Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I realise that the two Apple TVs have different architectures and software but how difficult would it be for Apple to add Netflix compatibility and TV rentals to the original's software? I am no programmer but it seems like a trivial thing to do and the reasons for not doing it have more to do with business than practicality.

As for the energy-saving credentials of the new Apple TV, consider this: the previous Apple TV could function stand-alone while the new one needs at least one computer to be on for it to access its audio and video content.

Perhaps this was a consolidation of Apple's ever-growing product lines. The new Apple TV has been re-designed to be more affordable while the new Mac Mini has been re-purposed as a living room PC (see HDMI port, smaller profile, etc). If I was starting from scratch I would be happy with either but as an Apple TV owner I cannot help but feel stiffed by Apple for not giving me access to the new TV rentals on the iTunes Store.
 
I realise that the two Apple TVs have different architectures and software but how difficult would it be for Apple to add Netflix compatibility and TV rentals to the original's software? I am no programmer but it seems like a trivial thing to do and the reasons for not doing it have more to do with business than practicality.

As for the energy-saving credentials of the new Apple TV, consider this: the previous Apple TV could function stand-alone while the new one needs at least one computer to be on for it to access its audio and video content.

Perhaps this was a consolidation of Apple's ever-growing product lines. The new Apple TV has been re-designed to be more affordable while the new Mac Mini has been re-purposed as a living room PC (see HDMI port, smaller profile, etc). If I was starting from scratch I would be happy with either but as an Apple TV owner I cannot help but feel stiffed by Apple for not giving me access to the new TV rentals on the iTunes Store.

it depends. It might be as easy as just recompiling the code for the different architecture and OS.If the netflex part is written in Java it is even easier since all they need is the JVM on the apple TV which my guess is they have one for it already on it.

To the other extreme that it would require a complete re write from scratch. My gut tells me it is closer to the top than the bottom.
 
OK, fair enough. Still, there's no reason (beyond greed) that they couldn't have allowed it to be upgraded.

Please. The new box is $99. I suppose your the type that would expect Ford to upgrade the 2009 Focus with the Voice Activated system in the 2010 just because you think it would be fair.

It's called moving forward, not greed. A product like yours simply is not worth the effort.

Fixing iOS 4 to work properly on a 3G, 3GS is worth the effort. One was a "Hobby" for Apple, the other was a source of significant revenue.

Basic Business 101. :apple:
 
I continue to be amazed how Apple as company seems to be doing everything it can to make me find another platform for my computing and entertainment needs. First the Iphone 4 fiasco where Apple and Jobs had the nerve to blame the consumer for their faulty design and now they are ripping off people who recently purchased an Apple TV. They are lucky I hate working with windows stuff because at this point the desire to stay away from windows is the only thing keeping me from telling Apple where it can stick it's contempt towards it's users.
 
I continue to be amazed how Apple as company seems to be doing everything it can to make me find another platform for my computing and entertainment needs. First the Iphone 4 fiasco where Apple and Jobs had the nerve to blame the consumer for their faulty design and now they are ripping off people who recently purchased an Apple TV. They are lucky I hate working with windows stuff because at this point the desire to stay away from windows is the only thing keeping me from telling Apple where it can stick it's contempt towards it's users.

Does the AppleTV not do what you bought it for?

If not, why did you buy it?
 
Old Apple TV can show slideshows and home movies

Am I the only person who uses the old AppleTV with iPhoto and iMovie? Using both of these apps, I create slideshows from my photos, including stills and video. I load them onto ATV and--presto--I have a traveling slideshow, to show on others' TV's. All I have to take is my ATV and an HDMI cable.

It is really excellent for this purpose--a modern replacement for a 35mm slide projector (do you know what they are, children?). Classy effects (Ken Burns, movie clips, titles, etc.) all included.

The new ATV won't store anything, so I can only give "slideshows" like this at home, using WiFi streaming. It will not work elsewhere. So I will hang onto my old ATV as long as it keeps working.
 
Too bad for the whiners. bohoooo ~~~~~~~

I want ............ I want ............ I want!

"You'll get nothing and like it", Judge Smails

JohnG
 
Didn't think it was possible, but I am actually less interested in this product than the previous gen, of which in itself was worthless to me beyond a hacking curio.

An inverse RDF, coolio.
 
You kidding? Comcast will bleed you white for more as soon as they figure out a way to justify it to consumers. Comcast is loving this trend and will pretend raising their capabilities is not possible as long as they can create the illusion that you're getting a deal. I wouldn't care if somebody dropped a nuclear bomb on that company's corporate headquarters.

Very true. I heard the biggest reason they don't want us downloading too much media is so you will be forced to purchase their online content through that bs "Xfinity" program. Kinda like when Verizon blocked services that sold ringtones so customers would be forced to purchase ringtones through their Vcast. So I'm sure you are right, the only way they'll raise the cap is if we as consumers pay an extra premium. If only they weren't the only option here with decent internet speeds. :mad:
 
I just ordered a new one from Apple store clearance section for $149. It serves my purposes more than streaming only, and I think it's a good deal.

As did I. For what I want, I believe the older model will work better and now that it's been discounted even more, the value proposition rises for me.
 
If I had the original Apple TV and heard this, I wouldn't mind because for only $99 you can get a new and improved Apple TV.

Because of the huge drop in price on the new Apple TV this shouldn't be a big deal.

People need to cough out $99 if they are not happy with the Original Apple TV and what it offers without any more Software Update.
 
The new ATV won't store anything, so I can only give "slideshows" like this at home, using WiFi streaming. It will not work elsewhere. So I will hang onto my old ATV as long as it keeps working.

Exaggeration about "not work elsewhere". You just need to bring the the storage with you. If you want the 35mm sidle projector analogy then it truely is just that; the projector. You need to also bring the slide carousel. In the real world those were not one unified unit. They were two pieces.

A tad more expensive but;

1. iPad (loaded with your slide show. )
2. new AppleTV (and HDMI cable ).

Plug in AppleTV. Set the iPad to stream. Stream from iPad.

it is more expensive, but if you just want to do the slide show for 1 (maybe 2) people then don't need AppleTV and you can use the iPad for more than just streaming (Touch or iPhone could also play the role). Just sit next to someone with the iPad so it from there. Assuming that the two can Bonjour hook up without having to route through a set WiFi router. (there is more complicated set up if not. )


P.S. and just like slide shows from years gone by nobody really wants to see 300 slides of some vacation. So the limited storage capacity of the iPad/Phone/Touch really shouldn't be a huge problem. If bringing an old Apple TV to show 10GB of material then .... that's classic streotype.

P.P.S. and burning this slide show movie onto a DVD and just plopping that into a player at the remote side is just too low tech.
 
The Real Reason Why

Has anyone mentioned this yet? I tried to read through the thread to check, but I didn't see anything. --So, the NEW Apple TV is based on iOS. Right? Remember when Apple said they were bringing YouTube to iPhone with Steve Jobs' critic statement to a customer (via email) that you didn't need Flash to play Youtube? And, lo and behold, YouTube came for the iPhone and it didn't use Flash! Awesome, right? YouTube came along as H.264 video progressively downloaded through a custom application from Apple (in joint collaboration with Google). Google then took things further and used its H.264 roadmap to support an HTML 5 saavy version of the website. Everybody won!

Well, do you remember when Netflix didn't support Macs? Initially, when Netflix began its streaming service, it was running on Windows Media DRM. Check out this Netflix blog entry from November 2008:
http://blog.netflix.com/2008/11/encoding-for-streaming.html

Then, Microsoft introduced Silverlight and promised a Mac compatible version of the player. This opened the door for Netflix to support Mac OS X computers... using Silverlight rights management. However, with Silverlight 2, Microsoft dropped support for PowerPC Macs, so... there went Netflix support for a good number of Mac users. When people began hacking the Apple TV to play Netflix, they did so by taking the Silverlight Intel runtime plugins for Safari, and jimmy-rigging them into the Apple TV's system. To be sure, this is a solution neither Microsoft NOR Apple supported or wished to provide ongoing support for. So, that's where we left Netflix for the moment.

ENTER the iPAD. When Apple introduced the iPad, few people realized that Apple would pull off a small coup, by helping Netflix get their streaming movies to the device. But, exactly how did that happen? Is Silverlight on iOS? --Because most people associated YouTube with Flash and associated NOTHING with Netflix or than... Netflix... not many questioned what was going on. Ars reported on this last year before the iPad was announced:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...es-silverlight-video-streaming-to-iphones.ars

At the end of the day, its the same content being streamed to Silverlight, being streamed instead through Apple's proposed HTTP Live Streaming protocol by the same Microsoft Media server.

So. Back to the Apple TV. It's terribly ironic that Apple supports HTTP Live Streaming only on Quicktime X in Snow Leopard, and 3.0 and above iOS devices. Crazy, isn't it? I'm not sure why this is, but that's your OLD Apple TV update problem right there. There is ZERO reason for Apple to open themselves up to giving a MAJOR software architecture update to the old devices running a variant of Mac OS X (desktop). Apple isn't even bending over backwards to support HTTP Live Streaming on Pre-Snow Leopard Macs! Should the Apple TV support for HTTP Live Streaming come before Mac OS X? Instead, Mac OS X continues to use the Silverlight plugin for Netflix. Period.

Putting Netflix on the OLD Apple TV would REQUIRE one of two very specific things. EITHER: 1.) Apple & Microsoft join forces to get Silverlight on the old Apple TV box (chances: 0%), 2.) Apple goes well out of its way to not only add HTTP live streaming to the OLD OS running on Apple TV, but retrofits the Netflix app for the old plugin architecture of the previous Apple TV software (chances: 0%).

There are even loonier options... but the bottomline is... nothing about Netflix on the old Apple TV makes any sense. AT ALL. So get ready to dump your old Apple TV boxes, and gear up for the iOS future. I suspect Apple did a HUGE amount of work to achieve feature parity with the old Apple TV system on the new architecture. After they launch, they should begin having breathing room to start supporting more NEW features that take advantage of "the most advanced mobile operating system on the planet".

~ CB
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.