Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Developing a Home Media Server?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I want one. I've got 2 Minis and an ATV connected to different HDTVs. The ATV is streaming content from one of the minis. I'm getting tired maintaining sperate itunes libraries. I'd stream from one mini to the other, but the lack of album art in front row really bothers me. Also I mainitain my iphoto library on my office imac, but sync a couple iphones with the mini in the master bedroom and have yet to find a painless way to keep the photos in sync.
I think this home media server would solve a lot of these problems.
I think this home media server would solve a lot of these problems.
I kind of wish they would also give you the option of just a software version. For those of us that have a server already. An iTunes Server Edition would be nice.
I would disagree. You have better odds of your drives failing before your Drobo does. I use a Drobo and love it. The cost is a little higher, but infinitly more expandable as drives get larger. I would not worry about Drobo going out of business anytime soon.
So my enthusiasm for the MediaSmart Server has died off a bit.
"And, while the white paper doesnt say why I know why, and Ill tell you. See, what HP did to enable Time Machine to work with Windows Home Server (WHS), was to patch the way WHS handles SMB stores. Then, on the Mac, they tweak a few settings to override Apples backup restrictions. This allows the Mac to see SMB file shares (like, WHS file shares), and then HPs intermediary on the Mac mounts the special patched SMB file share mount."
I'm not sure I think it's a good idea for HP to be modifying Apple's operating system even if it is a well-known hack.
http://www.christopherprice.net/hp-......-not-all-of-it.-but-i-can-fix-it.-796.html
"And, while the white paper doesnt say why I know why, and Ill tell you. See, what HP did to enable Time Machine to work with Windows Home Server (WHS), was to patch the way WHS handles SMB stores. Then, on the Mac, they tweak a few settings to override Apples backup restrictions. This allows the Mac to see SMB file shares (like, WHS file shares), and then HPs intermediary on the Mac mounts the special patched SMB file share mount."
I'm not sure I think it's a good idea for HP to be modifying Apple's operating system even if it is a well-known hack.
http://www.christopherprice.net/hp-......-not-all-of-it.-but-i-can-fix-it.-796.html
Why is it bad for HP to give a feature that apple doesnt? Thats how the market works. If theres a peripheral that needs something tweaked because the OS is restricting it then i say just go for it, give the customer what they want instead of giving more money to apple so they can do the same thing.
I think what Jaw was referring to was that fact the hack tweaked apple's OS.
No, it's not stealing, but
It's called copyright infringement.
Stealing denies the possession of what you steal to the original owner.
Copyright infringement doesn't do that, it makes an illegal copy of the original, but the original is still available to the original owner, assuming he is returning the Netflix dvd.
Not returning the Netflix dvd would be stealing.
Both, of course, are illegal, but one is a criminal offense, and the other is a civil offense.
Two VERY different animals.
It's called copyright infringement.
Stealing denies the possession of what you steal to the original owner.
Copyright infringement doesn't do that, it makes an illegal copy of the original, but the original is still available to the original owner, assuming he is returning the Netflix dvd.
Not returning the Netflix dvd would be stealing.
Both, of course, are illegal, but one is a criminal offense, and the other is a civil offense.
Two VERY different animals.
If Apple is indeed developing a media server, this might help them with regarding copying DVD's to iTunes. The copied DVD would only be copied once and stored on a central media Server like Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/). Through iTunes DRM it can only be accessed through authorized mac computers and thier corasponding iPods/iphones. Being able to access it only through a mobile me account adds another layer of security that the video files are not tampered with.
I rather like the idea.
I rather like the idea.
Please! Apple still can't get front row right. Shared cover art in front row still doesn't show up and leopard is over a year old now..... I don't see Apple getting a media server right if they can't get front row correct (in leopard).
It is even more a generic problem. Even if you run Leopard Server there is no way to keep libraries from iTunes, iPhoto or what so ever synchronised in a way that multiple users can acces the same libraries and add new stuff to it.
If
moves into this direction it will means that they have to update most of their software products to work in a "local" setup and in a "server" setup. They are capable to do it (see there professional software) but need to make it working in there consumer line of applications as well.We will see what the show will bring.
Personally I would hope for new software along updated hardware (iMac, mini and MacPro). Especially new software, for example groups calender (with synchronisation), integration with iPhone like they have with Exchange, etc.
O ja, an upgrade to iWork would be nice too
So? There are a ton of programs that tweak little bits of Windows when you install them because it need the extra functionality to work. OSX is not sacred and people are allowed to tweak it if they see fit.
And maybe that might be some of the reasons for the crashes? Never said you can't or shouldn't tweak Mac OS. Never said OS X was sacred either. However I would rather not have a third party tweak/mess/over write parts of the os.
Heres where it gets interesting. Most of the crashes on a windows system comes from 3rd party crap messing with things. If Apple keeps growing at a good rate there will be 3rd party apps that insist on tweaking things to work better for them, reducing osx into a crash-prone system like windows.
So what would you rather have, a more stable system that only works with a select group of peripherals priced higher than anybody else's, or a system that works with cheaper 3rd party peripherals and might crash a bit more?
So what would you rather have, a more stable system that only works with a select group of peripherals priced higher than anybody else's, or a system that works with cheaper 3rd party peripherals and might crash a bit more?
For me, more stable... I am already paying a premium to not have to deal with crashes etc.
Yes, but some people will quickly grow tired of paying more than everyone else and Apple is going to take the heat for the crashes. Apple needs to be careful that their arrogance in the market doesnt slowly turn on them. Right now they are ok being marketed only to the wealthy, but that wont last forever.
I don't know if they are marketed to the wealthy. Judging by who is on this very message board/forum.
But hey, this is about Home Media Servers.............
I was gonna get a Mac Mini (on my Amazon Wishlist) but now I am kinda hoping for this OS X Home Server version to come out. Hopefully it should be easy since Windows Home Server is just Windows Server 2003 with some ancillary applications added on to it.
OS X server could just be tweaked to offer the integration like that of WHS.
OS X server could just be tweaked to offer the integration like that of WHS.
A mac is a good buy when you compare equivalent systems from Dell and HP.
That depends on how you view the cost/benefit ratio. I know a ton of people who like OSX and would love to use it but refuse to pay the "mac premium" or "mac tax."
They would rather spend half as much on a laptop that has the same specs or better.
Apple will have crossed a huge line if they make it so that only their media server works on osx. Vendor lock-in like that is only tolerated by zealots and fanboys. Though, to be fair, most mac users are zealots and fanboys so it probably wouldnt hurt them at all
Though, to be fair, most mac users are zealots and fanboys so it probably wouldnt hurt them at all
Hey, I resemble that remark!
That depends on how you view the cost/benefit ratio. I know a ton of people who like OSX and would love to use it but refuse to pay the "mac premium" or "mac tax."
They would rather spend half as much on a laptop that has the same specs or better.
Apple will have crossed a huge line if they make it so that only their media server works on osx. Vendor lock-in like that is only tolerated by zealots and fanboys. Though, to be fair, most mac users are zealots and fanboys so it probably wouldnt hurt them at all
Of course you might want to do a search for comparisions between Mac's and PC's. There are a ton of threads on this.
Apple has been quietly pointing to this eventuality for some time. First the AirPort Extreme and the MacMini, next the Apple TV, then the MacBook Airlost it's optical drivefinally the advent of the Time Capsule. Add this all up and you have a 802.11n Media Server; all that's missing is RAIDkind of a no brainer. It's just a matter of time.
Only if Apple release a device with the same functionality and features. Once (if) Apple release a product that surpasses the MediaSmart, then HP never beat them to the punch because they cannot be compared against one another.
I hope they do this. We were talking about one of these back when the "Brick" rumor was going on.
Ugly mock-up:
God thats ugly. Who mocked up that nightmare? That's worse than the worst p.c. case from Taiwan. Uggh!