
Jul 8, 2012, 07:47 PM
So you've read that its down to a feature of the actual hardware, a feature your older Mac doesn't have?

Well, yes but still i think it could be optimized to work with the pre 2011 models somehow.

JohnDoe98
Jul 8, 2012, 07:49 PM
Well, yes but still i think it could be optimized to work with the pre 2011 models somehow.

Based on what? Wishful thinking? What makes you think pre 2011 models can work any better than Air Parrot? And if they could, why hasn't Air Parrot optimized their software? Don't you think they could make more money if they offered a better product?

ixodes
Jul 8, 2012, 08:04 PM
Apples secret plan is becoming apparent.

They began with the iToyz model of proprietary mobile devices that are largely sealed. ie: non replaceable batteries, no expansion card slot or USB port, etc.

Next they are in the midst of the iOS - OS X convergence.

The mostly unserviceable, high end, expensive MBPr is released.

Followed by the even more iOS like, OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion.

Then the Q4 release of the iOS 6 Equipped iPhone 5 (or whatever they name it).

Next up, the pricier Retina equipped MBA's, followed eventually by a complete abandonment of upgradeable computers running the central all powerful, eye candy laden iOS across all products.

All users locked into iCloud, and Apple Financial via their proprietary iPayments.

Just like Disneyland, you gain access to AppleLand via your money, and the promise you'll never leave the compound :)

Senseotech
Jul 8, 2012, 08:07 PM
Apples secret plan is becoming apparent.

They began with the iToyz model of proprietary mobile devices that are largely sealed. ie: non replaceable batteries, no expansion card slot or USB port, etc.

Next they are in the midst of the iOS - OS X convergence.

The mostly unserviceable, high end, expensive MBPr is released.

Followed by the even more iOS like, OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion.

Then the Q4 release of the iOS 6 Equipped iPhone 5 (or whatever they name it).

Next up, the pricier Retina equipped MBA's, followed eventually by a complete abandonment of upgradeable computers running the central all powerful, eye candy laden iOS across all products.

All users locked into iCloud, and Apple Financial via their proprietary iPayments.

Just like Disneyland, you gain access to AppleLand via your money, and the promise you'll never leave the compound :)

I really do fear for you conspiracy quacks, eventually you're going to completely lose touch with reality.

NewbieCanada
Jul 8, 2012, 08:10 PM
Have you honestly not read a SINGLE post in this thread?

Read yes. Understood????

----------

Apples secret plan is becoming apparent.

They began with the iToyz model of proprietary mobile devices that are largely sealed. ie: non replaceable batteries, no expansion card slot or USB port, etc.


Last time I checked you're still allowed to buy whatever brand of hardware you like.

ixodes
Jul 8, 2012, 08:55 PM
I really do fear for you conspiracy quacks, eventually you're going to completely lose touch with reality.

Oh my, must've stepped on someone's toes...

Thanks for the compliment :)

matbal
Jul 8, 2012, 09:12 PM
Not quite. It has to encode and send it through the network, but the Apple TV will do the decoding of the encoded stream, just like it works when you currently airplay a video through iTunes. It just sends the video and the Apple TV decodes it. That's why the Apple TV 2 will only mirror up to 720p because it can't decode any higher.

I understand that, guess the way I put it was unclear. Just implying that any latency saved through the whole process (encoding with QuickSync in this case, which saves a ton of time) plays a huge role in the implementation and performance of AirPlay.

GermanyChris
Jul 9, 2012, 02:11 AM
You'd have to be able to transcode h.264 1080p faster than realtime in order to make Airplay work, which is why we're insisting on 1080p. In addition, you'd have to be able to do so with extremely little impact on the speed of the computer in doing other tasks.



What's kigo? MP4 doesn't matter since h.264 is the format Airplay uses. If you're going to do a test, use the same format...



I'm supposed to know this how?



Why do you think I don't know this? I've given you plenty of evidence I do.

How many times do I need to state that I care very little about 1080p because I don't own any 1080p video. I'm going to try to convert some 1080p today to see if it transcodes faster than real time. It doesn't need to do it with very little impact on the speed of the computer it needs to be able to do it and share it's screen. Again 1080 is only relevant if you have the new Apple TV.

H.264 is a Codec it's how you get to MP4 (MPEG-4) which is one the formats that Apple TV uses..it's called h.264 it's the standard for compressing HD video to include BluRay bluray players need to decode H.264. There are other ways to compress HD video and no the Apple TV won't read them. You can and do use H.264 to compress regular movies also. H.264 is what you use to rip DVD's into you iTunes library also it's is the codec most popular converters use of which Handbrake and Kigo use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

Your supposed to figure out things by looking at them in context.

Your second comment shows this should be explained.


http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html
H.264 video up to 1080p, 30 frames per second, High or Main Profile level 4.0 or lower, Baseline profile level 3.0 or lower with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
MPEG-4 video up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
Motion JPEG (M-JPEG) up to 35 Mbps, 1280 by 720 pixels, 30 frames per second, audio in ulaw, PCM stereo audio in .avi file format

I've spent enough time in timeout recently so this is the last post of yours I'm going to respond to becasue I'll no longer be able to remain polite.

Senseotech
Jul 9, 2012, 05:26 AM
How many times do I need to state that I care very little about 1080p because I don't own any 1080p video. I'm going to try to convert some 1080p today to see if it transcodes faster than real time. It doesn't need to do it with very little impact on the speed of the computer it needs to be able to do it and share it's screen. Again 1080 is only relevant if you have the new Apple TV.

H.264 is a Codec it's how you get to MP4 (MPEG-4) which is one the formats that Apple TV uses..it's called h.264 it's the standard for compressing HD video to include BluRay bluray players need to decode H.264. There are other ways to compress HD video and no the Apple TV won't read them. You can and do use H.264 to compress regular movies also. H.264 is what you use to rip DVD's into you iTunes library also it's is the codec most popular converters use of which Handbrake and Kigo use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

Your supposed to figure out things by looking at them in context.

Your second comment shows this should be explained.


http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html
H.264 video up to 1080p, 30 frames per second, High or Main Profile level 4.0 or lower, Baseline profile level 3.0 or lower with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
MPEG-4 video up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
Motion JPEG (M-JPEG) up to 35 Mbps, 1280 by 720 pixels, 30 frames per second, audio in ulaw, PCM stereo audio in .avi file format

I've spent enough time in timeout recently so this is the last post of yours I'm going to respond to becasue I'll no longer be able to remain polite.

None of this matters at all since you have yet to show us conclusively that your G5 can encode the contents of your screen (likely running at a resolution close to the raw pixels found in 1080p) faster than real-time. AirPlay mirroring doesn't care if you "only have 480" content, because its going to mirror the ENTIRE display, be that 1920x1080 (scaled down to 720p if your aTV or TV set are limited) 1440x900, or anything else. Standard Airplay (that is, sending a specific media file to your AppleTV from a Mac) and Airplay Mirroring are two separate beasts; one simply sends data over the network for the aTV to decode and play back, the other is going to have to encode your entire display in its full resolution to something compatible with an aTV, and then send that for decoding and play back.

CyBeRino
Jul 9, 2012, 07:23 AM
How many times do I need to state that I care very little about 1080p because I don't own any 1080p video.

Yet when you're encoding your entire screen, that's exactly (well, maximally) what you're sending. The size of a video you're playing on said screen does not matter.

Surely you don't still work with a 1024x768 or smaller screen.

If all you're interested in is airplaying videos as opposed to your entire desktop, any mac can do that given the source is h.264 already. Because then it's just streaming pre-existing data.

blueroom
Jul 9, 2012, 07:34 AM
Intel calls it WiDi. Apple calls it AirPlay.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/intel-wireless-display.html

AppleDApp
Jul 9, 2012, 11:13 AM
Intel calls it WiDi. Apple calls it AirPlay.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/intel-wireless-display.html

I looked into widi a few years ago when it was coming out. Apparently it didn't work so well. Here's hoping that Airplay works well.

mattmcguire
Jul 10, 2012, 01:33 AM
So you're telling me that my 12 core Mac Pro with 64 gig of ram can't handle something a piddley Mac Mini can do? This is ridiculous.

CyBeRino
Jul 10, 2012, 02:52 AM
So you're telling me that my 12 core Mac Pro with 64 gig of ram can't handle something a piddley Mac Mini can do? This is ridiculous.

Well in fairness your 12-core Mac Pro could probably do it. But then there'd have to be an entirely separate implementation of the feature just for the tiny, tiny amount of people who have Mac Pros with 12 cores. Not worth it.

Just use AirParrot.

mattmcguire
Jul 10, 2012, 03:24 AM
Well in fairness your 12-core Mac Pro could probably do it. But then there'd have to be an entirely separate implementation of the feature just for the tiny, tiny amount of people who have Mac Pros with 12 cores. Not worth it.

Just use AirParrot.

Does AirParrot send audio as well or just the video? This is the first I've heard of this software and I've been waiting for this feature in OSX for months now.

CyBeRino
Jul 10, 2012, 07:18 AM
Does AirParrot send audio as well or just the video? This is the first I've heard of this software and I've been waiting for this feature in OSX for months now.

I haven't used it myself, but the website says it sends both.

Krazy Bill
Jul 10, 2012, 08:41 AM
Does AirParrot send audio as well or just the video? This is the first I've heard of this software and I've been waiting for this feature in OSX for months now.Yes, AiParrot will send audio but depending on your system it can take a while to sync to the ATV.

Actually, AirParrot pretty much sucks for me. At first I just chalked it up to my crappy w-fi but AirPlay in ML runs circles around it (obviously).

macbookman83
Jul 10, 2012, 10:34 AM
Airparrot is pretty decent. Before upgrading to my 2012 Air, It was my goto streaming software to watch the nba season. Its not the fastest but definitely viewable and its NOT as crappy as the above poster. It's pretty much at the mercy of your wifi/memory/system.

Not gonna lie I'm REALLY looking forward to test out Airplay on mountain with my 2012 Air. Will be putting up a demo when I get home today :)

AppleDApp
Jul 11, 2012, 11:24 AM
Here is a good read as to The Real Reason Why Macs Before 2011 Can’t Use AirPlay Mirroring In Mountain Lion (http://www.cultofmac.com/178460/the-real-reason-why-macs-before-2011-cant-use-airplay-mirroring-in-mountain-lion-feature/). Enjoy.

DarwinOSX
Jul 11, 2012, 12:43 PM
If anyone had actually bothered to read the article instead of engage in Apple conspiracy theories you would know it is a DRM issue forced on everyone by RIAA and the other content companies.
There are other ways to send video to your TV than Airplay and most of the complainers would probably never use this feature anyway.

Senseotech
Jul 11, 2012, 12:48 PM
If anyone had actually bothered to read the article instead of engage in Apple conspiracy theories you would know it is a DRM issue forced on everyone by RIAA and the other content companies.
There are other ways to send video to your TV than Airplay and most of the complainers would probably never use this feature anyway.

If YOU bothered to read anything but the article, you would know that the originally linked article about DRM is utter BS and has nothing to do with the true reason. :rolleyes:

shompa
Jul 13, 2012, 07:01 PM
This is just lazy Apple.

Graphics card can accelerate H264 encoding since Nvidia 8800 AMD 2XXX series. I understand its more work to program for 3 different solutions, but it can be done.

I personally bought 3 Apple TVs and installed 10.8 just for this feature. A less then 2 year old mac cant handle it but a slow MacBook Air can?

BTW. Apple still haven't solved the resolution issues with Airplay + HDMI out from iPads. Most TVs are 1920x1080. How many mac laptops support that resolution today?

When I use my macbook air with Airplay I only get a small screen on the TV since Apple have no scaling in this. Just a straight H264 encode.

Ipad: Same there. TVs are 16:9 and Ipads 4:3. Sure. Apps can support 16:9, but why cant Apple support external 16:9?

Novablas
Jul 15, 2012, 10:01 PM
Man this is HORRIBLE. So my 2010 Hexcore Mac Pro can't use Airplay mirroring?

AppleDApp
Jul 15, 2012, 10:16 PM
Man this is HORRIBLE. So my 2010 Hexcore Mac Pro can't use Airplay mirroring?

Nope

kikuchiyo
Jul 15, 2012, 11:40 PM
Mr. Cook and co. has replaced my 'reasonable expectation of a fit for purpose laptop ' for at least the life of the Applecare and I am now regretting buying into Mac

You have no idea what you're talking about. Instead of whining about your computer, I hope you get a PC next. You'll be happier and the rest of us won't hear you misstate reasonable expectations (hint Airplay isn't part of it).

----------

T
I personally bought 3 Apple TVs and installed 10.8 just for this feature. A less then 2 year old mac cant handle it but a slow MacBook Air can?

Yeah because the MBA has the hardware to decode it. You might a well be asking why can my phone do it and my computer cannot?

----------

This is garbage! My 2006 Macbook Pro can't do Airplay Mirroring! This is an OBVIOUS conspiracy by Apple to make me UPGRADE. YOU CAN'T HAVE MY $ APPLE.

I know my NEXT PC has to be an ACER because they know how to treat their LOYAL customers RIGHT!

I don't CARE that my Macbook PRO doesn't have the hardware and it's OLD. Apple SHOULD MAGICALLY put the hardware in my laptop! MICHAEL DELL would do the SAME THING. They should give me a feature no one even knew about when I bought my COMPUTER. /s

SnowLeopard2008
Jul 17, 2012, 07:56 AM
Apple is certainly not perfect, they've made mistakes (MobileMe, Ping, etc.) and they've had huge successes (iPod, iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air/Pro, etc.). But in this case, AirPlay is NOT a crucial feature of the OS. It's not something fundamental like web browsing, music/video playback or connectivity. Besides, in most scenarios involving AirPlay, your computer is relatively close to the HDTV it's streaming to anyway. AirPlay just allows you to cut the HDMI cable from computer to TV. If you really want to, you can hook up the computer to the TV using HDMI, VGA or DVI depending on what your TV supports. The best part of this method is that it doesn't require any kind of video stream/encode, QuickSync or any of that. Most likely, you'll get higher FPS through a cable than AirPlay. Also, AirPlay requires an Apple TV. That's a separate hardware purchase. I also remember Intel's WiDi technology only worked if you had dongles and adapters all over the place. The fact is, most people don't have Apple TVs or WiDi dongles/adapters. Most people don't NEED or USE AirPlay and AirPlay-like functionality on a daily basis. Your $3000 MBP or $5000 MP just can't wirelessly send a screencast to your HDTV. Is that the main thing you do on that computer? I seriously doubt the answer is yes. Seriously, you can't get everything in a new OS. In Windows 7, there's support for all kinds of features that require compliment hardware. Same with Linux. And practically every OS out there.


If the main functionality of your computer regardless of how much it originally cost is to wireless mirror the display to a HDTV, then I guess you are right to be mad. But Apple didn't take away any EXISTING functionality. You just didn't get a new one. Not a bunch of new ones, JUST ONE FEATURE. GET OVER YOURSELVES. Your computer still work EXACTLY like it did the day you bought it. For $20, you get a bunch of new features. Be thankful for what YOU DO GET instead of what YOU DID NOT GET. Why? Because there IS ALWAYS something you did not get. ALWAYS. Thanksgiving should come early for people like Moonloop. Maybe all year round.

PaulKemp
Jul 27, 2012, 03:20 AM
I understand that this is rooted in the hardware limitations of the older CPU's, but i still cant help but feel that they are pushing the upgrade cycle from iPad and iPhones to the more expensive hardware. They have seen that they can get people on 2year cycles with phones and tablets.

Obviously, I'm not going to upgrade my computer every 2nd year. But still, we are seeing that now. People going from 2010 MBA's to 2012. I donno, but you don't feel valued a as customer when you feel the push for the latest and greatest. Everyone wants to feel like they did a good buy, and I feel that was the case more often a couple of years ago.

Beta Particle
Jul 27, 2012, 03:45 AM
Apple is turning to PCs windows installed in 90s and 00s, with every os upgrade it is getting resource and hardware hungry.

If I pay £1300 for a computer, I want to be able to use it for at least 5 years while benefitting from new coming apps, features. This is why I switched from Win-PC to osx-mac.I think you switched for entirely the wrong reasons. Windows has always retained support for older hardware much longer than OS X has—at the cost of offering worse performance on hardware that is too old to run it optimally.

Apple would rather that older hardware is unsupported rather than offering a potentially degraded experience.

The video encoding required for AirPlay Mirroring can be done on the CPU, but it requires a lot of CPU power, eating up battery life and limiting what can be done with mirroring. Doing the encoding in hardware via QuickSync should have no impact on the performance of the machine when mirroring. It's perfectly reasonable for them to not offer support for slower hardware, and a third-party software solution already exists to offer the feature for unsupported hardware.

Man this is HORRIBLE. So my 2010 Hexcore Mac Pro can't use Airplay mirroring?AirParrot works just fine if you have CPU cycles to spare, or are mirroring something that's not very CPU intensive.

Reflection also works well for me as an AirPlay receiver. I have a PC hooked up to a large TV and mirror content from an older MacBook Pro (currently running Lion) to it using AirParrot at least a few times a month. I'm much happier having spent $15 on that, than $155 (equivalent price here) for an AppleTV. In fact, I actually had bought an Apple TV but returned it because Reflection was sharper quality. (can display iPad apps in a window without scaling for example)


I understand that this is rooted in the hardware limitations of the older CPU's, but i still cant help but feel that they are pushing the upgrade cycle from iPad and iPhones to the more expensive hardware. They have seen that they can get people on 2year cycles with phones and tablets.Are you saying you'd rather they just didn't introduce new features because older hardware can't make use of them, making you want to upgrade sooner?

Darknight670
Jul 27, 2012, 05:45 AM
Here is a good read as to The Real Reason Why Macs Before 2011 Can’t Use AirPlay Mirroring In Mountain Lion (http://www.cultofmac.com/178460/the-real-reason-why-macs-before-2011-cant-use-airplay-mirroring-in-mountain-lion-feature/). Enjoy.

This is utter ********, the real, the only; and the good reason is the lack of Quicksync in older CPUs...

----------

So you're telling me that my 12 core Mac Pro with 64 gig of ram can't handle something a piddley Mac Mini can do? This is ridiculous.

Yes exactly.

A 12 core Pentium 1 ( if it existed... a cray1 if you want) is also less powerful than an iPhone. You know number of cores / speed in mhz is not a good metric?

bchgoer
Jul 27, 2012, 01:45 PM
I was about to DL the new OS for that feature alone. I am running an MBP 2009 2.53 GHz intel core 2 duo 4gb DDR3. If the OS is upgradable so should all the features. So now I am not interested in upgrading my OS. Kind of a bummer, since I have 2 MBP, 2 iphone, ipad and an ATV2. Just completely unforgivable.

AppleDApp
Jul 27, 2012, 01:47 PM
I was about to DL the new OS for that feature alone. I am running an MBP 2009 2.53 GHz intel core 2 duo 4gb DDR3. If the OS is upgradable so should all the features. So now I am not interested in upgrading my OS. Kind of a bummer, since I have 2 MBP, 2 iphone, ipad and an ATV2. Just completely unforgivable.

imagine me down voting your post.

But really the reason newer macs can do airplay mirroring is because they have Quicksync which is hardware that was only added in the newer CPU's

wafl iron
Jul 27, 2012, 02:08 PM
Who really needs Mirroring anyway?

Mike: "Hey Julie! Come watch me browse twitter and reddit! I also have this sweet powerpoint presentation i want to show you!"

Julie: "Oh Joy!"

kbmb
Jul 27, 2012, 02:09 PM
Who really needs Mirroring anyway?

Mike: "Hey Julie! Come watch me browse twitter and reddit! I also have this sweet powerpoint presentation i want to show you!"

Julie: "Oh Joy!"

My Mac can play ANY file format for a video file. The ATV needs it converted. Would be great to mirror a full video file from my Mac playing via VLC.

-Kevin

wafl iron
Jul 27, 2012, 02:15 PM
My Mac can play ANY file format for a video file. The ATV needs it converted. Would be great to mirror a full video file from my Mac playing via VLC.

-Kevin

It's either copyrighted material or porn. Amirite?

kbmb
Jul 27, 2012, 02:20 PM
It's either copyrighted material or porn. Amirite?

Is there anything else? :p

-Kevin

Acrobat5
Jul 27, 2012, 02:51 PM
Of course there's an element of making more money from driving sales to newer models, but hardware is a big factor too. Yes third parties have been able to implement Airplay on older models & Siri on older models, but perhaps they want to reserve these features for their best possible performance.

Siri runs on models that have a more advanced noise-cancellation chip than the models it was left off from, and Airplay "left behind" iPad and iPhone 4 when they were just a year old or so because it's only implemented on models with the A5 processor.

Not everything is a big giant scheme of greed, entirely anyway.

Is it that hard to use an HDMI cable anyway? For a computer you're not likely to be doing things on it while mirroring (unless you're giving a presentation in which case perhaps your grievances are warranted) like you would with a mobile device anyway.

steeerpike
Sep 6, 2012, 11:59 AM
I had a life, then I got an expensive 27" 4 core Mac now I got a traitorous company spitting in my face whilst trying to take more money out of my pockets chevalier433 says 'its all about marketing and money" well releasing apple tv which is unable to work on pre 2011 macs is a shot in the foot for apple mac.
New apple devotees get to use apple tv while the people who helped apple get up are BETRAYED.
I am surounded by Mac products but I guess that like me a lot of people who have bitten the Mac apple are spitting it out right now and thinking like ***** am I buying another apple product to make apple TV work "1st thing, is they lost the sale of an apple tv unit 2nd thing they lost is me as a customer.
New customers get to be happy while loyal customers who put apple up in the 1st place are left with a bad taste.

I find this situation a complete betrayal of of apple supporters and I won't ever buy another apple product unless this ridiculous tech problem is resolved.
I'll use the HDMI cable to mirror before I give apple any more cash.:mad:

Beta Particle
Sep 6, 2012, 12:27 PM
I had a life, then I got an expensive 27" 4 core Mac now I got a traitorous company spitting in my face whilst trying to take more money out of my pockets chevalier433 says 'its all about marketing and money" well releasing apple tv which is unable to work on pre 2011 macs is a shot in the foot for apple mac.
New apple devotees get to use apple tv while the people who helped apple get up are BETRAYED.
I am surounded by Mac products but I guess that like me a lot of people who have bitten the Mac apple are spitting it out right now and thinking like ***** am I buying another apple product to make apple TV work "1st thing, is they lost the sale of an apple tv unit 2nd thing they lost is me as a customer.
New customers get to be happy while loyal customers who put apple up in the 1st place are left with a bad taste.

I find this situation a complete betrayal of of apple supporters and I won't ever buy another apple product unless this ridiculous tech problem is resolved.
I'll use the HDMI cable to mirror before I give apple any more cash.:mad:Your iMac is too old and does not have the Intel Quick Sync video encoder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video) built into the CPU.

This is not Apple removing/restricting features, your computer does not have the hardware required for Mountain Lion’s AirPlay method.


If you want to use a software encoder that will eat up CPU power and potentially give you a compromised experience, you can give AirParrot (http://airparrot.com/) a try.

Senseotech
Sep 6, 2012, 01:22 PM
I had a life, then I got an expensive 27" 4 core Mac now I got a traitorous company spitting in my face whilst trying to take more money out of my pockets chevalier433 says 'its all about marketing and money" well releasing apple tv which is unable to work on pre 2011 macs is a shot in the foot for apple mac.
New apple devotees get to use apple tv while the people who helped apple get up are BETRAYED.
I am surounded by Mac products but I guess that like me a lot of people who have bitten the Mac apple are spitting it out right now and thinking like ***** am I buying another apple product to make apple TV work "1st thing, is they lost the sale of an apple tv unit 2nd thing they lost is me as a customer.
New customers get to be happy while loyal customers who put apple up in the 1st place are left with a bad taste.

I find this situation a complete betrayal of of apple supporters and I won't ever buy another apple product unless this ridiculous tech problem is resolved.
I'll use the HDMI cable to mirror before I give apple any more cash.:mad:

This? This right here is what dementia and paranoia, mixed with a persecution complex looks like.