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

Apple to Offer iTunes Remote Control App for iPhone and iPod Touch

so do I need additional hardware for this?

I don't have airport or remote sensors. Will iTunes respond to my iPhone just through the wifi?:confused:
 
Bluetooth remote control for my PS3

I was bummed that my Harmony remote wouldn't work with my PS3, but maybe someone will build an iPhone app that allows you to use your iPhone as a remote for the PS3 using bluetooth.

I know I could buy the $25 Sony remote, but I'm just hoping I won't have to...


marco
 
ipedro said:
Yes, the Airport Express does exactly that.

A little different than what you're doing, but I have an Airport express in each room of my loft that I want to hear music (Bed, Bath and Kitchen) and an :apple:TV in my living room. Each is connected to a small amp and speakers.

When I want to listen to music in a specific room, I play it in iTunes and select the one or more rooms where I want that music to play.

This app will allow you to do all that without going back to your computer.
Click to expand...

That would be awesome if Apple added that feature, but it's never been supported. I've been waiting for this feature since the AirTunes was released. I have little faith that Apple will include this feature. It's great exercise running up and down the stairs to change AirTunes Speakers. But, like all lose weight fads, it's short lived.
 
Oilbrnr said:
Good luck getting a GPS lock in a building. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I must be lucky then, because my TomTom works fine in my house. I'm not saying it would work flawlessly, but it isn't impossible.

Thanks for the obligatory rolls eyes, though. Makes your point that much stronger.
 
So basically, this just duplicates what "Signal" and "Remote Buddy" can already do (Signal works on the PC as well) with existing iTunes applications. This simply builds the remote capability into iTunes itself instead of having to run an additional application in the background. It also more or less eliminates any need for Signal and one less function for Remote Buddy (unless of course their implementation sucks and has less features). It also probably means that we won't be seeing an ITunes "app" for Signal or Remote Buddy since Apple went and filed a patent and they'll argue that those programs violate their patent even though they existed first (as separate apps) and up until now offered no way for those apps to possibly integrate into the iPhone or iPod Touch themselves directly. In short, they're probably screwing over the authors of Signal and Remote Buddy (assuming they block their apps but I suppose also by giving away for free something they're selling, but I don't fault them for that as I like free apps too) and proving just how much of a dictatorship this iTunes software distribution will be (the power to deny software makers the right to distribute their program for a given platform).

In any case, I'd much rather see an application that allows the iPhone or iPod Touch to transmit its own synced music to an Airtunes device directly (i.e. the iPhone acts as iTunes itself does and transmits its own music collection directly to the Airtunes device, thus eliminating the absolute need for a computer to be turned on in the first place). In other words, if you just want to play music from your iPhone or iPod Touch on your stereo from across the room, you can transmit straight to it via WiFi, not just control your computer in the house via WiFi (which I can already do via Remote Buddy and/or Signal) and have been able to do for several months.

Given the intense reactions here, though, it's pretty obvious some people have never heard of Airtunes, let alone Remote Buddy or Signal....


Personally, I'd like to see iTunes ported to Linux also. RhythmBox lets me play my iTunes library stored on my hard drive in Linux, but I can't transmit to my AppleTV devices from Linux. I have to boot into Windows or use my Mac. Given iTunes on Linux would only mean more customers and given they already have BSD compatible code, I'm not sure why they just don't go ahead and do it, really. They could port Safari while they're at it too.
 
jgerry said:
I'm curious to see if this will have more functionality than Remote Buddy, which I threw down $35 to have. It was a little pricey but does a whole lot of other stuff -- most of which I don't even use. I should probably look into the other features since I bought it!

Remote Buddy is certainly laggy though. I hope they'll come out with a native app soon, and I hope they don't charge me any more $$ for it either. $35 for a remote control app was a pretty tough pill to swallow.
Click to expand...

The ability to view my Logitech 9000 webcam's output remotely on my iPod Touch is a pretty neat "other" function of Remote Buddy. The last software update to Remote Buddy made things considerably faster here in terms of responsiveness, though Signal is still WAY faster. They also added the ability in Remote Buddy to select your speakers that are playing in "Multiple" pairs (something Signal could already do).

Yes, I bought both apps and they each have their strong points, although Remote Buddy's last update definitely brings it closer to Signal (although Signal does not show a live update of the song's time progress, which is a weakness, IMO). *IF* Apple even ALLOWS them to distribute a native app through ITunes, I would hope it compares more favorably to the music browsing system the Iphone/Ipod Touch already uses to browse its own collection of music. I like the alphabet style scroll down album list screen, which of course responds instantly. Hopefully, Apple's own app will work that easily. I also hope it can handle more than one iTunes installation (I have a Mac and PC in the same den, both setup with iTunes) and it better be able to switch speaker selections (that currently requires a handi-cap function enabled to do it from Signal and Remote Buddy and it brings iTunes out of "hide" mode when you activate it which is annoying so I'm hoping they'll have a more direct Airtunes selection feature in it.

It'd also be nice to be able to receieve music directly to the iPod Touch (i.e. headphone listening to iTunes libraries without having to SYNC them to the Ipod touch first; I have way more music in my library than will fit on my iPod Touch, yet given I use it mostly as a remote to begin with, it'd be nice to be able to stream the entire collection when I want to listen with headphones in the house or the deck out back. Similarly, being able to transmit the phone's own library to an Airtunes device ought to be supported as well (it's like WHY NOT already? It'd be simple for them to implement given the WiFi capability of the device concerned).

How about direct remote control capability for AppleTV with a lot more buttons than that simple remote they give you? An iPod Touch could be the ultimate AppleTV remote. In fact, with a WiFi enabled infrared repeater transmitter (which you would plug in and mount somewhere pointed at the stereo equipment racks you have), you could effectively have an app to turn the thing into a Universal Remote and map out EVERY SINGLE FUNCTION (unlike most actual Universal remotes out there which miss device specific functions due to a lack of buttons or programming codes) and just install them with a little download of the template for a given remote.
 
MagnusVonMagnum said:
In any case, I'd much rather see an application that allows the iPhone or iPod Touch to transmit its own synced music to an Airtunes device directly (i.e. the iPhone acts as iTunes itself does and transmits its own music collection directly to the Airtunes device, thus eliminating the absolute need for a computer to be turned on in the first place). In other words, if you just want to play music from your iPhone or iPod Touch on your stereo from across the room, you can transmit straight to it via WiFi, not just control your computer in the house via WiFi (which I can already do via Remote Buddy and/or Signal) and have been able to do for several months.
Click to expand...

Okay folks, why aren't more people talking about the need for the feature mentioned by the above poster.

iTouch and iPhone should have the capability, via wi-fi, to send it's OWN music tracks to Airtunes (or Apple TV). Are there only a few people who think this is a no-brainer?

Why should I have my computer (a laptop, which has limited storage space to begin with) be my "music central"? And my laptop isn't always stationary, plugged in, ready for remote capabilities. Sometimes it's sitting on my countertop, in sleep mode. Other times I don't pull it out of my bag after work.

Remote controlling your iTunes collection off a computer hooked into your network is cool, but why limit the Airtunes playback in that way only? What if your friend brings over their iPhone or iTouch for the evening with a few music tracks they'd like to play on your stereo. Why should they have to PLUG IN to a minijack connected to your stereo?

Right now they do. It's strange that there is technology is embedded to move data wirelessly and yet you can't move music to your Airport directly from the handheld device.

They have wi-fi, I have wi-fi, everyone has wi-fi. Send it to my Airtunes directly, yo!

I think this is a bizarrely overlooked possible feature. Could there be a technical limitation?
 
I already use a app like this but i want the apple one

Well i'm really this app is coming but there is all ready a app out there just like this. I have used it before on a ipod touch. If i find it i will post another comment to let you know where u can find it...:apple:
 
Jmodamagicmofo said:
so do I need additional hardware for this?

I don't have airport or remote sensors. Will iTunes respond to my iPhone just through the wifi?:confused:
Click to expand...

Please, will someone just put a bullet in my head now to end my suffering?

This is not that complicated folks!
 
Oilbrnr said:
Please, will someone just put a bullet in my head now to end my suffering?

This is not that complicated folks!
Click to expand...

gee. Thanks for the sarcastic vomit. You could have at least answered my question. Some "folks" are new to this concept. Please clarify, genius. If you have the time to type, why waste it replying to a post you think is deserving of a bullet in your head.
 
Ipod Touch and Iphone have only 802.11b/g...

My network is setup with 802.11n, and both the iPod Touch and iPhone have "only" 802.11b/g.. Does that mean that in order to use this remote control I have to downgrade my Network? :(

Or could it be that the remote control functions over bluetooth, and the iPod Touch gets this as an upgrade on the 11th?

What are your thoughts anyway about the ipod touch getting the same plastic casing as the iPhone? I guess that would bring down manufacturing cost and would from a design point of view bring the devices more together?
 
streaming music directly from iPhone to AirPort Express would most likely kill your battery super fast. We are talking about a constant stream of data over WiFi here. With browsing you are generally using data only when you load a new page.
 
Project said:
joey112 said:
Old news, Apple .. Remote Buddy can already do this since last year:

http://www.iospirit.com/index.php?m...objcode=html-141&sid=7249477G5a60fba2d3ac9c52

It can also control Keynote, PowerPoint, Front Row, EyeTV, etc., etc. ... I guess Apple's software will look very pale in comparison ...
Click to expand...

performance is awful though with it being a web app
Click to expand...

I read on their forum they work on a native version. Should be faster than the current web implementation, then.
 
It'll 'just work'

peterdevries said:
My network is setup with 802.11n, and both the iPod Touch and iPhone have "only" 802.11b/g.. Does that mean that in order to use this remote control I have to downgrade my Network? :(
Click to expand...

They're interoperable. You won't have to change a thing.
 
Salling Clicker does the same thing on most mobiles. It's really fab, I use it all the time.

Have a look if you don't fancy an iPhone.
 
I'm suprised that all the people, who constantly claim that because of SOX, Apple has to take money for added functionality are utterly absent in this thread.

So much for the SOX-argument when defending Apple's price policy.
 
I've been wanting a feature like this for a long time.

I love having music playing all through my house via AirTunes, and normally we control it with my girlfriend's Macbook. Being able to do it from my phone will be amazing. This is the kind of stuff that I immediately saw the potential for when the iPhone debuted. Since Apple had already given us the Airport Express, I didn't think it was too far of a stretch to wish for something like this.

The smug sense of nerd satisfaction I'm going to feel at my next party is going to be wonderful.
 
Now we're talking...

I have a similar setup (Monster Cable Remote Controller with RF, made by Logitech Harmony) so I can control all my IR gear from anywhere in the house.

But, I've added whole house VIDEO using a Modulator from Smarthome.com. So whatever is being displayed in my living room is available on channel 77 (user selectable) on any TV. I have a Mac Mini with all my DVDs ripped to the hard drive (DVD2pod), a Sony DVD player, a Sony Playstation 2, and a Time Warner DVR. They all go through an A/V selector (Psyclone).

So, I kinda have this functionality, but with the iPhone app, it could be more elegant.

What would be nice is an IR emitter for the Mac, with software so the iPhone could control more than iTunes. The Mac Mini could be the A/V hub.

Mark Booth said:
Like several others, I have a fairly sophisticated home theater/sound system with speakers in multiple locations. I long ago removed the CD changer from my sound system and now use either an iPod (my A/V receiver has a direct iPod input) or my Mac Mini Home Theater PC to play music. My Mac Mini is hardwired to my local network so all of the music on all of the Macs in the house (5 in total) is available to the Mac Mini in the home theater room. Presently, I control my home theater/sound system with a PC-programmable IR/RF remote. All of my gear has IR repeaters (including the Mac Mini) and, thanks to the RF capabilities, I'm able to adjust volume, change tracks or change inputs on the A/V receiver from anywhere in the house. I can be in the garage listening to a particular playlist and kick up the volume or jump a track with a simple button press of the remote.

But what my current system doesn't let me do, is visually browse through the music remotely. I'd need an even fancier remote or video screens in each room to do that. It sure sounds like this iPhone application will solve that!!

This is VERY exciting news! Probably one of the best apps I could have hoped for for the iPhone! I hope Apple and/or 3rd party companies take it a bit farther and ultimately allow the iPhone to become a custom WiFi remote control for your entire A/V system! Imagine powering up your entire system (or just one component) via the customized touchscreen of your iPhone!

Mark
Click to expand...
 
ribdinner said:
Okay folks, why aren't more people talking about the need for the feature mentioned by the above poster.

...

Remote controlling your iTunes collection off a computer hooked into your network is cool, but why limit the Airtunes playback in that way only? What if your friend brings over their iPhone or iTouch for the evening with a few music tracks they'd like to play on your stereo. Why should they have to PLUG IN to a minijack connected to your stereo?
Click to expand...

I think the answer is kind of obvious, although I hope someone makes an app to do it an Apple doesn't block it. But I would imagine the REASON Apple hasn't done it already is that they make more money selling you a $50 dock that has audio outputs for your stereo (or some expensive set of cables) whereas an app on the iPhone that transmits to an existing Airtunes device you probably already have (one could argue that if you don't have it; they're going to make the money selling you an Airport Express or AppleTV, although given they don't include Airtunes with their regular Airport Extreme OR the Time Capsules that they don't really care about AirTunes all that much to begin with or they'd include it with all their WiFi products to 'get it out there' to more people's homes).

I mean seriously, there's a lot of "why doesn't Apple do this" type questions out there and MOST of them come down to 'because they make more money NOT doing it'. Examples include Instant Messenging apps on iPhone 1.0 while Apple was still getting revenue sharing from AT&T. To include an Instant Messenger would mean less money from text messenging so too bad, you don't get it until 2.0 when revenue sharing no longer exists (probably one reason Apple bailed on that pushing that deal this time around since so many whined about the lack of it and the 2.0 software with SDK means it's inevitable now). Look how many people say the reason we don't get a consumer level tower Mac is because Apple would much rather sell you a higher profit margin $2400 or $2700+ Mac Pro than a $1500 mini-tower even if it's total overkill for your needs. The iMac never gets so much as a single expansion slot (not even for video) because they want you to buy a new iMac every other year (more money selling you a new computer at $1500-2300 than letting you just upgrade your video card for a couple hundred bucks). Why include a user replaceable battery for iPhone when they can charge you to replace it at $80 a pop? Why make the hard drive user accessible on the MBP if they can charge you to do it at an Apple Store and make some more money?

Let's face it. So long as Apple makes most of their money selling hardware, not software, they're not going to be very consumer friendly in terms of helpful money-saving features or ones that bypass some hardware gadget (like docks) they want to sell you for 1/4 the cost of your iPod just to connect it to a stereo or charge the thing away from your computer.

I think this is a bizarrely overlooked possible feature. Is it possible that it might be a technical limitation? How?
Click to expand...

No, there's no technical limitation. The limitation is a financial one. Hopefully, this 2.0 SDK and a more software orientated Apple for iPhone this time around will lead to more software solutions. If they can sell you a little application for $20 that lets you transmit directly to AirTunes (or swipe $6.67 off the top of someone else's app that adds such functionality) then they'll probably offer it in the future.
 
Project said:
streaming music directly from iPhone to AirPort Express would most likely kill your battery super fast. We are talking about a constant stream of data over WiFi here. With browsing you are generally using data only when you load a new page.
Click to expand...

It does kill your battery super fast, even when using Signal or Remote Buddy as they stream updated data the whole time. Frankly, even if I'm not using ANY WiFi features but just have WiFi enabled, it severely cuts the battery life on my iPod Touch from 8+ hours to like 1.5 hours.

But what I do at home using it to control my whole house audio system is I have an AC charger device for the iPod Touch sitting on my little end table next to my listening chair and I just leave the iPod Touch plugged in there all the time except when I'm taking the device with me somewhere or to another room in the house. 95% of the time I have it plugged it where it runs off AC power as its primary function in my house is to control iTunes' Airtunes broadcasts to the AppleTV in that room (the wire is slightly annoying, but doesn't get in the way, really and then it doesn't use ANY battery power, thereby not shortening the life of the rechargeable battery in the iPod Touch that is not user serviceable).

Does that make it an expensive remote? Yup. But when you look at comparable systems out there (Sonos and the new Squeezebox with the color remote) it's quite a reasonable alternative price wise and has the added benefit of letting me surf the web, check e-mail, etc. in my living room. I can even view my mac's webcam on the iPod Touch using the function on Remote Buddy. Soon I'll be able to instant message and even play video games on it while listening to streamed music in the living room that it can control. Sonos and Squeezebox can't do that and the touch interface is much more responsive to use and easier to navigate, IMO. Having to plug it in to conserve battery life is a small price to pay, IMO and still beats having to get up to change the song or having to have a monitor turned on just to change a song (thinking of AppleTV's own interface to iTunes here) I'm not sure you can even plug in the new Squeezebox or Sonos remotes if you WANT to to save on their batteries.

Given an app-based remote control for iTunes will be able to buffer all the data on the iPhone/iPod Touch itself, it should be a bit more battery friendly this time around anyway.
 
chewy5000 said:
They're interoperable. You won't have to change a thing.
Click to expand...

No, he means will he have to degrade his network performance to "G" from "N" in order to use this feature. The answer is essentially YES, he will have to degrade it if that is the only network in his house. It won't slow to quite "G" speeds, but it will be compromised.

Really, you can get an older B/G router for $30-40 to run alongside an N router if speed is truly paramount. Personally, I use a 2nd network (it's N also since it's run off the new Airport Express 802.11N model), but I allow N devices to connect only to that network. The NetGear DraftN router I have (which tests faster than the Airport Express by far in N mode) is for N devices only here.
 
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