Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I use to swear by the apple tv but can't see myself going back to one at this point.
 
I'm not sure you understand how the SDK for Chromecast works. It will allow you to connect your apps to the device and stream content. The code from the SDK does not run on the Chromecast. It runs on the server device. Just like the iOS SDK allows for AirPlay. I am not aware of any advantage from the SDK on the Chromecast other then cross platform clients.

I separated my statements for a reason.

I'm aware of the differences and my point still stands.
 
That's great, Apple. But the Apple TV 3G is still useless until it can be jailbroken.
Yeah, all I can do with mine is stream video from my Mac, iPhone, Netflix, Hulu, Vimeo, YouTube and iTunes online, plus stream photos and music from my Mac. Totally useless. Can't believe I spent nearly one hundred dollars for it. Two years of constant use and I really should try to get my money back. I really need to install apps on it because it's not like I have a laptop and an iPhone that can do more or less anything at this point.
 
Last edited:
The processor power is present, the iTunes/App Store connectivity is present so users can get around the memory constraints, and aTV is already running a constrained version of iOS6. Bring the aTV OS in line with all the other iOS devices to enable apps and update the darn SDK. Our iPhones and iPads already function as controllers for aTV why not just head off all these other sub-par experiences and end the wait.

Apple is most likely going to actually do cool stuff when they come out with the Apple TV. I'm sure this is just to milk money from people who want such features to see how the market is for it. This will probably stay as it is, a simple device to transfer files onto the TV just like you can with a $5-10 HDMI cord, but wirelessly. Tim Cook has stated quite a few times that they're getting in the TV market, so I would expect it coming within the next few years.
 
That's great, Apple. But the Apple TV 3G is still useless until it can be jailbroken.

Pretty sure that's exactly the opposite of how Apple sees it.

----------

Uhh... Let's face it, nobody uses DivX but pirates. It's totally pointless.

A lot of people rip their own content to MKV so they don't have re-encode the sound from DTS.

No one should be using DivX at ALL. Even the pirates abandoned it years ago.
 
That's great, Apple. But the Apple TV 3G is still useless until it can be jailbroken.

Oh gee, what will we ever do without crappy free streaming services that can be hacked onto there? :rolleyes: Already wasted my time on that with the ATV1.

I'd jailbreak right this instant if they made an HDCP crack so I don't have to unplug the ATV's HDMI cable then plug it back in every time so the retarded copyright protection doesn't claim that my TV is recording the ATV's output. FiOS cable boxes do it as well.
 
I separated my statements for a reason.

I'm aware of the differences and my point still stands.

Actually it doesn't. The Chromecast SDK is for host device applications, not the Chromecast device. This is exactly the same as how iOS implements their Airplay API.
 
Actually it doesn't. The Chromecast SDK is for host device applications, not the Chromecast device. This is exactly the same as how iOS implements their Airplay API.

I don't know if you can't read or you can't comprehend. Read my post as its written. *facepalm*
 
Nexus 7 is way better in every respect, including battery life (which Apple always prided itself on).

September should be THAT must more interesting then :)

Yes, accept build quality. There are tons of forums with people complaining of how their devices have slowed to a crawl and are practically unusable after a few months of use.
 
I think Apple just has an increasing supply of refurb units, and they're trying to bring inventory down. I doubt they would drop the price of a refurbished product in response to a competitor's new product.
 
Apple needs to have a $35 Airplay-Only device. I am pretty sure most people use their AppleTV for little more than AirPlay.

Airplay is what I use it the LEAST for, and I have an AppleTV on three TV's in the house.

It is primarily a netflix and iTunes streamer.
 
It is also done poorly and very sluggish. It's a rev A product so give it time, but the price point certainly is enticing.

Why should I do that? Given the cost of a modern TV spending slightly more for a Roku that actually works now seems to be a extremely minor investment in the cost of the whole setup.
 
I don't know if you can't read or you can't comprehend. Read my post as its written. *facepalm*

Your post states that Chromecast has an SDK and aTV does not. You then make the implication that Google has a advantage in this area using the example of Apple not allowing native apps.
My point is that Chromecast does not hold an advantage. The level of accessibility to a developer is essential the same.
However I do agree that a native SDK for aTV would be nice to have.
 
It was sitting at $85 for well over a year. Now Chromecast shows up for $35 and it finally drops to $75?

If that was a reaction, it's the weakest reaction I've ever seen. They didn't change the price of the actual product, just the already-discounted refurbished model, and even then only by $10.
 
iPush

Apple needs to have a $35 Airplay-Only device. I am pretty sure most people use their AppleTV for little more than AirPlay.

there you go. it is not from apple. it was there weeks before chromecast was announced. and yes, it costs less, just $30, shipped to your doorstep. i already ordered mine, can't wait to try this out.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/310715093300
 
Apple needs to have a $35 Airplay-Only device. I am pretty sure most people use their AppleTV for little more than AirPlay.

Maybe AppleTV needs to license AirPlay to more than just high end speakers. I could see someone else making what you're talking about, not Apple itself. It makes sense on paper, but apple likes to have multiply redundant systems of selling you media. Similarly, they could open up AirPlay to non-apple sources, but they're not going to do that either.

Source: AirPlay and ATV iTunes media user. I think you're wrong about why people use it, but I am curious to know actual figures before making wild statements. Maybe cable users don't need it, but I love it. Buy a season of Breaking Bad, watch it on the ATV at home or watch it on the ipad for travel.

----------

there you go. it is not from apple. it was there weeks before chromecast was announced. and yes, it costs less, just $30, shipped to your doorstep. i already ordered mine, can't wait to try this out.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/310715093300

craziness, let us know how that is...
 
I know the Apple TV cannot. While it has a usb input in the back, right now it is only usable for service updates. Given it lives in the apple ecosystem, I wouldn't hold my breathe. Not sure about chromecast.

What are you talking about?

I have ripped all my movies as well, and have them on a NAS.
What you do is simply point your iTunes library to the NAS and do a computer share and access your iTunes media that way. I do this and have absolutely no problems.

I have ripped almost 200 titles using Handbrake, then take that file and drop them into iDentify to add all the metadata for the movie/including the artwork. Works perfectly. Once the file is output, I move them into my iTunes movie folder, and from iTunes, "add to library".

----------

I've ripped all of my DVDs to a network attached drive on my LAN and watch them on my tv using a BoxeeBox. Can either the AppleTV or Chromecast device do this, play files from a networked drive directly?

Yes you can. See my other post.
 
It's mind boggling to why people think "Chromecast" is in the same league as AppleTV when it's nothing more than a poor mans Airplay.

Yes and no. Basically it turns everyone's phone/tablet/computer into an appleTV. They don't have to buy a separate content device for their television. If I had a TV I would buy a Chromecast.

With this, who really needs a Roku or an AppleTV (in its current incarnation)?
 
Last edited:
I would love to see a native Spotify app on there. I know I can stream through Airplay, but that's only good until I get a call on my iPhone.

I know Apple wants everyone to buy stuff through iTunes, but I just wish they would see the value that third party apps (like Netflix and Hulu) bring to the ATV. Spotify would only make the ATV more desirable.

On the other hand, I would be totally fine if iTunes radio turned into more of a Spotify thing in the future.
 
Just a thought, I wish Apple would not only take away all the cables and set top boxes but would take away the TV itself. What if they made a Mac mini size projector that could be placed anywhere? Controlled by your phone, of course. You could take away the "designated tv spot" in your home. I think this could be very useful and revolutionary. Don't know if it could actually happen but I feel like the longer they wait to release this thing, the more of a let down its gonna be.
 
As if the price of Apple refurbs never dropped before.

They dropped the price of the refurbished iPad 4 and iPad mini in May.
Do you think that was also in reaction to the Galaxy Note 10.1 and 8.0?

Nope, Apple just has too much refurbs on their hands because of returns and repairs.

This coupled with a likely update to the aTV to include 802.11ac and perhaps a spec bump too.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.