Outputting iPhone Apps to a TV: Moto Chaser Demo

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

Last week, Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/11/26/iphone-2-2-sdk-offers-undocumented-tv-out-features) had reported that the latest iPhone 2.2 SDK included an new undocumented framework that allows applications to output to a television rather than to the native screen.The MPTVOutWindow class allows your iPhone to send its video to a connected TV rather than to the built-in screen. Intended to be used with movies, the unpublished class creates a live video feed that is sent out through the iPhone's connector port. End-users will need to buy a video adapter or cable to use this functionality.While a couple of interesting demos had been thrown together. Ars then asked (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/transforming-iphone-into-tv-gaming-device.ars) Freeverse about adding the functionality to a version of their Moto Chaser (http://www.freeverse.com/games/game/?id=8006) [App Store (http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=284881537&mt=8)] game. The result is an impressive (though unsupported) demo:

Video (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

Outputting to video-out resulted in a performance hit, so the TV version of the game can only reach approximately 20 frames per second. The game normally runs at 26 fps on the native screen. Freeverse notes that this was all thrown together in a few hours, so there is room for improvement. It's not clear if and when Apple might allow developers to officially release Apps using this new functionality.



Article Link: Outputting iPhone Apps to a TV: Moto Chaser Demo (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

[overanalyzer]

Apple should absolutely pursue making this an option for app developers. Since they're pushing the iPhone and iPod Touch as a gaming platform and games are clearly a major chunk of the App Store, the idea of being able to basically take a TV gaming platform with you in your pocket would be excellent. Add in wifi for multiplayer controls and this could be the new Wii (i.e. innovative gameplay and controls over just raw performance and graphics). Here's hoping by the holidays in 2009 we'll be playing iPhone games on TV while visiting family. :)

[alexbates]

that is great, I would love to be able to play my iPod Touch games on a TV. I wonder how good the picture quality really is.

[mr.steevo]

Hi,

Is this theory possible with the first gen Touch?

s.

[HiRez]

Cool. There was also a simpler demo presented on ArsTechica.com the other day that shows you how you can draw to both the tv out and internal screens simultaneously (with different content).

[MacsBestFriend]

wow! this is going to be awesome! now we can call the ipod touch a true wii killer!

[SkeffMBP]

This would be neat if they somehow linked it with Apple TV - no wires running from your iPod/iPhone to your TV, but you have access to all of your apps on the "big screen." If this happens, the Apple TV could become a business mainstay - link it up to a projector, the possibilities would be endless.

[fendol]

Whoa, this is great... :)

This will open the door to new apps and games which will be good for developers and users alike. I think it's a big step forward ;):apple:http://seoagora.com/img/589/d08l1104oulu/smiley2.gifhttp://seoagora.com/img/1261/v08t1201sxfb/cheers.gif

[the vj]

Well, Jobs did it when he first introduced the iPhone. He was transmiting his interface directly to the huge screen.

[Loonytik]

Is it me, or is the tickdown clock going much slower than a second each time? Does it do that when displayed on the phone or is that caused by being hooked up to the TV. Im curious....

[Object-X]

iPhone as a game controller. The argument that Apple should get into gaming just got a lot stronger. Apple should really get behind this.

[kcroy]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) I would love to use one for a presentation I am doing at eTech in Columbus on apps for education.

Help.

Any links or info would be most appreciative.

K Croy

[franzmueller]

Wow, I never had any intension of getting a " classic " game console cause I´m not a game player but since I´ve got my iphone and so many great game apps , the idea of playing them on my tv looks like a winner to me :)
Saludos

[arn]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) Croy

Nope. The point of this article is that that was not something that could be done until now. And even now, it's unsupported by Apple so you won't be able to download an app that does it.

arn

[pmanija]

I have to say, that DEMO loked a little fake... How was the "GAS" button pressed?

[puffnstuff]

Nope. The point of this article is that that was not something that could be done until now. And even now, it's unsupported by Apple so you won't be able to download an app that does it.

arn

But it could be in the near future. The games thing on TV is cool but now the possibility of some sort of iphone/ipod touch netbook hybrid could be reality in a year or two hopefully.

[arn]

I have to say, that DEMO loked a little fake... How was the "GAS" button pressed?

They hacked it together for purposes of testing
http://toucharcade.com/2008/12/05/playing-moto-chaser-on-a-tv-from-an-iphone/#comments

Freeverse:
“You can have touch events on the iPhone and iPod while you output to TV. We just didn’t do both, as it would take a lot of time to re-write our touch code and UI for the demo.”

[i.maverick]

Apple should absolutely pursue making this an option for app developers. Since they're pushing the iPhone and iPod Touch as a gaming platform and games are clearly a major chunk of the App Store, the idea of being able to basically take a TV gaming platform with you in your pocket would be excellent. Add in wifi for multiplayer controls and this could be the new Wii (i.e. innovative gameplay and controls over just raw performance and graphics). Here's hoping by the holidays in 2009 we'll be playing iPhone games on TV while visiting family. :)

this really is cool.. but it won't be much fun if it has to be bound by the tv out wire..!!:p

[Marvy]

Is it me, or is the tickdown clock going much slower than a second each time? Does it do that when displayed on the phone or is that caused by being hooked up to the TV. Im curious....

It might be due to the lower fps caused by converting the video data to the TV set (the article states it runs at only 20 fps). Rather than skipping frames, the game may just be showing everything more slowly.

[hrag525]

This is amazing! This is truly the next generation of gaming... it would be awesome if they made a cable that would connect more than one iphone or itouch, then be compatible to play multi players on the tv. I say give it a few months and were good to go.:p

[talkingfuture]

This is amazing. Definitely some potential there for Apple to make a bigger impact in gaming.

[philskillz]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I can see this and the new Bluetooth 2.2 integrated somehow.

[G4R2]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) I would love to use one for a presentation I am doing at eTech in Columbus on apps for education.

Help.

Any links or info would be most appreciative.

K Croy

If you'd like to hook up your iPhone or iTouch to a TV via composite video Apple sells a component AV cable to do so:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB128LL/B?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ&mco=MjE1NTI2OA

The output is not hi def. The purpose of the cable is mostly to display movies or pictures.

[puffnstuff]

I kinda feel like the whole download games kinda hinders things because the games can only be so extensive compared to psp and ds that use cartridges and umd.

[steveleepete]

They hacked it together for purposes of testing
http://toucharcade.com/2008/12/05/playing-moto-chaser-on-a-tv-from-an-iphone/#comments

Freeverse:

interesting...i was wondering why he is holding the bottom RIGHT corner of the iphone down when the GAS button is on the bottom LEFT side of the screen...maybe it has to do with the reconfig of the UI setting or something

[hayduke]

Originally Posted by kcroy View Post
Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) Croy

Nope. The point of this article is that that was not something that could be done until now. And even now, it's unsupported by Apple so you won't be able to download an app that does it.

arn

Well, the device exists...

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB129LL/B?n=ipodtouch2&fnode=MTY1NDA0OQ&mco=MjE0NTAzOA&s=topSellers

My understanding that this is simply enabling the software support to output games to the TV. Other formats (movies, pictures, etc.) can already be output.

Keynote output support would be appreciated too!!!!!!

[LimeiBook86]

I think this is awesome, I've always wanted the ability to display my iPhone on a larger screen. If this works with games that would be great. :D

Also, if for some games, they could even have the main game on the TV, and the buttons could be on the iPhone display (if they could figure that out). Allowing you to free up the game screen of overlaying buttons. Of course it's not good for gaming on the go but, still a cool idea. :)

[zombitronic]

...draw to both the tv out and internal screens simultaneously (with different content).

this really is cool.. but it won't be much fun if it has to be bound by the tv out wire..!!:p

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I can see this and the new Bluetooth 2.2 integrated somehow.

Also, if for some games, they could even have the main game on the TV, and the buttons could be on the iPhone display (if they could figure that out). Allowing you to free up the game screen of overlaying buttons. Of course it's not good for gaming on the go but, still a cool idea. :)

This would be ideal. You could sit on your couch and use the iPhone/iPod as a wireless controller/console with it's own display. Kinda like a DS with a much larger, detached second screen.

Wireless broadcast to a Mac or Apple TV hooked up to a TV or monitor. Gameplay video on your TV and customized controls on the iPod/iPhone. I would bet that this setup already exists in some form in Apple's labs.

[kdarling]

I wonder why it slows the application down?

Pretty poor video out implementation. Other phones have video out with no reported slowdown.

No wonder they didn't natively enable video for all apps.

[Diode]

What about wirelessly to an AppleTV?

The AppleTV could process the video signal itself ....

That would be awesome.

[puffnstuff]

This would be ideal. You could sit on your couch and use the iPhone/iPod as a wireless controller/console with it's own display. Kinda like a DS with a much larger, detached second screen.

Wireless broadcast to a Mac or Apple TV hooked up to a TV or monitor. Gameplay video on your TV and customized controls on the iPod/iPhone. I would bet that this setup already exists in some form in Apple's labs.


Yea, the redfly companion allows you to mirror the windows mobile phone through bluetooth connection. So I assume the touch and iphone could possibly be capable of doing something similar. I'd hate to see the price of the iPhone/Touch wireless connection adapter though. I can't even find any AV cables that work with the touch except for the one that costs $50.:eek:

[maehara]

Pretty poor video out implementation. Other phones have video out with no reported slowdown.
Remember that this isn't a supported feature yet - odds are they're still working on the implementation.

[Bonte]

Well, the device exists...

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB129LL/B?n=ipodtouch2&fnode=MTY1NDA0OQ&mco=MjE0NTAzOA&s=topSellers

The iPod is almost an AppleTV with this, apart from the interface and remote control it can almost have exactly the same function.

[Marx55]

FANTASTIC!!!

Does it mean that it is possible to use the iPhone and iPod touch for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations on videoprojectors much as when using a laptop?

Something like this is possible with the iPhone and iPod touch?

Impatica ShowMate
http://www.impatica.com/showmate

[MacFly123]

This would be neat if they somehow linked it with Apple TV - no wires running from your iPod/iPhone to your TV, but you have access to all of your apps on the "big screen." If this happens, the Apple TV could become a business mainstay - link it up to a projector, the possibilities would be endless.

Ya that would be very cool :)

Also, now that the video is on the TV and the iPhone screen is blank, imagine what they could do with the blank iPhone screen and putting interface and control elements on there as like a secondary DS screen or something :) They could do some really cool stuff, and not just with games. It would be like the laptops with the main screen and then a secondary multi-touch trackpad screen. Have iChat video chats on your big screen and control things on your iPhone at the same time. Throw news, stocks, music, anything from your iPhone to the big screen with controls on the iPhone screen while the big screen does the serious displaying :) I am loving this concept! :D

[Dr. Cabrera]

Man I posted about this earlier and no one gave a damn
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=609488

Now its on the front page and everyone is interested :confused:

Anyways, this is pretty monumental stuff for the hacking community

this brings us one step closer to being able to use the iPhone as a mini computer

[puffnstuff]

Man I posted about this earlier and no one gave a damn
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=609488

Now its on the front page and everyone is interested :confused:

Anyways, this is pretty monumental stuff for the hacking community

this brings us one step closer to being able to use the iPhone as a mini computer

God you don't even know how long I have been waiting for something like this..http://olo-computer.com/

although I do not think the olo concept will ever materialize but someone somewhere will make something similar

[zombitronic]

I'd hate to see the price of the iPhone/Touch wireless connection adapter though.

I'm not sure that there would be a need for a wireless connection adapter. Almost every hardware product that Apple sells has built-in WiFi, and Apple TV and iPod Touch are the only two major devices that do not have Bluetooth.

[ogbuke]

I think we might see Apple developing this into the Apple TV, it has a bright future, combine it with an ipod touch or iphone or some sort of new remote like that and you have a killer device.

[iJed]

I wonder why it slows the application down?

Pretty poor video out implementation. Other phones have video out with no reported slowdown.

No wonder they didn't natively enable video for all apps.

I believe, from the article, that it is running at a higher resolution on the TV screen than it does on the standard iPod touch screen. This resolution increase would explain the slowdown.

From the article: For my testing, I hooked the first generation iPhone up to a 42-inch television. The widescreen video-out matched the television aspects, using 853-by-480-pixel output dimensions. (On the iPod touch, the same code produces 640-by-480-pixel output instead.)

[tosui]

There's two ways that Apple can go with this:

1. Download/transfer the app to your AppleTV, and let it do the heavy graphics computation, while relying on the iPhone as a wireless controller.

This would be the most powerful & slickest interface - no cables, good framerate, high quality picture. This would be awesome, and would sell (I think) a *lot* more AppleTVs, because it's now a serious gaming device (especially if this is the only way to get games on your tv). However, I don't think Apple will push this. I think they'll go with...

2. Use your iPhone with a cable (no bluetooth/wireless box attached to your TV - is this really worth Apple pursuing if they already have the AppleTV?) just like in the video, and keep things simple (but slow). Sadly, this seems more realistic, at least in the short-term, to me.

[Bad Paper]

That looks like an astonishingly boring game.

[arn]

Well, the device exists...

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB129LL/B?n=ipodtouch2&fnode=MTY1NDA0OQ&mco=MjE0NTAzOA&s=topSellers

My understanding that this is simply enabling the software support to output games to the TV. Other formats (movies, pictures, etc.) can already be output.

Keynote output support would be appreciated too!!!!!!

Ya, App Support has been the issue.

arn

[puckhead193]

wow that's pretty crazy. From that youtube video it seemed to play back very well on the tv. Should be interesting. Hope apple allows this to future developers.

[libertyforall]

Apple should have had this from day 1 they sold the video connection cables! The lack of this functionality is why I returned the cables. Also it should give the option to show the iPhone interface full-time for Springboard and all as well! All applications should be outputted without special API usage.

I submitted this suggestion to Apple in the past.

Apple also needs to offer a combined video out cable - combine component & composite into one cable set! Also add a DisplayPort/HDMI cable or combine all the aforementioned into one. It's bad enough having to carry along cables, but not have the right one with you...

[zombitronic]

There's two ways that Apple can go with this:

1. Download/transfer the app to your AppleTV, and let it do the heavy graphics computation, while relying on the iPhone as a wireless controller.

This would be the most powerful & slickest interface - no cables, good framerate, high quality picture. This would be awesome, and would sell (I think) a *lot* more AppleTVs, because it's now a serious gaming device (especially if this is the only way to get games on your tv). However, I don't think Apple will push this. I think they'll go with...

2. Use your iPhone with a cable (no bluetooth/wireless box attached to your TV - is this really worth Apple pursuing if they already have the AppleTV?) just like in the video, and keep things simple (but slow). Sadly, this seems more realistic, at least in the short-term, to me.

Your scenario 1 seems more realistic to me. Sync or download a "helper" application to the Apple TV for compatible Apps. As you've said, this would be a more efficient solution.

While, with scenario 2, they may be able to market a proprietary video-out cable with a 5000% mark-up, scenario 1 would sell more Apple TVs, thus selling more iTunes content, renting more movies, and integrating Apple into your digital living room just a little deeper.

I'm wondering why you think they'd go with scenario 2 over scenario 1.

[puffnstuff]

I would like to see video input as well. Would be kinda sweet to be able to hook up a bullet cam to the touch and use it as a DVR kinda like the Archos.

[rlmccormick]

If you'd like to hook up your iPhone or iTouch to a TV via composite video Apple sells a component AV cable to do so:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB128LL/B?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ&mco=MjE1NTI2OA

The output is not hi def. The purpose of the cable is mostly to display movies or pictures.

I don't understand the difference between using the currently existing cables and this supposed new functionality. Is it that the app gets to decide whether or not to output to an external display?

[mixel]

I'm wondering why you think they'd go with scenario 2 over scenario 1.
Well they wouldn't have to emulate the ARM code of the iphone apps to run on the puny AppleTV if they just provided a gaming cable for the iphone.. (ok, Atv is much more powerful than the iphone but its probably still a bit much to expect it to run all the iphone stuff flawlessly.. You really need a more powerful PC than an appleTV to emulate a dreamcast which theoretically is slower than the iphone)

If the next appleTV is ARM based though then that'd be a likely addition. I dont think Apple would want to get into another Universal binary mess with iphone/atv apps..?

[lowbatteries]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) I would love to use one for a presentation I am doing at eTech in Columbus on apps for education.

Help.

Any links or info would be most appreciative.

K Croy

For a jailbroken iPhone, you can install Veency, a VNC server. Then use any VNC client to view and control your iPhone remotely. I use it all the time.

[libertyforall]

Yes, in the past, only Audio/Video could output from iPod, not other apps. Keep in mind this does not also give the option to output the iPhone/Touch UI. :-(

I don't understand the difference between using the currently existing cables and this supposed new functionality. Is it that the app gets to decide whether or not to output to an external display?

[notintheleast]

I sure hope that this trend can continue. It will if apple knows what's good for them. :D

[skestes]

http://www.myvu.com/Crystal-C24.aspx :cool:

[zombitronic]

Well they wouldn't have to emulate the ARM code of the iphone apps to run on the puny AppleTV if they just provided a gaming cable for the iphone.. (ok, Atv is much more powerful than the iphone but its probably still a bit much to expect it to run all the iphone stuff flawlessly.. You really need a more powerful PC than an appleTV to emulate a dreamcast which theoretically is slower than the iphone)

If the next appleTV is ARM based though then that'd be a likely addition. I dont think Apple would want to get into another Universal binary mess with iphone/atv apps..?

Makes sense. This gives me more hope for the mythic updated Apple TV / DVR / Mac Mini hybrid at MacWorld '09.

[libertyforall]

More likely Bluetooth 3.0 or whatever they end up naming it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth#Future_of_Bluetooth

I do find it odd Apple didn't upgrade to 2.1 on the 3G iPhone...


Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I can see this and the new Bluetooth 2.2 integrated somehow.

[MattInOz]

This would be great for an in car system.
Hook it up to a small projector and you have a heads up display for Navigation , changing music, handsfree phone.

Ok you'd have to limit what apps could use this version, but still cool.

[lamar777]

...in my opinion.

It would make more sense for Apple to configure the AppleTV to serve the game and for the iPhone/iPod Touch to act only as controllers. This would allow for much higher quality/performance of games as well as conserve iPhone/iPod Touch battery power. This could turn the AppleTV into a gaming console and provide incentive for people to purchase one, good for Apple also good for game developers. Developers could sell their games at 2 price points Handheld only and Handheld + Console for a higher price.

The console version could come with the game app to be uploaded to a games menu on the AppleTV, and a controller app for an iPhone/iPod Touch. The controller apps could be downloadable for free via the app store for friends that come over or even be sent wirelessly to any iPhone/iPod on the network from the AppleTV.

http://web.me.com/lamar777/games.jpg

[alexbates]

I have to say, that DEMO loked a little fake... How was the "GAS" button pressed?

Now that I have watched the demo a little closer, I have to agree. This could be a jailbroken iPod that comes up with a white screen, and what is on the TV screen could be a recording of what is usually on the iPod screen. (this makes me think that video recording could be a possibility of a future iPhone capability)

I think that having the Apple TV play games on an iPhone or iPod Touch could be a future possibility to boost their sales.

[Dagless]

wow! this is going to be awesome! now we can call the ipod touch a true wii killer!

LOL. No.

The iPhone isn't going to replace the DS and PSP, let alone home consoles.
No offence to the iPhone devs out there but I've seen little in the way of a Mario Kart beater, or replacement for Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3. Or to cut them some slack; Mario Kart DS, Advance Wars, Animal Crossing, Pokemon, GTA, Monster Hunter...

[mrr]

Nice! Ability to output all screen apps should be enabled.

What I want to see is _KEYNOTE_ for the IPHONE !!!

I would love to walk into a presentation and have a fully functional version of KEYNOTE for my iPhone.

Plug and play!

[Dr. Cabrera]

I have to say, that DEMO loked a little fake... How was the "GAS" button pressed?

gee how about you read the article -__-

They stated that they had to modify the game a bit in order to have it run ( they did it in about 3 minutes). they disabled the intro screen and had the gas button set to on all the time

...in my opinion.

It would make more sense for Apple to configure the AppleTV to serve the game and for the iPhone/iPod Touch to act only as controllers. This would allow for much higher quality/performance of games as well as conserve iPhone/iPod Touch battery power. This could turn the AppleTV into a gaming console and provide incentive for people to purchase one, good for Apple also good for game developers. Developers could sell their games at 2 price points Handheld only and Handheld + Console for a higher price.

The console version could come with the game app to be uploaded to a games menu on the AppleTV, and a controller app for an iPhone/iPod Touch. The controller apps could be downloadable for free via the app store for friends that come over or even be sent wirelessly to any iPhone/iPod on the network from the AppleTV.

http://web.me.com/lamar777/games.jpg

yes because we all want to pay an exorbitant price tag for a machine ( appleTV) who's only purpose is to stream media ...

Your idea makes absolutely no financial sense. There are way more iPhones sold out in the market compared to iTV's, and more importanly the two markets really don't intersect that much ( except for apple fans)


think about it this way, which will sell better

a) A game that requires a person to buy an iTV and an Iphone just to play

or

b) A game that runs natively on the iphone AND also support an OPTIONAL TV out option

Option b makes the most financial sense because there will be people who don't want to shell out more money for accesories ( such as the $50 apple A/V cables)

[puffnstuff]

Option b makes the most financial sense because there will be people who don't want to shell out more money for accesories ( such as the $50 apple A/V cables)

Agreed, I do not get the whole AppleTV thing either. I am not going to waste $229 for something that is basically a paper weight so I can play half arse games.

Correct me if I am wrong but there are already products out there that will stream video wireless to the tv. Problem is it has to be placed in a dock. Would be nice to see an alternative to that to make game play easier

[SnowLeopard2008]

Cool... Apple is slowly solidifying their argument for a game controller.

[sdschwendener]

It runs at a low FPS.

Suppose PA Semi chips that apple is developing are incorporated into an iPhone 2 (sorry 3g guys) which allows extensive graphics drawing on both screens combined with 32 and 64 gigs of space would allow developers to create true gaming on the platform.

Further, with mixed wireless capabilities (is :apple:TV bluetooth capable? maybe a future one will be?) it would allow a user to play the game on a single screen but paired with an :apple:TV to have a new UI with the action on the TV and the controls only on the screen.


Purely a creation of imagination but certainly a logical route to go (as far as I see it). But then again I'm no apple developer.


Time will show us what Jobs bestows.

[lamar777]

yes because we all want to pay an exorbitant price tag for a machine ( appleTV) who's only purpose is to stream media ...

Your idea makes absolutely no financial sense.


I don't really think Apple cares a whole lot about what you "want" to pay, for anything. Products evolve. And "finacial sense" for who? You? Again, don't think they care.


There are way more iPhones sold out in the market compared to iTV's, and more importanly the two markets really don't intersect that much (except for apple fans)


Hmmm seems like Apple needs something, some gimmick to increase sales of Apple TV's what could it be?


think about it this way, which will sell better
a) A game that requires a person to buy an iTV and an Iphone just to play
or
b) A game that runs natively on the iphone AND also support an OPTIONAL TV out option

Option b makes the most financial sense because there will be people who don't want to shell out more money for accesories (such as the $50 apple A/V cables)

OK sure the answer to your question is B, but the question is the wrong one to ask.

Again you are looking at this from a consumers perspective. Apple doesn't give a rats sass which game a consumer buys. It's not about games, Apple doesn't make money on games they make money off of what is sold on the AppStore and Hardware. For Apple, option B is silly. The games are already selling. If Apple were to just support TV out they get nothing from that, like I said the games and the devices are already selling TV out or not.

Games being supported only via the AppleTV gets Apple something. It gets them some people like me who have an iPhone and have not bought an AppleTV but have been on the fence about it for a long time. It will sell more AppleTV's ($ for Apple), maybe not in droves but it gets them something and way more than they would ever get selling cables. Also they will make percentage$$$ off of TV versions of the games sold via iTunes. I bought Monkey Ball the first day it came out and I love it. Would I pay another 10$ for the Monkeyball TV version? Yep! Would I buy an AppleTV for it? Maybe, because I am about to buy one anyway.

peace

[alexbates]

think about it this way, which will sell better

a) A game that requires a person to buy an iTV and an Iphone just to play

or

b) A game that runs natively on the iphone AND also support an OPTIONAL TV out option

Option b makes the most financial sense because there will be people who don't want to shell out more money for accesories ( such as the $50 apple A/V cables)

Another option that Apple could have in the future is to be able to play games on both the iPhone and Apple TV without needing to connect the iPhone. This would introduce Apple's first gaming console (which has been rumored for years). It would also be great if you could access the App Store from the Apple TV.

I think this would increase the sales of the Apple TV, and best of all, Apple has already created a gaming platform. So this would be something easy for Apple to do.

[arn]

Now that I have watched the demo a little closer, I have to agree. This could be a jailbroken iPod that comes up with a white screen, and what is on the TV screen could be a recording of what is usually on the iPod screen. (this makes me think that video recording could be a possibility of a future iPhone capability)

I think that having the Apple TV play games on an iPhone or iPod Touch could be a future possibility to boost their sales.

Freeverse posted the video. It's not fake. It's just a hacked up version of the game.

arn

[jayducharme]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector?

As others have pointed out, the "device" is the $50 display connector for the iPhone/Touch. I use it all the time when I give lectures. But as mentioned, it currently outputs only photos and videos. My workaround is to create my "PowerPoint" as a simple set of images and place them in a folder. Then that collection can be called up on my iPhone. It outputs beautifully on LCD projectors, and I change slides with a swipe of my finger.

I wrote to Apple begging them to allow screen dumps through that display connector. My iPhone could then be the ultimate presentation tool, shifting from displays of Web pages to Apps to Photos to Videos. I'm sure many executives would find the iPhone preferable to lugging a laptop for those type of presentations.

[eugenio01]

It would be awesome if a wireless booster, display out connector with battery pack could be developed which attaches to the iphone (for better grip too) so you're not tethered to the TV.

In the first place though, there should be a way for these games to be installed on an AppleTV too and then the iphone be used as a controller. I'm sure Apple could develop an infra red receiver for the USB port on an AppleTV. for this functionality. However for simple display out, straight from the iPhone, apple should keep it basic and have it as just a taste of gaming on the big screen which will then help boost AppleTV sales as a simple gaming console. Imagine being able to buy games to play on your couch from the AppleTV itself and the games costing just as they are at $9 average ! That would be the end of other gaming consoles.


http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

Last week, Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/11/26/iphone-2-2-sdk-offers-undocumented-tv-out-features) had reported that the latest iPhone 2.2 SDK included an new undocumented framework that allows applications to output to a television rather than to the native screen.While a couple of interesting demos had been thrown together. Ars then asked (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/transforming-iphone-into-tv-gaming-device.ars) Freeverse about adding the functionality to a version of their Moto Chaser (http://www.freeverse.com/games/game/?id=8006) [App Store (http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=284881537&mt=8)] game. The result is an impressive (though unsupported) demo:

Video (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

Outputting to video-out resulted in a performance hit, so the TV version of the game can only reach approximately 20 frames per second. The game normally runs at 26 fps on the native screen. Freeverse notes that this was all thrown together in a few hours, so there is room for improvement. It's not clear if and when Apple might allow developers to officially release Apps using this new functionality.



Article Link: Outputting iPhone Apps to a TV: Moto Chaser Demo (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/05/outputting-iphone-apps-to-a-tv-moto-chaser-demo/)

[rhpenguin]

I'll betcha this is what happens with this.

1: Apple blocks said app from store.
2: Developers get angry, blogs pick it up.. Lots of negative press.
3: In a year when they run out of innovative ideas, Apple will tout this new "feature" as a killer app.
4: All you fanboys will eat it up.


.... Just a hunch.

I'm sure I'm missing a ??? and Profit!, but this is how I see things playing out.

[alexbates]

It would be awesome if a wireless booster, display out connector with battery pack could be developed which attaches to the iphone (for better grip too) so you're not tethered to the TV.


Thats a great idea. I didn't think about the wireless part, which would be needed if Apple wanted to sell any. A controller like the PlayStation controller that an iPod Touch or iPhone could slide into would be best.

[craigverse]

That's pretty sweet. To be honest I had originally thought the games would automatically be outputted, I was sad when I bought the cable and realized only video was.

[Evan_11]

I wouldn't get too excited over being tethered by a usb cable a foot away from the tv.

More realistically they'll introduce games to the Apple TV and the iPhone/Touch will be used as a wireless controller.

[powers74]

bitchin'

[powers74]

This would introduce Apple's first gaming console (which has been rumored for years).

You mean Apple's second (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandai_Pippin) game console.

[alexbates]

You mean Apple's second (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandai_Pippin) game console.

Thanks for the link, I wasn't aware of the Pippin.

[bmorris]

this is really obvious, im surprised this hasn't been discussed before.

but a wireless connection would def be the next step.

[tonyl]

Why do you want to play games on iPhone at home?

[alexbates]

Why do you want to play games on iPhone at home?

It would be great to be able to play the games on a larger screen like a gaming console. Also, if you were hooked up to surround sound, some of the racing games might seem more realistic.

I also would love to have larger controls on the iPhone screen. For example: If you were playing Cro-mag rally, you could have the game playing on the TV and have the entire iPhone screen as accelerate and reverse buttons. It would make the game seem like you were playing on a DS.

[wackymacky]

Why is there a need for a video adaptor? Isn't it just a change in the firmware to allow Apps to send to the port? and hence the current composite or component cables could work?

[ikir]

Oustanding!

[Bevz]

As previously mentioned by a few posters isn't this just the API apple themselves have been using for their presentations? If this is the case it would have been there (but hidden) in all the previous versions of iPhone OS... And, if it's been there since the beginning, Apple has clearly not chosen to document or support it yet, so i'm not hopeful they will now.... I hope they do though as it clearly "does what it says on the tin" so would be minimal work by apple to include in the next release.... Seems odd though why they would not officially document (and allow others to use) such a powerful class?

[djgamble]

Hi,

Is this theory possible with the first gen Touch?

s.

I'm guessing it is...

[Dr. Cabrera]

I don't really think Apple cares a whole lot about what you "want" to pay, for anything. Products evolve. And "finacial sense" for who? You? Again, don't think they care.



Hmmm seems like Apple needs something, some gimmick to increase sales of Apple TV's what could it be?



OK sure the answer to your question is B, but the question is the wrong one to ask.

Again you are looking at this from a consumers perspective. Apple doesn't give a rats sass which game a consumer buys. It's not about games, Apple doesn't make money on games they make money off of what is sold on the AppStore and Hardware. For Apple, option B is silly. The games are already selling. If Apple were to just support TV out they get nothing from that, like I said the games and the devices are already selling TV out or not.

Games being supported only via the AppleTV gets Apple something. It gets them some people like me who have an iPhone and have not bought an AppleTV but have been on the fence about it for a long time. It will sell more AppleTV's ($ for Apple), maybe not in droves but it gets them something and way more than they would ever get selling cables. Also they will make percentage$$$ off of TV versions of the games sold via iTunes. I bought Monkey Ball the first day it came out and I love it. Would I pay another 10$ for the Monkeyball TV version? Yep! Would I buy an AppleTV for it? Maybe, because I am about to buy one anyway.

peace


wow your post has so many contradictions I don't think I even have to post a reply

anyways , I see you feel strongly about this subject ( seeing as how you went out of your way to photoshop an ad) ... you umm run with that man. later

[zedsdead]

What about wirelessly to an AppleTV?

The AppleTV could process the video signal itself ....

That would be awesome.

I was thinking the same thing. It's got to be coming. This would make the phone a game console as well. As that needs to be done is added native resolution like how the movies/tv shows are.

As others have said, it could work with Macs as well.

[Andronicus]

Why do you want to play games on iPhone at home?

FieldRunners

[haravikk]

Does this work with the iPod Touch as well?

[alexbates]

Does this work with the iPod Touch as well?

Yes, applications have been availiable for both the iPhone and iPod touch since the App Store came out.

[MrCrowbar]

Is it just me or is the iPhone's tilt sensor ("accelerometer") far super to the Nintendo Wii's remote? Some iPhone games out there are really fun, solely because of the great input methods.

Now imagine you could control a video game on your TV with the iPhone (or iPod Touch). You would have decent control via tilting the device, but you could also tap the four display corners (button-replacement) and have the HUD (score, health, mini-map etc) on the iPhone screen. The buttons would even have context-sensitive labeling, so you immediately see what they're doing and can rearrange them at will, too.

For when you need to do keyboard input or precise cursor movement, you can just use the iPhone touch keyboard and tap on the screen. This makes sense for menus that are usually a pain to navigate on consoles (down, down, down, A, down, down, A, ...).


On the other hand, you wouldn't give your kids a gaming controller that is more expensive than the console itself, would you? It's also slippery if held with sweaty hands, unergonomic (for extended use) and probably can't take too much hard beating.

[alexbates]

Is it just me or is the iPhone's tilt sensor ("accelerometer") far super to the Nintendo Wii's remote? Some iPhone games out there are really fun, solely because of the great input methods.


I have the Wii also. For some reason the iPod touch accelerometer does seem to function better than the Wii remote.

Another idea that I had thought of is to have a seperate conroller wirelessly to the Apple TV, so it would function more as it's own gaming system. Also, I don't think people would buy a $450 gaming system (both the iPod touch and Apple TV added together). People would want to buy a cheap gaming system about the price of the Wii or Xbox 360 (Apple TV & cheap remote with accelerometer and possibly some multi-touch.

[puffnstuff]

There is nothing they can do to the AppleTV to make it appealing to the masses. They would have to create epic games that people would be able to download in a snap. Even then I would rather a mini in my living room it's a dvr,dvd player, game console, etc. Load up bootcamp play GTA4.

The ability to output is only going to be a gimmick in terms of games. I don't think once it is supported anybody will think about using it as a gaming device. More so to display presentation, surf the web on a bigger screen, type documents on a bigger screen etc.

[Dagless]

Is it just me or is the iPhone's tilt sensor ("accelerometer") far super to the Nintendo Wii's remote? Some iPhone games out there are really fun, solely because of the great input methods.

After seeing Glovepie and some other apps sync data of the Wiiremote, no ;) it's just the individual software implimentation, because you're far from the display most games have a large "dead zone" on the sensors. If you hook it up to a PC you can see it detects everything. Placing it on my desk the sensors still picked up on slight vibrations on the other side of the desk.

[twoodcc]

now this would be huge for the app store! i really hope this happens soon. it would help make the iphone a much bigger gaming threat, i believe

[alexbates]

now this would be huge for the app store! i really hope this happens soon. it would help make the iphone a much bigger gaming threat, i believe

If Apple would update the Apple TV to support games found in the App Store for $10, they could make a fortune. Nintendo would not sell as many Wii's if Apple had a gaming console that is $20 cheaper and has the same game (hopefully with multi-touch) for $10 instead of $30 or $40.

[lamar777]

wow your post has so many contradictions I don't think I even have to post a reply

anyways , I see you feel strongly about this subject ( seeing as how you went out of your way to photoshop an ad) ... you umm run with that man. later

Go ahead enlighten me. What are the contradictions?

Apple cares more about selling hardware and iTunes store units, be they songs, TV shows, games or movies than giving consumers every feature they can think of for free.

So what sells more hardware and iTunes Store units?

a) Enabling the iPhone/iPod Touch to play video out on the TV
or
b) Enabling it only via AppleTV with better performing games

Option a = only marginal sales increase in iPhone/iPod Touch and appstore games, if you haven't noticed those things are selling no problems. Overall not much gain for Apple.

Option b = at least marginal sales increase in the AppleTV and a totally new product in the iTunes Store. Developers gain as well, they can sell essentially the same game twice.

I will take your assumption that I feel strongly about the whole deal based on the Photoshop job as a compliment, but it took me less than 5 min so no I don't really care that much.

Recap; I posted what sounded like a cool idea to me, you criticized it, I responded with my reasons why it would make sense for Apple, you bowed out with a lame so bad I cant even comment line.

[MagnusVonMagnum]

The iPod is almost an AppleTV with this, apart from the interface and remote control it can almost have exactly the same function.

Don't forget the lack of HD video on the iPod Touch and iPhone.

The one feature I would like to see that should be easy for Apple but so far isn't present is Airtunes functionality. You should be able to play your iPod Touch's music collection over an Airtunes device like an AppleTV or Airport Express without having to connect any cables to it. They're both WiFi devices, after all, so there shouldn't be ANY issue doing so. And the same should be true in reverse. Your computer and/or AppleTV should be able to send a song to the iPod Touch to listen to. This would enable you to listen to songs at home with headphones in any room you like off your master library without having to store them on your iPod Touch (shared library mode would make sense). The only reason I can think of that Apple hasn't already included this option is that they want to MILK those iPod Dock stations and cable accessory sales for awhile...possibly forever (although one could argue it would promote the sale of AppleTV and/or Airport Express units in trade). You may never see the function. They make a LOT of money selling things like Mini-Display Port adapters for $99 to connect to a $199 display as is the case with the new Macbooks (and your ONLY other choice is to buy Apple's own much more expensive monitor since NO ONE ELSE uses it). Hey, wait a second...I think we just got iPWNed!

[flottenheimer]

Looking at a game like this once again reminds me of all those people claiming that "The iPhone is capable of graphics that are as good as those on the PSP"... Come on - even the December 12. 2004 PSP release game Ridge Racer looks a million times better han Moto Chaser.

Oh, and the PSP Slim can output both music, games and movies to a TV - without taking a framerate hit. All you need is the official PSP Slim > TV component cable

I love my Touch - but as a serious games platform it simply doesn't have what it takes (neither in the control- nor in the graphics-department).

[MagnusVonMagnum]

I don't really think Apple cares a whole lot about what you "want" to pay, for anything. Products evolve. And "finacial sense" for who? You? Again, don't think they care.

That underscores one of Apple's biggest PR problems as of late. They DON'T CARE what consumers WANT. They DICTATE TO consumers what they should buy. There's a BIG difference and sooner or later it WILL bite them in the butt again. They've had some luck predicting what consumers will want, but when they don't listen to their consumers they will inevitably lose them sooner or later. It's only a matter of time. I've sent them bug reports (some very easy to fix such as the rotation issue on iPhone/Touches (probably iTunes's fault when it resizes them) with EXIF data not being preserved resulting in portrait photos being turned the wrong direction) and I honestly believe they just throw them in the bit bucket trash can. They just don't give a crap so long as their devices keep on selling.


Hmmm seems like Apple needs something, some gimmick to increase sales of Apple TV's what could it be?


For me, it would be a subscription based model to tv shows and/or movies. Pay one monthly rate and watch as many shows and/or movies as you want. THAT would compete with cable and/or paid channels like HBO. As it is now, it BARELY competes with the DVD/Blu-Ray rental place down the street because movies keep being removed from "rental" status. Try to rent a Disney movie on AppleTV. Good luck. 95% of them are unavailable to rent including new movies like Wall-E. Certain movies like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull aren't available to rent in HD. "Must See HD" movies like "No Country For Old Men" haven't actually been available to RENT for MONTHS and MONTHS and YET they STILL APPEAR on the "Must See HD" lists. I've sent several feedback replies pointing this out to Apple and they haven't addressed it or even so much as sent me one courtesy e-mail to explain WHY it's on that must see HD list and yet isn't available to rent or why all the Pixar movies one day were suddenly not available to rent.

There are REASONS for these things happening and Apple doesn't want to draw attention to the fact that they don't have the clout to keep these movies around. That a five and dime DVD rental place down the street can still offer "Finding Nemo" to RENT and my high-tech modern AppleTV WiFi rental system CANNOT offer it to RENT is just ABYSMAL, IMO. You can rent the sequels to the Matrix, but not the original movie (it WAS available to rent for about one month and then changed to buy-only (in SD) for no apparent reason). Well, guess what? I already own it in SD. I MIGHT consider renting it (or better yet BUYING it if that were an option; but it is NOT) in HD since it looks so much better on my 93" screen that way, but tough luck. There are no such options. But given Apple Support's refusal to even respond to e-mails asking WHY things are happening, I have to simply say their support teams SUCK. NOTHING is worse than a support team that just IGNORES the problems reported. I even got an automated reply back asking me how my experience with support was and I reiterated the IGNORED ME and that reply too was ignored. Apple Support SUCKS PERIOD.

If Apple is unwilling to properly support products like AppleTV then why do they even bother to sell them in the first place? Nothing is worse than half-arsed attempts to market something they don't really have much interest in selling in the first place. Look at the Mac-Mini. Why not just pull the thing? It's completely outdated and with current specs, overpriced. If they're not going to update the thing, they should just delete it and say sorry, we only cater to the rich.


Again you are looking at this from a consumers perspective. Apple doesn't give a rats sass which game a consumer buys. It's not about games, Apple doesn't make money on games they make money off of what is sold on the AppStore and Hardware. For Apple, option B is silly. The games are already selling. If Apple were to just support TV out they get nothing from that, like I said the games and the devices are already selling TV out or not.


They MIGHT care in that situation because it would encourage people to buy more $50 accessories and Apple LOVES to sell you cables and what not because they're high profit items. That's why the new Macbook lines don't include any kind of mini-display port adapter. They'd rather SELL you one (same for the apple remotes that used to be included). And at $99, it's hardly a REASONABLE price for a cable that is 100% NEEDED to use any external display except Apple's, which is 100% useless with any other computer EXCEPT those laptops (how much would it have cost Apple to include a DVI or HDMI connector on that monitor and greatly increase the potential user base? My 24" LG monitor has HDMI, component and VGA connectors and comes with a DVI to HDMI adapter cable!) But you just watch. They will shortly come out with a DVI to Mini-Display Port cable for $99 and fanboys will rejoice that their older MBPs and MBs can connect to the new monitor. Apple wins and Apple wins again with these people because they're too blind to see Apple is taking them for all this extra cash that other companies include for free. But they don't have an Apple logo on their monitors so they don't matter. Then again, if you have the new MBs and MBPs you have to buy that cable to use someone else's monitor anyway. So Apple wins again. That's the genius (or stupidity if people do NOT fall for it) behind the propriety mini-display port connector. They get to sell you either their own monitor or a cable either way. You are screwed no matter what. They couldn't even include a mini-to-regular display port ADAPTER even because that would mean you COULD use a select few 3rd party monitors without paying Apple a 'tax' to do so.


Personally, I would have hoped that with Apple's computers going to the Intel platform that everything would be standardized and fans of the Apple operating system could get standard cheap 3rd party cables and accessories, but clearly Apple realizes they are losing out on easy money so they invent new non-standard versions of emerging standards and milk it for as long as they can because they know at least 50% of Apple fans are RABID fans and will buy anything they put out. They've always treated their users that way in the past and some thought they would stop with the Intel change in exchange for the ability to attract disenfranchised Windows users and make up in quantity for losses in unique hardware, but clearly Apple wants its cake and to eat it too.

And THAT is why we don't have AirTunes for iPod Touch from day one (cable or dock sale) and why non-standards like "mini" display port appear. It's not to benefit YOU. It's to benefit Apple. Like you said, Apple doesn't CARE (unless you PAY them to as in "AppleCare" for $$$$).

For me personally, this definitely fits into a love/hate relationship. I love some of Apple's products (the iPod Touch IS sweet and with "Remote" and my AppleTV and Airport Express units, I think I have a more functional system than a Squeezbox and it's much cheaper than Sonus (and still more functional, IMO). I love the Mac OS X operating system. But I HATE Apple's greediness (and the hardware product changes it often results in), which seems to be getting worse all the time and poor user support and short warranties.

[MrCrowbar]

After seeing Glovepie and some other apps sync data of the Wiiremote, no ;) it's just the individual software implimentation, because you're far from the display most games have a large "dead zone" on the sensors. If you hook it up to a PC you can see it detects everything. Placing it on my desk the sensors still picked up on slight vibrations on the other side of the desk.

That's the IR sensor. There's an infrared light in the wiimote that the sensor bar can track. The iPhone only has an IR sensor so it turns off the display when you hold it against your ear (proximity sensor). I was lalking about the tilt sensor which seems to be very rudimentary on the Wii.

[lamar777]

That underscores one of Apple's biggest PR problems as of late. They DON'T CARE what consumers WANT...

Liked your post thanks.

[akac]

I'll betcha this is what happens with this.

1: Apple blocks said app from store.
2: Developers get angry, blogs pick it up.. Lots of negative press.
3: In a year when they run out of innovative ideas, Apple will tout this new "feature" as a killer app.
4: All you fanboys will eat it up.


.... Just a hunch.

I'm sure I'm missing a ??? and Profit!, but this is how I see things playing out.

Yes, you are missing that this is not a supported feature so no app is going to use this. Its only used to DEMO the capabilities. So #1 can't happen because nobody will use it. Its not fully implemented either. As such #2 can't happen ... and why would anyone get angry that Apple blocked an app from using an undocumented API that is forbidden from the SDK terms anyway? #3 is going to happen because Apple is obviously working on the feature...#4 of course - because this shows the potential.

[dagger01]

Ok, the demo is cool and all, but can we stop calling an external monitor a TV? In about a year or so every device we used to call a TV (analog, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor with VHF/UHF tuner) will cease to exist. Calling a modern LCD or plasma display device a TV is silly. The TV is dead, let it die! Do you call your computer monitor (which is pretty much what the TV has become in the digital age) a TV? No!

Sorry, pet peeve!

[Dagless]

That's the IR sensor. There's an infrared light in the wiimote that the sensor bar can track. The iPhone only has an IR sensor so it turns off the display when you hold it against your ear (proximity sensor). I was lalking about the tilt sensor which seems to be very rudimentary on the Wii.

No, I wasn't talking about the IR either. Back in late 2006 before the IR data could even work with Wii controller apps on the PC I tested it. The app read yaw, pitch etc. Lol, why would you think I was talking about the IR sensor?

[Dagless]

Ok, the demo is cool and all, but can we stop calling an external monitor a TV? In about a year or so every device we used to call a TV (analog, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor with VHF/UHF tuner) will cease to exist. Calling a modern LCD or plasma display device a TV is silly. The TV is dead, let it die! Do you call your computer monitor (which is pretty much what the TV has become in the digital age) a TV? No!

Sorry, pet peeve!

The line is blurring. I watch EyeTV on my external monitor via software, or if I need to watch TV in a hurry I'll switch on the Freeview box plugged into the Composite input on my Dell monitor. And a friend of mine bought a 24" monitor because it was cheaper (and supported full HD) than a 24" TV that he uses only for playing console games on.

IMO the only thing that seperates them now is that a monitor doesn't come with a built in Freeview receiver since they all have ports and inputs to support everything (TV's with VGA/DVI, monitors with RCA/S-Video).

[MrCrowbar]

No, I wasn't talking about the IR either. Back in late 2006 before the IR data could even work with Wii controller apps on the PC I tested it. The app read yaw, pitch etc. Lol, why would you think I was talking about the IR sensor?

Well, you said something about distance to the TV (thus sensor bar). Sorry :p

[alexbates]

Ok, the demo is cool and all, but can we stop calling an external monitor a TV? In about a year or so every device we used to call a TV (analog, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor with VHF/UHF tuner) will cease to exist. Calling a modern LCD or plasma display device a TV is silly. The TV is dead, let it die! Do you call your computer monitor (which is pretty much what the TV has become in the digital age) a TV? No!

Sorry, pet peeve!

I do not think that many people call a computer monitor a TV. But people do call the new plasma's and LCD's TV's, just like every called the old tube television a TV.

[DubbleDuecer]

Ok, the demo is cool and all, but can we stop calling an external monitor a TV? In about a year or so every device we used to call a TV (analog, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor with VHF/UHF tuner) will cease to exist. Calling a modern LCD or plasma display device a TV is silly. The TV is dead, let it die! Do you call your computer monitor (which is pretty much what the TV has become in the digital age) a TV? No!

Sorry, pet peeve!

My pet peeve is dumb people.... why is this not a TV? how do you know its not a TV? Can you tell if it has a built in tuner or not? the difference in my computer monitor and my 50inch plasma is that my plasma has a built in tuner which allows me to watch broadcast television and works as a stand alone TELEVISION with no need for external sources of input, whereas my monitor has no built in tuner and in order to display video needs to be hooked up to an input source cable box/computer/playstation... Also, any Modern LCD or Plasma has this built in Digital Tuner, so IT IS A TV. AND Those old CRT tvs, and whatever else you are pretending to know about (ie interlaced, analog,cathode ray tube (crt) blah blah)), also have tuners in them, analog tuners that will be useless in a couple of months when we make the digital switch, but tuners none the less. Anyway im just saying the built in tuner is what separates the TV from the monitor. Just because one is analog and one is digital doesn't currently qualify or disqualify it as a TV. You actually couldnt be any further from correct on this issue Because actually those old (what you call TV's) are going to become monitors in February because they will not work without some external video source. So long live the new Plasma and LCD TV's, and you have fun with your tube Monitors comes Feb.

PS: learn to properly use ( )

[Donald Doom]

I think you should see this post. These guys changed the feature of
SDK for using the iPhone as a laptop. Look like sailing in and the internet while they see everything through the TV.

http://applediario.com/en/

After seeing this, I am beginning to believe that the iPhone will be the replacement of computers as we know them

[opaqueentity]

Impressive

[mdriftmeyer]

I'd love to see instead of steering (rotating on the Z plane: the plane coming out of the player towards you ) like a car you'd think they would program the steering like a motorcyle (twist/torque in the Y plane so that turning left would be the resultant of bringing the left side of the player toward you and the right side of the player away from you; and vice versa for turning right.

It would simulate a more real experience.

[chickenninja]

eat your heart out nintendo 64, slap some joysticks on this honker and well have a winer

[madmax_2069]

Ok, the demo is cool and all, but can we stop calling an external monitor a TV? In about a year or so every device we used to call a TV (analog, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor with VHF/UHF tuner) will cease to exist. Calling a modern LCD or plasma display device a TV is silly. The TV is dead, let it die! Do you call your computer monitor (which is pretty much what the TV has become in the digital age) a TV? No!

Sorry, pet peeve!

Ok so my old CRT TV is just going to disappear from my room when they switch to digital ? nope thats why they made the digital tuner set top box, not everyone can afford a LCD/Plasma HD TV yet.

another thing is that if you can't tell the difference between a TV or a monitor you should not even say anything cause it makes you look stupid.

LCD/Plasma HDTVs have a built in tuner wile a monitor does not. oh i would suggest you look up what TV means. thats why they call the new LCD/Plasma HDTV and not HD-monitors.

[Luke1robb]

This would be neat if they somehow linked it with Apple TV - no wires running from your iPod/iPhone to your TV, but you have access to all of your apps on the "big screen." If this happens, the Apple TV could become a business mainstay - link it up to a projector, the possibilities would be endless.

I would think that with MacWorld '09 will come a big announcement having to do with this, AppleTV, and the Mini. I think they have a lot of potential here and I think we can all agree that there isn't much big that's due for an update other than the mini and apple tv. When say big I mean thats gonna shock people. MBP 17" and iMac, and possibly 32 GB iPhone are all new things, but not shockers... MWSF is all about shockers recently.

[Luke1robb]

Is there a device that sends the iPhone/iPod touch screen image to a television or projector? (The Apple Keynotes use them.) I would love to use one for a presentation I am doing at eTech in Columbus on apps for education.

Help.

Any links or info would be most appreciative.

K Croy

Hey Croy, when is this presentation? I am a student at Bryant University in Smithfield, RI and I'm working on trying to get iPhones and iPod touches worked into academia and the school as part of tuition (ACU-like). I have found a couple conferences and summits that I want to go to with school admins, but I'd love to hear more about eTech and your presentation in specific. Any details would be great! Also if anyone else sees this and thinks they might know of a good conference or event for me to know about private message me please... thanks!

Luke

[Luke1robb]

this really is cool.. but it won't be much fun if it has to be bound by the tv out wire..!!:p

I'm thinking wireless connectivity is something to come big time if Apple plans on making this a real deal.... MSWF '09

[alexbates]

I'm thinking wireless connectivity is something to come big time if Apple plans on making this a real deal.... MSWF '09

Yeah, without wireless, it would be like the gamecube all over again. Apple would not sell anything, because nowadays, everyone wants wireless.

[puffnstuff]

I think you should see this post. These guys changed the feature of
SDK for using the iPhone as a laptop. Look like sailing in and the internet while they see everything through the TV.

http://applediario.com/en/

After seeing this, I am beginning to believe that the iPhone will be the replacement of computers as we know them

Am I missing something? I clicked the link and it takes me to the game demo. I would love to see the internet surfing on the larger screen. It would be Apple has finally given a piece of the netbook many have been craving for a 3rd party will finish it off.

[qpawn]

... It's also slippery if held with sweaty hands, unergonomic (for extended use) and probably can't take too much hard beating.
That's what she said. :cool:

[BarneysPosse]

That's what she said. :cool:

BAHAHAHAHAHA
ohh they never get old.

[koobcamuk]

My pet peeve is dumb people.... why is this not a TV? how do you know its not a.......
PS: learn to properly use ( )

a) Learn to use paragraphs - it's so hard to read massive blocks of text.
b) Another difference is that the DPI on monitors is higher - as we typically sit ~1m from a monitor and ~3m from a TV.

The Apple 30" Monitor has a higher resolution than a 46" LCD TV.

ohh they never get old.

That'll get you arrested.

[mrgreen4242]

God you don't even know how long I have been waiting for something like this..http://olo-computer.com/

although I do not think the olo concept will ever materialize but someone somewhere will make something similar
Ya, I'll be first in line for a reasonably priced sub-note sized dock for the touch. This is really the "final piece" of that puzzle. There's been demos of keyboards connected to the iPhone already, so with this it could be a pretty decent mini computer.
My only concern is the output resolution of the iPod using this method?

Yeah, without wireless, it would be like the gamecube all over again. Apple would not sell anything, because nowadays, everyone wants wireless.
Not sure what parallel you're trying to draw here, but the GameCube had the best wireless controller of its generation, hands down.

[MrCrowbar]

That's what she said. :cool:

LOL, good one! Been using that phrase for a while now. Real ice breaker for business meeting, provided there are no women present. Looking at my statement, I was really asking for it. Kudos.

[alexbates]

Not sure what parallel you're trying to draw here, but the GameCube had the best wireless controller of its generation, hands down.

Sorry, I didn't know that the GameCube had a wireless controller until now. Back in the days, I remember everyone that had one, only had wired controllers.
It bet it was no where near as good as the current controller on the Wii. This is what I am hoping that Apple will use in what will hopefully be a future Apple TV controller, something similar to the Wii's remote (with the accelerometer that Apple has included with the iPod Touch and iPhone).

[mrgreen4242]

Sorry, I didn't know that the GameCube had a wireless controller until now. Back in the days, I remember everyone that had one, only had wired controllers.
It bet it was no where near as good as the current controller on the Wii. This is what I am hoping that Apple will use in what will hopefully be a future Apple TV controller, something similar to the Wii's remote (with the accelerometer that Apple has included with the iPod Touch and iPhone).

In the last gen (the XBox, PS2, and GC days) no system shipped with wireless controllers. The WaveBird was Nintendo's add-on wireless controller and it was good enough that when the 360 and PS3 were being demoed early on, most reviewers were using the Wavebird as the benchmark for the now-bundled wireless controllers for the "next gen" systems.

Now that they're not produced anymore they actually command a bit of a premium in the used market because they are Wii compatible (using the GC controller ports) and lots of people swear by them for games like Super Smash Bros.

[NemMac]

Apple should absolutely pursue making this an option for app developers. Since they're pushing the iPhone and iPod Touch as a gaming platform and games are clearly a major chunk of the App Store, the idea of being able to basically take a TV gaming platform with you in your pocket would be excellent. Add in wifi for multiplayer controls and this could be the new Wii (i.e. innovative gameplay and controls over just raw performance and graphics). Here's hoping by the holidays in 2009 we'll be playing iPhone games on TV while visiting family. :)

Sounds like the future will definitely be brighter for the iPhone gamer!

[Object-X]

gee how about you read the article -__-

They stated that they had to modify the game a bit in order to have it run ( they did it in about 3 minutes). they disabled the intro screen and had the gas button set to on all the time



yes because we all want to pay an exorbitant price tag for a machine ( appleTV) who's only purpose is to stream media ...

Your idea makes absolutely no financial sense. There are way more iPhones sold out in the market compared to iTV's, and more importanly the two markets really don't intersect that much ( except for apple fans)


think about it this way, which will sell better

a) A game that requires a person to buy an iTV and an Iphone just to play

or

b) A game that runs natively on the iphone AND also support an OPTIONAL TV out option

Option b makes the most financial sense because there will be people who don't want to shell out more money for accesories ( such as the $50 apple A/V cables)

I would imagine if Apple were to conceive of such a concept, they would include an iPod touch with the AppleTV. A simple downloadable app would allow you to use your iPhone if you want. The premise is not that far fetched. But you're right, they wouldn't make you buy two devices, you would just buy one package with both devices.

The real problem would be pricing. You would have to sell both for about $200 - $250 to be competitive.

[doubleusn]

If you'd like to hook up your iPhone or iTouch to a TV via composite video Apple sells a component AV cable to do so:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB128LL/B?fnode=MTY1NDAzOQ&mco=MjE1NTI2OA

The output is not hi def. The purpose of the cable is mostly to display movies or pictures.

Hi

I am waiting for the iPhone <--> displayport cable to be introduced.

Using your iPhone on the new 24"ACD would be cool, and then maybe a BT profile for the Apple Wireless KB as well.

That app patent awhile back showing an iphone like box sliding into an iMac-ish looking screen is adding up more and more I think.

Apple CD with minidport
iphone with minidport (or adapter for current iPhone plug)
Add in some BT KB support into the iPhone
A new more powerful iPhone in June 09 made possible by our friends from PA Semi, with batter battery life.
Running Snow Leopard's reduced footprint.

Neat stuff may be a coming soon... :)

Cheers
-wsn

[bj3949]

Wait, does the iPhone 3G NOT have a Video-out capability?
Forgive me for not knowing.
I know all the other iPods do.

Why is this such a big deal?
Is it really not possible right now to connect your iPhone 3G to your TV's Audio/Video inputs and see your iPhone on your TV screen?

Someone please explain this to me.
I'm really interested.

Thank you.

[kdarling]

Wait, does the iPhone 3G NOT have a Video-out capability?


It has video out for photos and movie viewing.

But, unlike the special one Jobs uses for demos, a regular iPhone/touch will not display other application output... no web, no games, or anything else is output.

Makes it pretty hard to use for office presentations, for example.

[bj3949]

It has video out for photos and movie viewing.

But, unlike the special one Jobs uses for demos, a regular iPhone/touch will not display other application output... no web, no games, or anything else is output.

Makes it pretty hard to use for office presentations, for example.

I see. Well that sucks. So is there anything out there 3rd party that allows us to do this?