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 Reportedly Set to Open Up Apple TV to Third-Party Developers at WWDC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have no need to buy a 3. I still only have a 720p TV. But yes, plex is the only reason that I need to jailbreak my apple tv. And I dont have to worry about not upgrading for fear of breaking the jailbreak and plex.
I'd guess so. The ATV is likely going to be pulling content from a Mac or iPhone/iPad in most cases. In other cases it'll be working with network or web based storage/streaming.
The 8GB will be used for app storage and buffer space.
----------
I think he meant that he would buy 3 of them
Hyperbole much? Do you work for Apple marketing? Yeah I'm sure Comcast and DirecTV are quaking in their boots right now.
Similar trash talk by competitors of both the iPhone and iPad before and after release.
How did that work out?
Neither Comcast nor Direct TV need be too worried now, but cord cutters increase and ala cart demands could impact earnings.
Apps would be great
Have you ever entered the WiFi password on an aTV - it sucks!
But using an iPhone/iPad/iPodTouch requires a new set of SDK. I'm not talking about a remote keyboard or screen sharing.
For any type of App the display (aTV) needs to send data to the remote and the remote sends the control events back to the aTV. Just like a remote Apple-Events we had in OS9. I'm sure they have a nifty OO solution for Xcode, and that's the sort of solution Steve had in mind.
Have you ever entered the WiFi password on an aTV - it sucks!
But using an iPhone/iPad/iPodTouch requires a new set of SDK. I'm not talking about a remote keyboard or screen sharing.
For any type of App the display (aTV) needs to send data to the remote and the remote sends the control events back to the aTV. Just like a remote Apple-Events we had in OS9. I'm sure they have a nifty OO solution for Xcode, and that's the sort of solution Steve had in mind.
The cable networks wont be worried until Apple can get live streaming of their channels. Until that happens, they dont need to do anything.
The last few iMac's have had the ability to use the displays as external monitors. Once the computer hardware is outdated, just plug your new computer into the old one, and presto, it's a monitor.
Concerning on-board storage for apple TV
For those that are worried about the small 8GB storage on the apple TV, I could totally see upgrades to iCloud to allow for "Cloud Apps". This totally makes sense for the apple TV at least considering its supposed to be always connected. This in my opinion is the only way they'll get this to work, cause yea 8gb is too small. Especially considering after firmware and everything else really there is probably about 4gb free space left. Either that or Apple will get really really restrictive about size limitations of apps which does not equal a good thing.
For those that are worried about the small 8GB storage on the apple TV, I could totally see upgrades to iCloud to allow for "Cloud Apps". This totally makes sense for the apple TV at least considering its supposed to be always connected. This in my opinion is the only way they'll get this to work, cause yea 8gb is too small. Especially considering after firmware and everything else really there is probably about 4gb free space left. Either that or Apple will get really really restrictive about size limitations of apps which does not equal a good thing.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Technically, you are correct. But I'll try again. Suppose Apple does as suggested as adds a coax in jack to the
TV. Then what? I have DISH, so if TV is going to be able to replace my DISH box, the software that translates DISH digital signals into something that can actually be seen on the HDTV will need to be built into the TV box. Suppose you have DirectTV. Same issue. Someone else has Comcast. Same issue. Cablevision. Time Warner. Etc. There are lots of them.In a Coax in solution, Apple would need to strike deals with all of these players so that the software could be put inside the
TV to work with their particular variation of encrypted digital signals over coax. Most (all?) of them make nice revenues by renting their own boxes, effectively a required rental if you want to view their signals. Why would they cut their revenue throats to make a one-time (purchase) box from Apple replace all that revenue (and related opportunities by installing their own boxes)?I offered how it could work against that reality. Maybe adding an HDMI in port to
TV could allow all of the Cable/Satt players to keep their boxes in place while still creating a way for the signal to flow through the TV4 (with HDMI in). I think this is much more likely than all of the existing cable/satt guys cooperating with Apple to kill off their recurring box rental revenues (and related revenue opportunities).
Last edited:
I buy most of my iPhone/iPad Apps and manage the arrangement of Apps on each device (have 4) via iTunes on my Computer. I would hope I could do the same for ALL of the Apple TV's in my house (current have 3).
Reading through several messages here it appears ATV will be the go to hook to TV unit for every TV, but that Roku will continue to offer features people cannot live without and Apple is very unlikely to adopt. It also appears you will still need a PS2 if only for Blue Ray support. If Apple were to at least allow external "resource" devices to attach to the ATV ecosystem to distribute whatever content you have in your home to whatever TV you have, that would be spectacular.
I would also expect Apple to allow open ended remote control apps within some bounds and over time adopt some of their aspects or features or possibly purchase a small remote app company so by the time we get to iOS 6.2 or so there is an "evolved" remote scheme. That scheme will not look like anything we have now, like a prettier looking remote on a screen, but some combination of context sensitive options, voice control, habit repetition and optional full modifications.
So no, Roku and PS2 are not dead anytime soon. Can we at least hook them up? I suppose Apple will force us to have a Mac for that rather than a $2 way to do it on ATV. TB makes a bunch of things possible if it's not crippled or locked down in some way.
Rocketman
Next Gen ATV5 in a year might have slots for 4 "cable cards" so the subscriptions services are in no way bypassed, but the user has ultimate convenience. If a cable/sat company can get full revenues but skip the box handling aspect it actually increases ROI.
I would also expect Apple to allow open ended remote control apps within some bounds and over time adopt some of their aspects or features or possibly purchase a small remote app company so by the time we get to iOS 6.2 or so there is an "evolved" remote scheme. That scheme will not look like anything we have now, like a prettier looking remote on a screen, but some combination of context sensitive options, voice control, habit repetition and optional full modifications.
So no, Roku and PS2 are not dead anytime soon. Can we at least hook them up? I suppose Apple will force us to have a Mac for that rather than a $2 way to do it on ATV. TB makes a bunch of things possible if it's not crippled or locked down in some way.
Rocketman
Next Gen ATV5 in a year might have slots for 4 "cable cards" so the subscriptions services are in no way bypassed, but the user has ultimate convenience. If a cable/sat company can get full revenues but skip the box handling aspect it actually increases ROI.
Last edited:
----------
I think he meant that he would buy 3 of them
Lol yes, 3 of them for around the house.
Define "apps". If you are thinking the width and breath of the iOS stores then sure, it doesn't feel right.
If you are talking about a limited SDK that assists folks in creating TV appropriate apps and app modes for games, viewing video etc, those things do make sense. And I think that's what they will get. Not a fully open SDK but a limited one for making apps that will work with viewing things on a tv.
Also, they might end up releasing an Apple TV with more storage.
The only thing I do hope is that they do something about the whole iTunes Extras not working on iOS and these studio created apps like the whole Dark Knight etc. I bought the movie before the app came out but to use the features that require purchase I would have to buy it again. To me that is totally wrong. There has to be a way for the app to know I already bought it and activate that stuff. Or if I buy it in app for me to be able to download the plain movie file to my computer.
I bought the Avatar release a few months back cause I wanted to see these all new jazzy Extras features and they were rather awesome for such a set up. Way more 'disk' than previous ones. But that kind of thing is never really going to take off if we can't watch them on all devices. Sure you can hook up a computer to your tv but that negates the point of the Apple TV so why not make it work in that system if not in the iPad as well. Fix that issue, encourage studios to make their online closer to identical to the disks in terms of features, subtitles etc. give us a way to buy up to the higher quality for things that weren't available that way before (like many tv shows) etc and Apple could have a winner even without building an actual tv
The advantage of Apple building their own set would be the additional sensors they can add to it. The simple example is a camera for facetime & motion capture.
A crazier example is a touch screen & gyro. You can rotate the screen to portrait mode, or tilt it back to drafting table mode. Tilt it back all the way for board game, ping pong, billiards, maps mode.
Most people would not pay a premium for a tv with an Apple logo on it, but they would pay a premium for an "iPanel" that can also be used as a tv.
If they do make something, it will be as much a tv as the iPhone was a phone.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
No it can't. These cable companies pretty much own local broadband for a (THIS) reason. Cut into the TV subscription revenue with some Internet-based replacement and broadband pricing will just go up to make up the difference. A solution like this- from Apple or anyone else- is dependent on broadband.
The missing rumor is how Apple can bypass all of these middlemen by linking us users directly to iCloud. As long as we have toll masters called Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc they will NOT suffer losses by someone's replacement solution that is dependent on their broadband pipes.
This could possibly do away with the need to jailbreak an AppleTV. Granted the ATV 1 and ATV 2 can be jailbroken, but as is know, the ATV 3 isn't JB'd yet, and it seems it's a fairly impenetrable little device, so no-one seems to know how long it'll take for a JB to arrive.
Why JB an ATV? Well, for me, I want to run XBMC on it. I don't want to convert / transcode (even if it's live transcoding) any existing files to an iTunes compatible format, nor do I want to add items to iTunes to be able to play them Yes, fully understand I don't need to copy the media over, but I still have to add references to them to iTunes. It's a step I don't want. I want to be able to turn on the ATV, connect to my server, open my player app, and play my avi / mkv / whatever file.
I'm hoping that if this SDK does come to fruition that XBMC types will look into it and see if they can get their app running using it. I know a little about dev and would presume if it'll run on a JB'd device then if there is a legitimate way to get the app onto the device it would still run.
One possibly cloud on the horizon could be the App Store side of things, there will be guidelines as there are with the other App Stores, and like the iPhone one, I suspect there could be a "Duplicates Existing Functionality" guideline, which could be used to keep something like XBMC out of the store, as it's a player, and the ATV can already play files.
I'd like to think Apple wouldn't be so boneheaded to do that though.
Why JB an ATV? Well, for me, I want to run XBMC on it. I don't want to convert / transcode (even if it's live transcoding) any existing files to an iTunes compatible format, nor do I want to add items to iTunes to be able to play them Yes, fully understand I don't need to copy the media over, but I still have to add references to them to iTunes. It's a step I don't want. I want to be able to turn on the ATV, connect to my server, open my player app, and play my avi / mkv / whatever file.
I'm hoping that if this SDK does come to fruition that XBMC types will look into it and see if they can get their app running using it. I know a little about dev and would presume if it'll run on a JB'd device then if there is a legitimate way to get the app onto the device it would still run.
One possibly cloud on the horizon could be the App Store side of things, there will be guidelines as there are with the other App Stores, and like the iPhone one, I suspect there could be a "Duplicates Existing Functionality" guideline, which could be used to keep something like XBMC out of the store, as it's a player, and the ATV can already play files.
I'd like to think Apple wouldn't be so boneheaded to do that though.
If Tim wants to do a 'one more thing' he'll do it. He'll have something in the works that hasn't leaked out to anyone. Something only he and Sir Jony know about. Course it might not 'be real' for a few months if they are keeping it that close. But if that's what's required that's what's required.
But something tells me that he doesn't want to. That was a Steve thing and this isn't Steve's Apple anymore. That kind of showmanship and zing is part of what got everyone focusing on Steve and not the products and that was a bad thing for Apple. Now we have boring Tim and his boring presentations in terms of how he says the words, so everyone focuses on the pretty photos and what he's talking about. Just as he likely wants it. Hell he plays narrator more than anything else and leaves the show to the various members of the teams. Why? To show folks that it is a team and not one man. Something Steve latched onto in the end as well. But not until after Apple took a major plunge because of the star focus on Steve and the media hyping up the idea that he and Apple were the same thing and without him there is no Apple.
Exactly. And then everyone is pissed off at Apple because they didn't live up to rumors propagated by others.
This is similar to the SlingBox but you only need 1 per box and then on the Apple TV you stream from the SlingBox. I think SlingBox is built into one of the Sat Boxes (maybe DISH). Verizon FIOS is due to release a 6 turner Media Server and then uses boxes like the Apple TV as the clients streaming from the Media Server. I believe they even say you can use boxes like the XBOX so they appear to already be willing to work with other STB's. I think Version has the right idea. They just need to have an App for the Apple TV.I offered how it could work against that reality. Maybe adding an HDMI in port to
lass? You mean like AirPlay from an iPad?
Everything that Nintendo, Microsoft et al showed off this week has been done with an iOS app with or without Airplay.