Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Tablet to link TV and PC?

In response to my post about an APPLE wireless media center sanford wrote:

Originally posted by sanford
www.slimdevices.com
Click to expand...

Yes, I know about these devices and in my original post I mentioned that HP and others already produced similar products.

As for the people who are asking for an Apple-labeled DVR I don't think that is going to happen. Right now the DVR hardware is being sold pretty much as a loss leader (i.e. at no profit). What TiVo and the others want is your monthly subscription dollars, they don't expect much in the way of profits from the sale of the hardware. Also, it is my opinion that DVR functionality is going to be controlled (or taken over) by the media service providers (cable and satellite TV providers). Thus, I don't think there is any real space for Apple in that product category.

As for the wireless LCD tablet that links to and/or relies upon your Mac or PC. Well, that's an interesting idea but I think given today's technology that such a device would be just about as expensive as an iBook. To build such a device you'd pretty much have all of the component requirements of a tablet PC. You might be able to do without the hard disk, but that's about it. You'd still need a fairly fast processor, a relatively expensive video display system, local DRAM and ROM, batteries and power management, i/o and wireless functionality, and a touch or pen sensitive input method.

In contrast to that a wireless media center that attaches to your A/V receiver and TV is pretty much a DRIVELESS DVD player (in cost and complexity) but with wireless transfer of the media (JPEG, MPEG2/4, MP3, AAC). Apple should be able to use off-the-shelf components to build such a device fairly cheaply and still earn a reasonable profit off of the hardware sale. There are already devices like this on the market (have been for at least a year or two) so this would be nothing difficult or new but a clever industrial design combined with some Apple software magic could produce a successful new product category for Apple.
 
i think the tv/computer merger is often misunderstood. The iapps and quicktime lend their content to being displayed in other environments as well as a computer screen.

My wish product (since this is what most of these posts seem to be about) is a low grade computer in a hifi form factor that enables me to play my itunes library through my hifi and iphoto, imovie and quicktime libraries through my tv. It would have adequate storage so it coulld be standalone but equally it would network through rendevous to my pc. Throw in a dvd drive so I can use it as a dvd player and the ability to record video streams and you have a component that enhances apple's product line considerably and opens up new markets that others know is there but haven't the ability to capitalise on.
 
new iMac???

a few days ago a rumor start to spread in the rumors sites, the new iMac.... could it be that Apple is it going to make a tablet iMac (New Form factor)... if the cupertino company is going this way they won´t trash the actual iMac, only give an option, why not, bluetooth keyboards?, everything is pointing that direction..... we have to remember that phillips was the first TV maker who adopts the randevouz protocol..... so the new iMac form factor... could it be named tMac?


ony for the records.... i was the first person to predict a couple of years ago that apple was going to use IBM´s 970 for the G5 (when the 970 was only for server use only)....

regards
Juan Eduardo De Magalhaes-Calvet
 
Small changes...

The only thing stopping me from buying an iPod, a 12" PowerBook or an iBook is the amount of storage.

I know - iPods max out at 40GB and -Books at 80GB, but many people I know including myself own tons of CDs and I would really like to take my entire digital collection with me on trips anywhere, to my friends, next door etc.

CDs have been around since the early 80s and lots of people have vast collections. I have 1600 compact discs now converted to AAC and MP3, stored on a 200GB external noisy FW drive which is not very portable. I'm at 110GB of music at the moment. I play music shared from my iMac over Airport to an old PowerBook placed on top of my stereo. Works OK but I really wish my music could be stored on the PowerBook so I could just take it with me anywhere. Last time I went on a trip to a friends cabin I took the PowerBook and the external FW drive with me. Everyone used iTunes DJ-ing the music, but the drive is noisy and it is too much to carry in a lot of situations.

My point: All I really need is a small "-book" or "-pod" with more storage. Don't get me started on video storage demands, we need larger drives - not fancier equipment. A -Book would work just fine with all the iApps and sound/video output. I consider buying an old black PB with expansion bay drives from MCE - 3 x 80 GB, but will iTunes handle the three volumes? Maybe it's not a good solution...
 
Originally posted by fpnc
ITMediaCo, I'm not certain what you are trying to show here. The link you provided is the very same article that started this thread.
Click to expand...

I appologize for reposting.. or being repetitive. Just a link I found, didn't actually notice if it was previously posted.
 
Why do so many of you damn the tablet? I don't want to WATCH tv on a tablet or a computer - but CONTROLLING my entire home entertainment system from my computer - yes, that I would like to do. You can already control/share with some TIVO devices, expand this to a computer. I would love to schedule and record shows to a non-monthly subscription device and have the ability to pause live tv and play back (thus the need for wide band wireless).

I would also love to use my built-in jukebox (iTunes) to play my music over my home entertainment system. OR be able to broadcast internet radio over my home speakers.

Oh and how about this, I want to watch a DVD but don't have a DVD player - save the one on my computer. Now I could stream my video to my tv. I don't know how it would work keeping a DVD library, would require a ton of hard disk space. But now if I wanted to access the DVD rom features I could also stream those to the tv as well.

Not to mention creating an iMovie and streaming that to the TV rahter than buring a DVD or video CD.

What I see isn't so much a "tablet" as an other digital hub type device. Something that could hook up to the TV, stereo (have all the right inputs svideo, rca, optical, etc.) and have wireless conectivity.

I know options are availalbe or made by M$, but I want an Apple option. One that just works! One that is easy to use. Easy to setup.
 
For subscription, DVRs from the cable/satellite company (DirectTivo), have the standalone Tivo/Reply devices beat all hollow ($5/month for DirecTivo gets you 2 tuners)

Standalone devices - the DMR-E80H is nice (80GB hard drive and DVD-R/RAM burner for $500) - upgrade to the DMR-E100 and get 120GB hard drive and Firewire input (burn those miniDV tapes to DVD for $800, or load your videos to it from your computer via Firewire)
 
Originally posted by macnews
Why do so many of you damn the tablet? I don't want to WATCH tv on a tablet or a computer - but CONTROLLING my entire home entertainment system from my computer - yes, that I would like to do. You can already control/share with some TIVO devices, expand this to a computer. I would love to schedule and record shows to a non-monthly subscription device and have the ability to pause live tv and play back (thus the need for wide band wireless).
......
Click to expand...

macnews, I agree with some of your points (wireless iTunes, internet radio, and QuickTime playback on your TV). However, I don't understand your apparent mixing of the tablet idea with the DVR functionality (your post seems to suggest that connection).

As far as I know even Airport Extreme can not handle the data rates associated with standard definition TV unless the video is compressed (in fact, in the "real world" I don't think it could even support DV data rates). So, if you want to wirelessly transmit digital video BACK to your Mac you'll need a realtime MPEG2/4 compressor within the wireless transmitter that is connected to your TV. While that could be done it would certainly add to the cost of the product.

In contrast, all I want is a wireless method to get the A/V media on my Mac (already compressed and ready for streaming) and listen to and display that on my home stereo and TV. While there are already products that can wirelessly transmit audio and still images, I'd like to see a relatively inexpensive offering from Apple that would also support MPEG2/4 video FROM my Mac to the TV. Eventually I might want a product that could transmit the media BOTH ways but that would certainly be a more expensive and complex product (a second or third generation unit that would be introduced after price drops and the wider adaption of digital TV in source form).
 
Okay, here are some products that do most (or more) of what I'd like in a wireless media center. Unfortunately it appears that nearly every such product is PC only. That's one reason I'd like to see Apple enter this field.

Here is a link to a review done by PC Magazine on several devices that they term media hubs or diskless media players (many are in the $150 to $300 U.S. price range):

http://www.pcmag.com/category2/0,4148,924250,00.asp

And here is a link to the product page for the device that they gave the editors' choice award:

http://www.prismiq.com/products/index.asp

Even though this Prismiq device seems to be gathering some good reviews, I've noted several user reports that say it is very hard to setup and use and that it is very buggy (and, anyway, it is PC only). However, this product does even more than I would want it to and it costs only about $300 when configured for wireless operation. If there was a product like this from Apple and it was priced below $400 then I would have bought it like yesterday. I might even go higher (on price) if it was really, really nice (maybe act as an Airport repeater to extend the range of my base station and it should have a built-in text display for navigation and music selection without the need of having the TV switched on).
 
Originally posted by fpnc
As for the wireless LCD tablet that links to and/or relies upon your Mac or PC. Well, that's an interesting idea but I think given today's technology that such a device would be just about as expensive as an iBook.
Click to expand...

I disagree. You're envisioning this as a thin client with a airport file-sharing link to a server. Try thinking of just a regular monitor with a wireless monitor cable. *Evereything* is in the CPU. The monitor is just a monitor. The main obstancles to this sort of set up are responsiveness and bandwidth.

As for responsiveness, I get 2-3ms pings to my 802.11 router, which is surely responsive enough for most uses - your average LCD only has 15-30ms response times anyway. Bandwidth is more challenging. A 1024x768 screen with 32 bits per pixel requires about 3MB of data per screen refresh. 3MB x 40 refreshes per second is a lot of data. But you could probably work things out so it only sends new data (LCDs don't refresh anyway) and reduce that to a few MB per second - well within the range of current technology. IMO, this is the only plausible idea. It's *not* a new product, it just adds useful functionality to current products at little extra cost - making them a more compelling buy. Very much like Airport.
 
Re: new iMac???

Originally posted by demagalhaes
ony for the records.... i was the first person to predict a couple of years ago that apple was going to use IBM´s 970 for the G5 (when the 970 was only for server use only)....
Click to expand...

No offense (I realize saying this always makes someone offended but anyway) but that's a pretty pretentious claim...
 
Originally posted by macnews
Why do so many of you damn the tablet? I don't want to WATCH tv on a tablet or a computer - but CONTROLLING my entire home entertainment system from my computer - yes, that I would like to do. You can already control/share with some TIVO devices, expand this to a computer. I would love to schedule and record shows to a non-monthly subscription device and have the ability to pause live tv and play back (thus the need for wide band wireless).

I would also love to use my built-in jukebox (iTunes) to play my music over my home entertainment system. OR be able to broadcast internet radio over my home speakers.

Oh and how about this, I want to watch a DVD but don't have a DVD player - save the one on my computer. Now I could stream my video to my tv. I don't know how it would work keeping a DVD library, would require a ton of hard disk space. But now if I wanted to access the DVD rom features I could also stream those to the tv as well.

Not to mention creating an iMovie and streaming that to the TV rahter than buring a DVD or video CD.

What I see isn't so much a "tablet" as an other digital hub type device. Something that could hook up to the TV, stereo (have all the right inputs svideo, rca, optical, etc.) and have wireless conectivity.

I know options are availalbe or made by M$, but I want an Apple option. One that just works! One that is easy to use. Easy to setup.
Click to expand...

You could get a lot of that with a DVD player. Some of them have an ethernet port so you can stream audio/video to your TV and it's speakers...I've been planning on setting up a small server for this purpose, but I think I'll just wait until I move out because my dad isn't as keen on the idea for some reason...
 
Re: A Powerbook with a tablet for a screen?

Originally posted by SuperChuck
When Jobs repeatedly says something, he usually means it. I think everyone else in the world agrees that the one-button mouse is ready for extinction, but Jobs has stood his ground and lost a lot of potential customers for it. As mentioned in the article, he has repeatedly said that a computer without a keyboard is not a good idea.

On this one, I completely agree. As a designer, I love the idea of writing on my screen...just as long as I don't HAVE to write on my screen to get anything done. The keyboard allows me to write this message far faster than I could by "writing" it by hand. And for those who want more than one button on their mouse - imagine a whole computer with one button: the power switch.

Since we know how true Mr. Jobs is to his word, I think the tablet may be the screen of a new generation of powerbooks. All the convenience of a portable tablet, all the joys of doodling on the screen, and all without the nightmare of trying to multitask with a stylus (the NO button mouse).
Click to expand...

Imagine the ProTab/iTab with the base of a PowerBook/iBook... Replace the keyboard/trackpad with the LCD screen... Add external bluetooth keyboard/mouse...

Want a 12" iTab? Fine... Want a 23" PowerTab? Awesome! :D
 
Originally posted by fpnc
As far as I know even Airport Extreme can not handle the data rates associated with standard definition TV unless the video is compressed (in fact, in the "real world" I don't think it could even support DV data rates). So, if you want to wirelessly transmit digital video BACK to your Mac you'll need a realtime MPEG2/4 compressor within the wireless transmitter that is connected to your TV. While that could be done it would certainly add to the cost of the product.
Click to expand...

Actually DV is 3.6MBps....Airport cannot handle those rates but Airport Extreme can with it's transfer rate of 6.75MBps...note this is Megabytes not Megabits....and yes this would even be able to do it with the overhead of 256-bit encryption....now of course this is considering that you have a good connection via Airport Extreme...you would be better off with some sort of compression though obviously, especially as there would be little left for other bandwith uses like internet, etc...
 
Originally posted by Towel
But you could probably work things out so it only sends new data (LCDs don't refresh anyway) and reduce that to a few MB per second - well within the range of current technology. IMO, this is the only plausible idea. It's *not* a new product, it just adds useful functionality to current products at little extra cost - making them a more compelling buy. Very much like Airport.
Click to expand...

It's true that LCDs don't have a refresh rate like a normal CRT, but they do refresh. If they never refreshed you'd never get any cursor movement on screen when you moved the mouse. It just doesn't refresh the entire screen.
 
Originally posted by zync
Actually DV is 3.6MBps....Airport cannot handle those rates but Airport Extreme can with it's transfer rate of 6.75MBps...note this is Megabytes not Megabits....and yes this would even be able to do it with the overhead of 256-bit encryption....now of course this is considering that you have a good connection via Airport Extreme...you would be better off with some sort of compression though obviously, especially as there would be little left for other bandwith uses like internet, etc...
Click to expand...

True, in theory it could work. However, you can't assume 100% efficiency. You'd most likely get closer to one half of the theoretical data rate which means that DV would pretty much "choke" the entire bandwidth. Most of the real-world data rates that I've seen for 802.11g have been in the 20 to 30 mbps range. So, 3.6MBps * 8 equals about 29Mbps. I'd guess that it wouldn't work very well for DV.
 
Originally posted by fpnc
True, in theory it could work. However, you can't assume 100% efficiency. You'd most likely get closer to one half of the theoretical data rate which means that DV would pretty much "choke" the entire bandwidth. Most of the real-world data rates that I've seen for 802.11g have been in the 20 to 30 mbps range. So, 3.6MBps * 8 equals about 29Mbps. I'd guess that it wouldn't work very well for DV.
Click to expand...

I did make note of that in my post just not expressly...I said that you had to have a really good signal and that you wouldn't be able to do anything else with it...
 
Originally posted by zync
Actually DV is 3.6MBps....Airport cannot handle those rates but Airport Extreme can with it's transfer rate of 6.75MBps...note this is Megabytes not Megabits....and yes this would even be able to do it with the overhead of 256-bit encryption....now of course this is considering that you have a good connection via Airport Extreme...you would be better off with some sort of compression though obviously, especially as there would be little left for other bandwith uses like internet, etc...
Click to expand...

I would think that for this reason you would want at least a small HD on the system so that you could send in over at a slower rate (probably compressed with the best available codec) and "Cache" it at the device. It might take longer to start up a movie, but it would be a more efficient use of network bandwidth.

As far as a tablet as a remote control is concerned, I have used a Palm as a remote. It is nice and convenient to use, however there is a lot to be said about having physical buttons for use on a remote control as opposed to virtual ones represented by an area on a screen, and that is that you can "feel" them without actually looking at them and discern their function by the shape or position on the remote. To me, this makes it more useful to have a universal remote for everyday use.
 
Tablets are horrid pieces of equipment. All the disadvantages of PDAs and Laptops rolled together. I do think the next iMac design might resemble a Tablet, but it'd still need to be plugged in and not rely on battery. Probably look like a Cinema Display but be a little thicker to accommodate for the actual computer stuff. But Tablets will never hit it off.

Someone already said that you could connect to a TV wirelessly on a Mac, so if you want to do it, you can do it without a blessing from Apple.
 
Originally posted by @HomeNow
I would think that for this reason you would want at least a small HD on the system so that you could send in over at a slower rate (probably compressed with the best available codec) and "Cache" it at the device. It might take longer to start up a movie, but it would be a more efficient use of network bandwidth.
Click to expand...

That's what I had in mind, but I really was thinking more of a just an i/PowerBook...
 
As far as DV over Airport Extreme, it appears that we sort of agree that it wouldn't be very practical and that was my original point. Also, DV is already a compressed video format so adding more compression on top of that would probably only result in decreased quality and/or very little reduction in the required bandwidth. That's why I've always said that a wireless digital video system would probably have to rely on either MPEG2 or MPEG4 (or take your pick of any codec that would result in data rates well below 20mbps, preferably no higher than 10mbps). I don't think isn't a good idea to stress any transport medium to its limit, particularly with a content like streaming video or audio.
 
Re: DS-CDMA vs. Multiband ODFM

Originally posted by wHo_tHe
Sounds like great technology we'd all love to have, of course.

But the article seems to suggest Apple is backing DS-CDMA, the "underdog" technology competing for the 802.15.3 standard, whose inventor has just been bought by Motorola.

I had thought Apple and Motorola's business relationship had soured intensely after the long delays -- and ultimately, Motorola's outright failure -- in ramping up G4 speed.

This could mean that Apple is once again placing a key technology in the hands of a supplier who has failed them before. I think we can all agree the (lack of) speed of the G4 was hurting Apple business before the 970 arrived.

On the other hand, of course, the interference problems with Multiband OFDM sound like they could cripple the technology to the equivalent of little more than a 6-foot cat 5 cable, something my junk drawer has more than enough of right now, thank you very much.

Bottom line, some sort of wide-band wireless technology will exist in the next couple of years and someone -- perhaps Apple -- will be poised enough and deliver the right mix of computing and entertainment to have their product shape the marketplace.
Click to expand...

Well, to its credit, Motorola has a LOT of experience in CDMA technology, both in standard CDMA and Wideband CDMA (as used in upcoming UMTS systems), and their implementations have been rock solid, hardware-wise. They have some of the smallest and highest-performing hardware solutions in the cellular infrastructure business. They probably figure that they can use this headstart to their advantage in DS-CDMA.
 
Originally posted by fpnc
As far as DV over Airport Extreme, it appears that we sort of agree that it wouldn't be very practical and that was my original point. Also, DV is already a compressed video format so adding more compression on top of that would probably only result in decreased quality and/or very little reduction in the required bandwidth. That's why I've always said that a wireless digital video system would probably have to rely on either MPEG2 or MPEG4 (or take your pick of any codec that would result in data rates well below 20mbps, preferably no higher than 10mbps). I don't think isn't a good idea to stress any transport medium to its limit, particularly with a content like streaming video or audio.
Click to expand...

I agree except I believe from my prof explaining last semester that DV isn't really compressed per se....it's actually a hardware compression which occurs at the point when it is transferred to a computer, etc. But yes, I agree, unless this device would only be to stream video to a TV over Airport Extreme, it'd be pretty stupid to nearly use the max bandwith of Airport Extreme. You'd also increase the chances of dropping frames or even the entire feed long enough for it to be completely annoying, not to mention you'd almost need line-of-sight for it not to do that :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back