HDMI accessory for the iPad - Is this bad for the Apple TV?

Heh, I caught a lot of flak for posting about my $30 cable solution as an alternative to the Apple TV.


https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=11781619&#post11781619

And yet, what has Apple done today?! They announced an HDMI adapter for the iPad 2. It's not exactly an elegant solution, but it's effective... and that was my point. This new $39 adapter can turn the iPad into a gaming console. Just use iPhones and iPod Touches as wireless remotes.

What does this mean for Apple TV?

I think it makes the iPad a better livingroom accessory.

If this new HDMI accessory works on the iPhone too, it makes it an even more effective alternative to the Apple TV. The Apple TV really needs an app store now. With all those happy iPad owners out there, they could just buy a cheaper third-party version of the $39 accessory and skip buying an Apple TV.

MacDawg said:

I am quite happy having a MBP, an iPhone 4, an iPad and an ATV thank you
I see no need to NOT have an ATV with all it offers wirelessly

Click to expand...

That's a very expensive combo.

If I had a Mac Book Air - or even a Mac Book Pro - I would see the iPad as redundant. I have an iPhone 4 and I see the iPad as redundant. With the Apple TV, it seems underpowered without an app store.

It seems like a risk of cannibalism.

I bought an iPhone 4 because it's one of the best phones out there. (I'm not a fan of Android.) I bought a Mac Mini (after returning the very expensive Mac Book Pro) because it was cheap and cute. What's so special about an Apple TV that a Roku box doesn't do for less?

Sure, wireless is nice, but I already have a PS3 and Wii for playing Netflix movies. I thought the HDMI announcement was nice, but that seems to make the Apple TV weaker. There wasn't an announcement for an Apple TV app store... which could dramatically change the way TVs work.

So, if a lot of people here didn't like the $30 cable solution that I posted earlier, why would Apple do this? It's not wireless, it's not elegant. It's because it's effective.

I imagine that most people don't have the money to waste on multiple Mac gadgets. This new HDMI accessory gives iPad 2 users a reason to skip the Apple TV.

NightStorm said:

Never understood why these sort of threads always come about... I do not want to have my iPad tethered to my television everytime I want to watch something from my iiTunes library. I might be more of an exception (since my library is ~4TB), but I'd rather have a dedicated device for streaming and be able to use the iPad as a remote or other functionality from the couch.

Click to expand...

A cable connecting an iOS device to a TV is a bit archaic. I don't mind it so much, as I can charge my iPhone while watching a movie. Yet, that's my point. If the Apple TV is so great because you can use a remote, why is this accessory made to be such big news?

Does Apple want to get people in the habit of connecting iOS devices to their TV? No, I don't think so. That's not an elegant solution.

Yet, with a simple $30 cable, I can play Netflix movies on my TV. While the Apple TV is cheap, I don't want to feel like I bought something obsolete. While the Apple TV doesn't have an app store now, I think there's a strong chance that it will in the future. So, I'm using the cable until Apple makes the Apple TV more exciting to me.

While a cable from the iPad to the TV isn't pretty, it's great for developers.

• Easy way to record video to promote apps.
• It can be turned into a game console, by using another iOS device as a controller.
• Increases awareness as iOS as a home gaming console. Two billion dollars were paid to developers. There's even more money to be made if Apple starts competing with the XBOX 360, PlayStation 3 and the Wii. Even if the Apple TV doesn't have the best graphics, 99¢ games can be very popular.