If Apple ends up adding a app store really soon then they have really messed up. I was ready to buy a set top box but was waiting to see what apple was going to release before i made my decision. Once they announced it, i was not that impressed and the ROKU box won my decision. Now, if they decide to add a app store, that could have swayed me in Apples favor as that was what i was hoping for in the first place. Im sure im not the only one this happened too. If they had any plans to add this huge of a feature, they should have announced it will be coming in the future, or simply held off on releasing the box until the app store was ready.
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.
New Apple TV Allows App Installation, Needs Launcher
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, and how people jailbroke their iPhone 1 to get apps, and then Apple came out with the App Store... But I guess people like to experiment to predict what will be possible in the future, or just out of curiosity. I'd like to know how a game would look on the ATV for example...
What if the ATV could get support for 3rd party remotes, with more buttons and stuff!
What's the problem with old games? Just because something is old doesn't mean you have to stop liking it. NES games were probably the best games ever made, which is why people still play them. At that time developers actually had to be creative and make a challenging game rather than all the 3D cr*p based on the exact same concept every time.
I'm glad there are Commodore games on the App Store, but I really don't get why there aren't any NES games. Most App Store games get me bored after 20 seconds, after which I never play the game again. The NES was the only time I could play games without putting them down for hours and days.
From what I understand, it's more of a copyright issue, Commodore software, a lot of the time were released as free code to who ever wanted it. As for Nintendo, there were a lot more measures taken to protect the titles.
Yeah, looks like I'm being pulled in. I'm going to get mines already. This is going to get good. 
No, because that is a solution where you pay for channels that you don't use. I'm talking about tv on demand, for a fixed subscription across all networks. It'll never happen, but it would be amazing.
Huh? I'm not looking at my mouse and keyboard while playing Call of Duty. I don't look at my trackpad to control the mouse on my computer.
?!?!?
Because back then, when we didn't have hyper-realistic 3D graphics, developers had to focus on making good game play. Good game play means longevity.
Do you complain your chess pieces don't look realistic enough? Would that make playing chess better?
Of course. We all do, but that doesn't mean the old games are no longer fun to play.
The thread is about the potential for applications on the AppleTV. Really. Check the title.
How does your touch pad work on your laptop? Do you need to look at it while you use it? Does it allow you to control your computer?
You're right about the mouse driver though - even though the little AppleTV can decode jpegs, pngs, play multiple audio formats, h264 video, has complete network connectivity, etc. - asking it to run some mouse driver code might be a little too much.
Cheers!
TV renders DVR obsolete.You watch what you want when you want to. There's no ongoing stream to capture and time-shift a la DVR.
Part of Apple's business model is "it's OK to tell users technology X is obsolete and we're not supporting it anymore."
You want to watch something? you pay a buck and watch it. No need to schedule a recording. Want to watch it again? it's worth more then, innit? pay a buck and watch it again.
It's 2010. The VCR model is dead.
People forget that 15 years is a lot of time to forget about the crappy stuff and glamorize the memory of the good. Comparing the filtered best of ages past to the totality of what's available now is unfair and unreasonable. Decades hence, we'll remember Grand Theft Auto and Portal and WoW and ..., while forgetting about the racks full of crud for sale now.
And of those memorable great old games, how many are still popular? played by new gamers? that would be ... pretty much none.
Google TV
Actually Google already got a lot of apps in the pipeline for Google TV.
http://www.google.com/tv/
It looks pretty neat, though that Logitech box isn't so nice.
Actually Google already got a lot of apps in the pipeline for Google TV.
http://www.google.com/tv/
It looks pretty neat, though that Logitech box isn't so nice.
You didn't actually read this thread, did you?
Hmm, interesting you would say I'm not reading the title when you didn't read the first sentence. Note:
This thread is about current apps. While the site is titled MacRumors, and entitled to post whatever, this one is silly. Current iOS apps are meant for touching them directly, as in, you have to look at what you are touching. Unless your TV is really a large touchscreen, the current apps will not really function on the current
TV. And I meant mouse cursor/arrow in that post, sorry for the confusion. Meaning there's no control function whatsoever. So...no launcher as of yet, no control as of yet. Pretty pointless for existing apps, IMO.
You watch what you want when you want to. There's no ongoing stream to capture and time-shift a la DVR.
Part of Apple's business model is "it's OK to tell users technology X is obsolete and we're not supporting it anymore."
You want to watch something? you pay a buck and watch it. No need to schedule a recording. Want to watch it again? it's worth more then, innit? pay a buck and watch it again.
It's 2010. The VCR model is dead.
Only if all of your content is available somewhere, or you don't mind paying that much. Which it isn't, not for me, anyway. I just dropped my expensive TV, why would I want to start up, again? But it's ok, DVRs for the Mac also cost $99. If you think VCR = DVR, you're just blind.
Cost analysis:
I have 2 DVR tuners at the moment, cost $198, could have saved $10 at Amazon, but I had reason to buy everything at once. (I'm just ignoring tax for simplicity) I personally, not counting the other 4 members of the family or live sports, watch 7 shows in the fall lineup, IIRC. At $.99/episode (just assume they are all available for that price, which they aren't) and 22 episodes for the season, that is $152.46. That already paid for 1.5 of my DVRs which get these shows for "free" forever, and I haven't even added in my wife's shows, yet. She watches more than I do. Or the summer shows we watch, or reruns.
Even $.99 is way too much for TV. Give me a $10 season and I'll consider it.
Nah, that's still too much. DVR still renders
TV obsolete, or at least, stupid. I've said it before: 
It's just an expensive shortcut for those that can't be bothered to find a way to plug in the PC/Mac directly.
This just seems like such on obvious way to sneak in through the back door of the console gaming market. Sure, any such games would lag pretty far behind the competition from sony, microsoft and nintendo, I still think there'd be a market for them.
Edit: I don't think anybody seriously thought the iphone would be a handheld gaming device at launch, but now iphones and ipod touches are competing against the nintendo ds and psp.
Edit: I don't think anybody seriously thought the iphone would be a handheld gaming device at launch, but now iphones and ipod touches are competing against the nintendo ds and psp.
Current iOS apps are meant for touching them directly, as in, you have to look at what you are touching. Unless your TV is really a large touchscreen, the current apps will not really function on the current
There is the whole category of non-location-specific pointer gestures. One could do a lot sans mouse pointer using the Wireless Touchpad (swipe left/right/up/down to scroll to a selection, generic click to pick whatever is selected, other vague gestures for additional options). Think about how much of that you do already on the iP*.
It's a cheap shortcut for those who can't afford a spare PC/Mac to devote to the viewing-room TV.
Short of OTA (not an option for some of us), most people still have to pay for content delivery somehow. Facing $X/month for any other option (X>=60 for most), that maps to X rented shows per month. Your viewing habits may result in a different financial answer, but for me ... if my family is watching more than 60 shows per month we need to find something more productive to do.
Yes, content availability is an issue. Then again, regardless of source your content will be limited. For now, I'd rather forego a few mindless time-wasters in favor of promoting on-demand commercial-free content.
Hey, if OTA + DVR works for you, great;
TV isn't for you. On-demand still obsoletes limited-content restricted-schedule commercial-laden time-delay systems though, and $99 for a devoted box trumps $999 for a devoted computer.
Eyetv app
No need for a dvr on the atv when elgato simply port their eyetv app to the atv. That will give you full dvr with live ota streaming.
Looking forward to it.
Ed.
No need for a dvr on the atv when elgato simply port their eyetv app to the atv. That will give you full dvr with live ota streaming.
Looking forward to it.
Ed.
Yep, you understand the point of the device. I don't think everyone else does quite yet.
BTW:
=+
The left side of the equation, of course, being considerably more than $60.
Fixed.
The Mac Mini is required on both sides of the equation unless you plan on only streaming from the cloud, thus it gets dropped if you know anything about maths (we'll leave out the pesky monthly costs for dedicated broadband). This leaves a 55$ USB adapter and a 5$ HDMI cable.