Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next Generation AppleTV References Found in iOS 5, But When?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is really annoying, my cat spilled a glass of water on our TV remote and it stopped working form any distance farther than 6 inches.
Is this a problem with the remote or the ATV2 ? Have you tried new batteries in the remote ?
We have done the same as you, mainly watch Netflix over the ATV2. It is a fantastic gadget. We would have cut the cable TV, but we got 2 years of free TV from FIOS for switching to FIOS internet, TV, and phone. When the 2 year contract is over we will just drop the FIOS TV.
is iOS 5 coming to the second gen AppleTV on the 12th Oct too?
Press release says " iOS 5 software will be available on October 12 as a free software update via iTunes 10.5 for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch customers."
But i assume you need iOS 5 for icloud etc
anyone?
Press release says " iOS 5 software will be available on October 12 as a free software update via iTunes 10.5 for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch customers."
But i assume you need iOS 5 for icloud etc
anyone?
Same here. I will just wait for the inevitable refresh to A5.
A thought? TV will be refreshed with the iPad in Q1. So TV/iPad late winter/early spring and iPhone/iPod in early fall.
Going to buy a new 1080p TV soon, so if they came out with a 1080p Apple TV, I'd definitely buy it.
I want Apple to bring true a la carte programming to consumers...how great would it be to turn that 50$ cable bill into a leaner version of preferred shows.
For instance, I'd pay 3.99 per month for AMC Streaming, 10.99 Showtime, 2.99 Nickelodeon, 1.99 CNN...etc. And major networks could be free (Fox, CBS, NBC). They could still keep commercials (since I'm not paying the premium of show rentals), but could do them in a very user savvy way (akin to web advertising).
I could have a 20.00 per month bill for only the channels that my family watches. The networks would make more money as well (I doubt folks like AMC get 10% of my monthly bill sent to them from the service providers). Lastly, Apple could easily integrate a purchase/rent option into the service ("I see you watched Mad Men Season 5 last week on AMC, would you like to rent previous seasons on iTunes?")
For instance, I'd pay 3.99 per month for AMC Streaming, 10.99 Showtime, 2.99 Nickelodeon, 1.99 CNN...etc. And major networks could be free (Fox, CBS, NBC). They could still keep commercials (since I'm not paying the premium of show rentals), but could do them in a very user savvy way (akin to web advertising).
I could have a 20.00 per month bill for only the channels that my family watches. The networks would make more money as well (I doubt folks like AMC get 10% of my monthly bill sent to them from the service providers). Lastly, Apple could easily integrate a purchase/rent option into the service ("I see you watched Mad Men Season 5 last week on AMC, would you like to rent previous seasons on iTunes?")
You can already control the Apple TV from your iPhone, iPod touch or iPad. There's an Apple app called "Remote" that's in the App Store. It's been around forever.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Why say this? Why continue to feed the perception of it as a one-dimensional product (only content from the iTunes store is applicable)? For the majority of consumers the first source of content for iTunes was NOT the iTunes store but ripping their own CD collection.
With
TV, content is sourced from many places other than the iTunes store. For example, an iPhoto collection probably has NO photos "purchased" from the iTunes store, yet they flow to the home TV via TV.Ripping a DVD collection is far from the simplicity of ripping a CD collection, but it can be done... and is done... to make the personal movie collection readily available on the home TV via
TV (no iTunes store link required).Almost every decent camera and any camcorder can shoot video. Apple provides tools (like iMovie) to edit that video. Renders from iMovie can go right into iTunes. Those will easily play on
TV too. Personally, I have our whole home (family) movie collection in iTunes and readily available on TV (none of that came from the iTunes store).Now, good cameras, iPhones and most HD camcorders shoot 1080p video. iMovie will edit & render that in 1080 too. It will go right into iTunes as 1080 content too. It just can't get from iTunes to the HDTV as a 1080p stream (the current model down converts it 720p). It is the ONE weak link in this Apple chain.
The point is that there are abundant (and legal) sources of content for
TV besides the iTunes store. It is not just a device through which to buy or rent content from there (even Apple agrees by adding other sources like Netflix support, airplay, etc).I think it makes great sense to launch an 1080p capable
TV BEFORE there is 1080p content in the iTunes store. The hardware must lead. Until there is lots of 1080p TVs in homes, there is no way for any studio to even test the profit potential of 1080p content for TVs in the iTunes store. Get the hardware going into homes and the software can follow. Between the time those 1080p
TVs start going into homes and when some Studio decides to test 1080p content, the TV3 will still play all existing content to it's fullest potential, much like quad core hardware in Macs can still run software coded for single core hardware. Lead with the hardware and the software owners will be tempted to exploit that newer hardware (it doesn't work the other way). Personally, I'm very encouraged by this new discovery. Hopefully, it's not another 4-year delay for the next round of new hardware. I've got 4+ years of 1080HD video shot on camcorders begging for a native Apple solution that doesn't involve downconversion to 720p. And for my own situation, I could care less if there is ever 1080p content for rent or sale in the iTunes store.
If it supports 1080p, I'm buying the next version. I don't have one yet, and the only thing holding me back is the 1080p... It needs to match the rest of my home theatre system. 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm not sure I understand these "I need an App Store on my ATV before I buy one". This is exactly what AirPlay/Mirroring accomplishes. Having a native App Store for your TV is going to pose many problems that will need to be solved before its introduction. Mainly, how will control these apps. Computers and iDevices already have a beautiful way to control their apps; the trackpad and touch screen. At this point, if Apple was going to introduce native ATV apps, you'll need to control them with either a keyboard (too clunky, not Apple's MO) or your regular TV remote (also something Apple who never want to do). The current ATV apps are very basic and are navigated very well with the traditional remote. I can't see this happening if Apple put out an SDK for the ATV. If they limited apps to only be controlled by a traditional remote, they would blow.
I'm not sure I understand these "I need an App Store on my ATV before I buy one". This is exactly what AirPlay/Mirroring accomplishes. Having a native App Store for your TV is going to pose many problems that will need to be solved before its introduction. Mainly, how will control these apps. Computers and iDevices already have a beautiful way to control their apps; the trackpad and touch screen. At this point, if Apple was going to introduce native ATV apps, you'll need to control them with either a keyboard (too clunky, not Apple's MO) or your regular TV remote (also something Apple who never want to do). The current ATV apps are very basic and are navigated very well with the traditional remote. I can't see this happening if Apple put out an SDK for the ATV. If they limited apps to only be controlled by a traditional remote, they would blow.
A5 has been damped up for some time.
The problem is going to 28nm or smaller to lower power. I'm actually hoping that somebody does an iPhone 4S tear down and disassembles the A5 chip in there. I'm wondering ifvthere was a prices shrink relative to the A5 in the iPad.
In any event I would rather see an A6 in the AppleTV upgrade. Why? For hopefully vastly improved graphics, a bit more integration and better core CPU performance. the A5 would result in a massive improvement to AppleTV today, but in an upgrade 12 months away might be a little to little by then.
AppStore would be significant but would be huge if they where to enable access to that USB port. It would be even better if that USB port where a standard connector that supported USB currents up to 500 mA. A little bit of I/O could go a very long way to enabling many different types of apps. We are talking everything from weather stations to flight simulator cockpits here. You don't need a lot of I/O but having none is a serious limitation in the other direction.
The problem is going to 28nm or smaller to lower power. I'm actually hoping that somebody does an iPhone 4S tear down and disassembles the A5 chip in there. I'm wondering ifvthere was a prices shrink relative to the A5 in the iPad.
Ramped up? Come on. The iPad has been in production how long now?
In any event I would rather see an A6 in the AppleTV upgrade. Why? For hopefully vastly improved graphics, a bit more integration and better core CPU performance. the A5 would result in a massive improvement to AppleTV today, but in an upgrade 12 months away might be a little to little by then.
AppStore would be significant but would be huge if they where to enable access to that USB port. It would be even better if that USB port where a standard connector that supported USB currents up to 500 mA. A little bit of I/O could go a very long way to enabling many different types of apps. We are talking everything from weather stations to flight simulator cockpits here. You don't need a lot of I/O but having none is a serious limitation in the other direction.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
If I was running this show at Apple, I'd launch this thing ASAP. With the few issues/shortcomings fixed in a "third time is the charm" update, I suspect it would be a massively hot seller for the holiday season. I'd buy a bunch of them as gifts for friends (and finally update my own too).
I think this "hobby" could be huge for Apple if they would just get on with finishing the evolution so that it fully competes with the max video & audio playback specs of BD and incorporates a few of the bigger wishes that remain unfulfilled in the current version.
----------
So the "remote" will be more expensive than the player? Don't think so. It's a fine option but it shouldn't be THE way to control an
TV. iDevices tend to leave the living room when their owners go out for the day, a trip, etc. Those left behind will not be very happy if the "remote" leaves with it's owner.Besides, the prior iterations of the
TV can already use other iDevices as controllers.
WQell, the new 4S records in 1080p, so I'd assume the current AppleTV probably downscales it (or will with an update) to 720p. Presumably, a new AppleTV 3 would play 1080p natively over AirPlay. Regardless of whether iTunes starts offering 1080p or not. My guess is that the iPod Touch and AppleTv didn't get the A5 immediately isn't because they didn't want to, but because of supply - trying to ramp up to make that many processors isn't easy, or a desire to wait for the A6. Would love to see the App Store soon, too!
One more thing...
To be completely honest, I thought an Apple TV upgrade was going to be a "one more thing" type announcement at the iPhone 4S announcement.
To be completely honest, I thought an Apple TV upgrade was going to be a "one more thing" type announcement at the iPhone 4S announcement.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I already do this, with my iMac hooked up to my 52" by HDMI
It's great, although I'm a little burnt out on Angry Birds now.
Same here. I am hoping that apple just "checked the oven" and decided to let it bake a bit longer, so in spring it comes out with 1080p, bluetooth, and app store support.
Regardless of whether the itms begins selling 1080p content, it makes sense to me that they'll add 1080p support. After all, there are going to be lot of iPhone 4S's shooting 1080p video...people are going to want to AirPlay those home movies to their apple tvs in full resolution...
An Apple A5 with dual core CPU, dual core GPU definitely seems overkill to just stream content. Even if they don't open up a general app store, it would make sense for them to make available APIs to studios and publishers so that custom interfaces, bonus material, tie-in mini-games, etc. can be made in association with TV shows and movies.
I think you are missing a few points here.
What makes you think they would do such a thing? Isn't it obvious that Apps like games require their own I/O. That "I" devices themselves can be I/O or that some apps wouldn't need user I/O at all. Not to mention is that AppleTV is a very communicative device and can easily be controlled from devices networked connected.
When I see they Apple TV I see a tremendous number of potential uses that only a low cost embeddable computer can offer. One just needs to think different.
Well I won't put that limitation upon myself. However I think you are missing the point, AppleTV is basically a micro computer. As such it can do many things, some of which it's size makes it ideal for.
Note even remotely.
There are as many solutions to that problem as there are apps. For example a weather station hooked up to an Apple TV wouldn't need an I/O at all. You would simply run an app to get your local values (assuming access via the USB port). Another example would be a cockpit for a flight simulator, again via a USB port. The problem here is that you can't assume conventional I/O is required or in some cases even desirable.
Way to narrow minded here.
What makes you think they would do such a thing? Isn't it obvious that Apps like games require their own I/O. That "I" devices themselves can be I/O or that some apps wouldn't need user I/O at all. Not to mention is that AppleTV is a very communicative device and can easily be controlled from devices networked connected.
When I see they Apple TV I see a tremendous number of potential uses that only a low cost embeddable computer can offer. One just needs to think different.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Apple TV with Siri ?
That would be Star Trek-like stuff:
"Apple TV"
"Yes"
"Run Movie: Avatar"
"OK"
What's that computer's name in Iron Man that works like this?
Siri and Apple TV
What I would really like to see Siri integrated into theTV
With the current hand controller in netflix you have to spell out the movie or actor you are searching for. With a microphone in the controller I could say "Show me available Clint Eastwood Movies" and all the streaming Clint movies would show up.
Other things you could say
"play slide show from last summers vacation"
"play the Beatles White Album"
If I want to see a movie in the theaters
"Play Moneyball trailer"
then
"What are the showtimes for Moneyball"
Even if they just use limited Siri for voice control of theTV. I could see it being very useful.
What I would really like to see Siri integrated into the
TVWith the current hand controller in netflix you have to spell out the movie or actor you are searching for. With a microphone in the controller I could say "Show me available Clint Eastwood Movies" and all the streaming Clint movies would show up.
Other things you could say
"play slide show from last summers vacation"
"play the Beatles White Album"
If I want to see a movie in the theaters
"Play Moneyball trailer"
then
"What are the showtimes for Moneyball"
Even if they just use limited Siri for voice control of the
TV. I could see it being very useful.