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

Beyond AirTunes?

JGowan said:
I think you're thinking of this backwards. The way I see it, Apple is not counting on BRAND NEW customers who only own a computer+iTunes to sell the Airport Express and an additional remote. I think they want to sell Airport Express to the 2,000,000+ people who already OWN an iPod.
Click to expand...
I think they are going for both customers. However, after looking at the sonos I think it's the answer to most peoples questions. Streaming audio to any system in the house, each with its own remote if you want, and the remote has all the information that is neccessary to browse your music library/playlist.

Down sides:
1. Can't play DRMed music (which is pretty lame).
2. The price needs to come way down (this will happen over time as all things do).
3. Looks like Apple is having a hissy over this system and might go to court over a few items.

You have to give it to sonos for designing such a nice looking piece of equipment and software package. I hope either Apple or sonos brings this to market at a reasonable price. I know I'd buy it. I did have an order for the roku but canceled it in hopes of Apple or sonos bringing their product out in the next few months.

All though I wanted to see the house get music through the ipod, I guess a system like this would be better incase you left your ipod at work. All I have to do now is remember to bring the laptop home as well. Decisions decisions.
 
DavidFDM said:
Has everyone seen the pricing Tivo is doing for their Series2 DVRs? I have been considering buying a new Tivo so I can have it do the work of AirTunes, plus all the DVR work. The USB printer sharing and 10 user router has little interest to me.
Click to expand...
The problem with Tivo is that Apple won't license Fairplay so even though the Tivo can access iTunes, it can't play songs bought from the iTMS.

This is the same thing that Roku's Soundbrige is running into. I little while ago, the guy from Roku posted that they have asked Apple to license Fairplay, but Apple wouldn't. Now we know why Apple is unwilling to license the DRM out to others. It's to prevent companies like Tivo and Roku from competing with the AExp.

EDIT - Oops, I just realized that I replied to a post from Page 3. I thought I was on the last page. If this point has been brought up, then I apologize.
 
Regarding wifi remote for AExp ...

I didn't see this idea mentioned in this thread or any other thread.

The main limitation of the AExp for streaming music is if your Mac is in a room other than the one that it's streaming to. There's no way to see what's playing or what's next. Plus, you can't control stuff like fast forward, skip, etc.

So instead of adding wifi to the iPod for streaming into the AExp, maybe what Apple should design is a small iTunes controller. This controller would have a small black/white screen and a few buttons (maybe the same layout as the miniPod). The internals would have an integrated 11g card.

The controller would pick up information from either the AExp or the streaming Mac. So on the controller's screen, you'd see which playlist your on, what song's playing, what's coming up, etc. If you want to change the playlist, or skip the song, you'd press a couple of buttons and the controller would send a signal to the AExp and the AExp would tranmit that signal to the Mac. The Mac would then do what you wanted.

The beauty of this is that you'd only need one controller since you could access multiple AExp's if you have them. So when you walked into another room that is streaming music from a second Mac, you'd automatically pick up that information and it'd be displayed on the little screen.

Price the controller at $79 and Apple would sell a bunch of them.
 
JGowan said:
Edgar_is_Devil's_Advocate: I think you're thinking of this backwards. The way I see it, Apple is not counting on BRAND NEW customers who only own a computer+iTunes to sell the Airport Express and an additional remote. I think they want to sell Airport Express to the 2,000,000+ people who already OWN an iPod. If Airport Express is something an iPod can control, people will see that they are already considerably vested in having this technology in their home. What's another $129 when you've spent the bulk of the cash already?<snip>
Click to expand...
I disagree. Already, my sister at my parents house will be able to play music from her PC straight to an Airport. She doesn't use iTunes, but she could convert her WMP files and she'd be pretty happy. She's a new user, so the only money Apple makes is on the Airport Express which my father wants. Of course...if my sister gets iTunes and later decides to buy a portable music player... which will she choose?

You know, we talk about this cheaper "dumb" tablet (a terminal) for walking around the house doing simple things like web browsing (or iTunes control) via a wireless connection to a Mac - Apple could do it just as well to a Windows machine really. I mean if it was a smart tablet it doesn't need a computer at all. If it's a dumb tablet then it has limited functions and Apple could serve those functions just as well from a PC. People could buy the tablet without having a Mac. (oh, I have ALWAYS preferred a company that sells a product that integrates with whatever you've got, so maybe I'm dreaming. Other things being equal a company like that will get my money - but Apple hasn't had a history of allowing interoperability, except when it has no choice. Pity!)

smorr said:
What Apple really should do is license the technology to stereo component manufacturers (Toshiba, technica, Aiwa, Sony etc) so that they can cheaply add air express technology straight into their systems and make the protocol (with Fairplay) pervasive in Stereos in addition to iPods.
Click to expand...
That's really interesting. Maybe Airport eXpress is the foot in the door, and what you say is the next plan. Those devices would need to have a play, pause, next button - a remote control would be necessary.
 
hmmm...

Well, the thing that is well more than clear is that Apple is creating a new market. APExpress is the teaser for whatever product will fill the glaring hole that we never knew existed until APExpress materialized. We're all sitting here asking ourselves how we're going to control it and patching together solutions via Salling Clicker or some other makeshift idea. Meanwhile Jobs and Joswiak already know how we're going to control it, and I doubt it's some new twist on the iPod or a questionably useful detachable tablet/monitor. I smell new product, they're clearly setting us up. My concern is that it will have pricing problems of...well... cubic proportions. It's gonna be good though, whatever it is.
 
video...

One point, or rather hint, that video streaming may be in the near future is found in some of the new apple.com/trailers videos. Notably, 'the incredibles'.

The full screen trailer requires you to have Itunes 4.5 and actually launches the video directly from iTunes. Doesn't take a rocket scientiest to figure out what fun can be had from this...
 
i see (eventually) a single computer in a house and the ability to operate it from anywhere in range by use of one of these things. have a display, keyboard, speaker, dvd/cd drive and mouse set up in every room if you so desire but the computer on the other side of the house. that would be beautiful. rather than networking computers let the computer become the network.
 
Use the laptop

I will be sitting on my couch tapping away on my laptop, once my Airport Express untethers me from my cable modem, and control the stereo's music from iTunes on my laptop. A remote control would be useful, I imagine, for those who keep the computer at their desk. What's the use of a WiFi iPod when we already have docks and FM transmitter devices can already stream the music to a stereo from an iPod?
 
Backwards

feeze said:
I agree a remote control that costs more than the product is just stupid.
Click to expand...

You're looking at it backwards, AirPort Express is an accessory to the iPod not the other way around.
 
again I wonder

If the Airport Express can be used with an omnidirectional (bluetooth?) mic. to input voice commands to the network. Also, using text to speech you could control the tunes or music with your voice. no remote needed. "computer play next track" or "computer play PARTY playmix"

"Computer play X movie" ... "increase volume 25%" "Computer MUTE"

Computer Voice - "There is an incoming call from (555) 555-5555 Your Mother shall I transfer it to this room?"

Voice is the most useful of remotes.

again I am hoping in this OS for os XX

🙂
 
GregA said:
I disagree. Already, my sister at my parents house will be able to play music from her PC straight to an Airport. She doesn't use iTunes, but she could convert her WMP files and she'd be pretty happy. She's a new user, so the only money Apple makes is on the Airport Express which my father wants. Of course...if my sister gets iTunes and later decides to buy a portable music player... which will she choose?
Click to expand...
Obviously, there are going to be people (such as your sister) that legitimitely is interested but are at SQUARE ONE, having neither AEpress nor the IPOD. I even said that a 3rd party company will most likely swoop in to put together a modestly-priced remote for those not wanting to get an ipod, but wanting the functionality of control of music in conjunction of computer AEpress. But, I still maintain that only a stupid company would not try to sell this new base station to their huge install base of ipod users.

Time will tell. It's obvious that we will SOMEHOW be able to control MUSIC with AExpress in some fashion. Whether it's with another device you think Apple is going to make or built into the IPOD in some way, we'll see soon enough.

I still maintain that 4th Generation Ipods will have it built it, while 3rd Generation Ipods might have to buy a small adapter that fits on top of the ipod (in the spirit of Griffin's iTalk or iTrip) and have new firmware. I say it will NOT be an entirely OTHER REMOTE. And I can't wait to be proven right.
 
iTerminal

I believe, that what will be introduced with 10.4 is Terminal Services made 'the right way' by Apple. As an addition to that a new device will be introduced, called 'iTerminal', which in fact was predicted before; check this page !

iTerminal

Think of a traditional *nix terminal. Now bring it into the 21st century by replacing the monochrome-green CRT with a touch-sensitive flat-panel, and having it use Airport instead of an Ethernet cable to communicate with nearby Macs. Include Apple Remote Desktop to allow users to create sessions with their main workstations, or to use the iTerminal as a slideshow display for an iPhoto album stored elsewhere on the network.
Click to expand...


It is obvious, mark this:
- 10.3 has some code related to virtual desktops. It will work in 10.4 as a possibility to run more than 1 desktop at the time, what's more - you can run yours AND other desktops (like Iterminal's!)
- until Itunes 4.6 you couldn't run more than one Itunes at the same time (for example on more logged user sessions), hey, now you can! Ring a bell?
- iTerminal will be remote 802.11g device. Why, you ask, not to put headset jack into it and skip all Airport Express-stuff? Simple; iTerminal supposed to be a remote device, your speakers are not.
- MacOSX is in fact Unix, terminals in Unix world are know better then alphabet to human kind. Microsoft has Terminal Services that works fine, with unit like wireless iTerminal Apple will kick some a......

If the remote we are discussing around here about will be in fact iTerminal keep in mind, that all iTerminal sessions are held on your Mac (which can be anywhere), so if iTerminal dies due to lack of power - your session remains and you can connect to it at any time, even using your Mac.

What's more - you could have up to 10 iTerminals with your 10.4 Pather all around the house (they will be cheep), so in fact your rooms will look like a interiors shown in Solaris movie.
 
ftaok said:
I didn't see this idea mentioned in this thread or any other thread.

The main limitation of the AExp for streaming music is if your Mac is in a room other than the one that it's streaming to. There's no way to see what's playing or what's next. Plus, you can't control stuff like fast forward, skip, etc.

So instead of adding wifi to the iPod for streaming into the AExp, maybe what Apple should design is a small iTunes controller. This controller would have a small black/white screen and a few buttons (maybe the same layout as the miniPod). The internals would have an integrated 11g card.
Click to expand...

Many people have been talking about this on various boards, but it's not clear why you'd use wifi. The need for that kind of bandwidth just isn't there (unless you're talking about streaming right off an ipod). If it's just a remote, you could probably do bluetooth and it would be smaller, lighter, and lower power.

Right now it seems there are two camps: adding wireless to ipod and an ipod-lookalike remote. I'm in the latter, pro bluetooth. Of course, there's probably a reason Steve has never asked my opinion, so take it for what it's worth.
 
I think the fact that blue tooth has a smaller range.. (I believe)
Also the airport express is an 802.11 device and therefore it'd be logical to use that technology. I also think that if needed the air tunes remote could show album cover art or other info maybe...
I think bandwidth isn't the reason wifi would be used.. more of a distance and the fact that the base station uses it
 
Dehuti said:
I believe, that what will be introduced with 10.4 is Terminal Services made 'the right way' by Apple. As an addition to that a new device will be introduced, called 'iTerminal', which in fact was predicted before; check this page !




It is obvious, mark this:
- 10.3 has some code related to virtual desktops. It will work in 10.4 as a possibility to run more than 1 desktop at the time, what's more - you can run yours AND other desktops (like Iterminal's!)
- until Itunes 4.6 you couldn't run more than one Itunes at the same time (for example on more logged user sessions), hey, now you can! Ring a bell?
- iTerminal will be remote 802.11g device. Why, you ask, not to put headset jack into it and skip all Airport Express-stuff? Simple; iTerminal supposed to be a remote device, your speakers are not.
- MacOSX is in fact Unix, terminals in Unix world are know better then alphabet to human kind. Microsoft has Terminal Services that works fine, with unit like wireless iTerminal Apple will kick some a......

If the remote we are discussing around here about will be in fact iTerminal keep in mind, that all iTerminal sessions are held on your Mac (which can be anywhere), so if iTerminal dies due to lack of power - your session remains and you can connect to it at any time, even using your Mac.

What's more - you could have up to 10 iTerminals with your 10.4 Pather all around the house (they will be cheep), so in fact your rooms will look like a interiors shown in Solaris movie.
Click to expand...


Actually, iTunes 4.5 could run in multiple users.
 
abc123 said:
i see (eventually) a single computer in a house and the ability to operate it from anywhere in range by use of one of these things. have a display, keyboard, speaker, dvd/cd drive and mouse set up in every room if you so desire but the computer on the other side of the house. that would be beautiful. rather than networking computers let the computer become the network.
Click to expand...

these computer ideas are like the big rooms full of computers with just 'terminals....'
 
TednDi said:
a handheld video RECORDER attached to the ipod4??

you could record in and playback in quicktime storing it on your 60gb harddrive?

then import to imovie, etc,....

not a pda not a camera

vpod?

for an example see

http://www.videodirect.com/panasonic/digitalmusicplayer/sv-as10s.html
Click to expand...

HA! This is the beginning of what I've been saying, iSight + iPod equals camera. Go another step further and iChat AV to go (yes this needs develpment but still. . . )
 
compromise

edgar_is_good said:
Many people have been talking about this on various boards, but it's not clear why you'd use wifi. The need for that kind of bandwidth just isn't there (unless you're talking about streaming right off an ipod). If it's just a remote, you could probably do bluetooth and it would be smaller, lighter, and lower power.

Right now it seems there are two camps: adding wireless to ipod and an ipod-lookalike remote. I'm in the latter, pro bluetooth. Of course, there's probably a reason Steve has never asked my opinion, so take it for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

How about this compromise:
1- plug an external bluetooth adapter in the USB port of AExpress. (might or might not be possible with current firmware)
2- plug a similar adapter on the iPod (or use a specific bluetooth remote control)
3- a bit of software magic (rendezvous? + software update for the iPod)...
4- point your device at AExpress and you can remote control your mac station via AExpress, as it will act as a relay between the remote and the mac!

This is useful when the mac is too far to be remote controlled directly via bluetooth (i.e. Mac in the office, AExpress in the living room), and would not require battery intensive WiFi on the iPod.

Is this feasible? Realistic? Practical?
 
Calebj14 said:
these computer ideas are like the big rooms full of computers with just 'terminals....'
Click to expand...

What do you call xServe render farms with xSan load-balancing the entire group onto a single array of drives? I call it the future of consumer computing, as Apple sees it.

A while ago - to the tune of two or three months before the annnouncement of xSan - I posted some ideas that my dad and I had been kicking around for a while. Apple was looking into networked computing a while ago, talking with Oracle and others about netbooting and limited aspects of this technology. They already offer a VNC client that runs natively in OSX, thought it's currently too expensive for most home users ($299 for Apple Remote Desktop). They have experience in scalable processing and network storage, with the xServe and xServe RAID as proof of concept pieces, and the forthcoming xGrid as the glue to bind it all together.

Perhaps they won't go all the way into a terminal model. I'd rather they didn't, actually, and stuck with powerful machines in individual cases, but moved into an area that has been unexploited so far. Say that you've jumped onto the the digital video bandwagon and want to archive your family movies, or keep that growing collection of media you've bought online in a central location, or any of a hundred tasks we don't even know we're going to want to do until Apple shows us how easy it can be... How do you do it?

In my vision, they go with a proven model of computing - centralization of resources. Bear with me, here.

Say that you have three or four computers on a network at home, but not all of them are always in use. Now, you could turn the spare clock cycles of the idling ones into useable processing with the advent of ever-higher speed networking and good code (xGrid, just to name Apple's take on it). Add to this a community storage device, call it the iStore or something like that, and maybe a consumer-grade rackmount node. The iStore is a networked RAID chassis, probably in a rackmount style enclosure, which lets you add drives and share them with a more limited and user-friendly version of xSan. The computing nodes speed up things like DVD encoding and other processor intesive tasks, along with your daily use machines.

Why do it this way? Power management, among other things. Computers that aren't in use or supplementing others can power down into sleep and listen on the network for a signal that they're needed. The iStore means that computer form factors could be smaller without much sacrifice, and moving the bulk of your equipment off the desk means having more things available to do with the design of stationary machines. In fact, as wireless advances (802.15.3 is supposed to approach 200-400Mbit/s, or the current wired speed of IEEE1394a "FireWire"), this could be a way to make laptops all that much more viablle as a choice. You have your serious processing resources where they can be powered properly, and a powerful-as-possible platform you carry around with you.

As a footnote to my remark about bandwidth, the current high-speed consumer technology is 150MB/s Serial ATA. This is only 17% faster than gigabit ethernet (128MB/s), which Apple sells standard on many of their machines at this point, and 10GBE (or 10 gigabit Ethernet) is in the works. We're supposed to see SATA change sometime this year or early next year, as well, to 300MB/s, which would wouldn't come close to the 1,280MB/s bandwidth of a 10GBE connection. Even the next planned SATA revision, due in 2007, wouldn't seriously stress 10GBE, because it would only be 600MB/s. I'm no electrical engineer, but aside from latency issues, why would you want to stick with drives inside a chassis at that point? Your network is now twice as fast as your hard disk and there's no way it can keep up.
 
edgar_is_good said:
Many people have been talking about this on various boards, but it's not clear why you'd use wifi. The need for that kind of bandwidth just isn't there (unless you're talking about streaming right off an ipod). If it's just a remote, you could probably do bluetooth and it would be smaller, lighter, and lower power.

Right now it seems there are two camps: adding wireless to ipod and an ipod-lookalike remote. I'm in the latter, pro bluetooth. Of course, there's probably a reason Steve has never asked my opinion, so take it for what it's worth.
Click to expand...
The main reason that I'm thinking wi-fi is range. True you would presumably have the remote in close proximity to the AExp unit, so that may not be an issue. The second reason is that I'm not sure that Bluetooth could handle the live updatiing of information from the Mac that I was describing. Maybe it can, I don't know.

Besides, wifi is pretty cheap these days. I don't think using wifi would be that much more expensive, if at all.
 
Steve Jobs doesn't believe in the media centre PC.

This is the key thing here: people do not really want a computer in their living room. Or their bedroom if they can help it. Even the cutest little Mac doesn't look all that good in either.

Jobs' money is on ancillary devices linked to the computer by wifi. The Airport Express shows this clearly. I don't think we're going to get anything that looks like a computer in the living room from Apple except for a laptop. So, a wifi iPod? Sure. Video out on AE Express 2? I'd be suprised if it didn't happen. Wi-fi tablet? Not a chance, except for maybe a very limited remote control device which would look more like one of the high-end programmable remotes than a tablet. At most capable of displaying album covers. Though even that is going to cost EUR200.00 or so, which is just too close to an iPod in price.

Jobs is betting that Microsoft are dead wrong, as is everyone trying to put a PC in the livingi room.

Colman
 
Yep

caveman_uk said:
It shouldn't be too didficult to sort out a remote. Can't salling clicker control itunes with a bluetooth mobile phone?
Click to expand...

Yep, and it rocks. My Sony Erricsson T610 with Salling Clicker rocks with my 17" AlBook... bluetooth is wonderful. Now I've ordered my Airport Express I'll be even happier. :-D
 
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