Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

Could try using PlexConnect with Plex Media Server on the ReadyNAS. It tricks the Apple TV's Trailers.app to interact with Plex.

https://blog.plex.tv/2013/06/04/introdu ... different/

I'd really like Apple to open up the Apple TV to apps like their iPhone and iPad. That way Plex could make a proper app for it.

There are rumors about a aTV revamp in 2015. http://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/30/app ... h-delayed/
If they open up to games, chances are apps will be available too and this will change everything. More over Tim cook has shown some openness with IOS8 APIs that now allow developers to use plugins integrated directly on the OS. I think that he will go on this way and provide great compatibility within the ecosystem and more flexibility for developers (thus providing an higher innovation rate and more attractive products).

You also got the airplay option, with either the mac or the ipad you can access your files via DLNA and mirror them to the aTV, if you have an older mac check air parrot. Also works with HDMI of course.

xeltros wrote:
...You also got the airplay option, with either the mac or the ipad you can access your files via DLNA and mirror them to the aTV, if you have an older mac check air parrot. Also works with HDMI of course.

Yes

But what's really needed is home sharing in the Readynas itunes server (in the apple sense) - which is a closed part of apple's platform. Airplay isn't really the best option, since you are often doubling (or even tripling) the needed wifi bandwidth (wifi streaming to the ipad, wifi streaming from the ipad, and in some cases wifi streaming to the apple TV).

If you have a higher end NAS, you could use it to host a Windows VM that runs iTunes. I can't think of any other way to do this w/o a PC (mac or windows).

mdgm, I'll definitely have to try that out, thanks! :D

xeltros & StephenB, you guys are totally right. Apple should provide some better way of doing this, and reading Steve Jobs' book by Isaacson, Steve was trying to figure out how to make TV work better and ran out of time. Indeed, this area is ripe for a company like Apple (maybe only Apple) to get the experience right. Combining in the Home Kit functionality in iOS 8, I could see a nice playback device from Apple that could make navigating multiple devices simply.

Another way to go for apple would be to open the airplay standard. I think that was meant to be at start. That way manufacturers could implement airplay directly on TVs, NAS and so on. We already got the sound on some amplifiers.

@stephenB, I don't see when you triple the bandwidth (unless you count that switching from wifi to wired connection is a entirely new stream) but I agree on double at least (from NAS to Apple device, from Apple device to AppleTV). That said Wifi N can definitely handle this unless you have bad signal or use 4K films. The problem is more about having a third, unnecessary device IMO. This implying electric consumption and preventing any other use for the device (if you mirror a film, the tablet has to be on the film screen so no one using it, and for MAC I guess you can still work but you would need to be able to control the film so...).

Apple is definitely a great brand in many regards, they only have two things to work on : prices and compatibility. I myself handle a lot of apple devices for me, my mother and a friend (Time Capsule, Macbook pro, Apple TV, Ipad, Iphone, AirPrint-enabled HP printer) and that's a breeze to update, reinstall, manage and use. Give them a proper server (OS X server is too limited and open directory is not compatible with most apps) and enterprises would crawl under apple devices. I still have my old macbook pro that fell a countless number of times and will be 6 years old by the beginning of the year. It still has no problem (battery is worned out though, lasts only 3-4 hours). I'm gonna change it to get airplay, wifi AC, HDMI and USB3 but that's pretty much it and it will spend at least 2 more years with my mother.
So I'm really expecting to see more compatibility with apple standards, more freedom for developers and that Apple finds a good way to do that without rising prices or sacrifying either security or ease of use.

xeltros wrote:
Another way to go for apple would be to open the airplay standard.

There already is one - called Miracast. Apple didn't create it though.

xeltros wrote:
I don't see when you triple the bandwidth (unless you count that switching from wifi to wired connection is a entirely new stream) but I agree on double at least (from NAS to Apple device, from Apple device to AppleTV).

There's only one sender on a wifi network at a time, and in the case of Airplay all the streams are relayed through the AP. So if the Apple TV is also wireless, you really have NAS->iPad to play the media, then iPad->AP + AP->Apple TV to get it on the TV. That's 3x the bandwidth. Miracast doesn't use the AP btw, it goes peer-to-peer. so in that respect it is better than Airplay.

How well this works depends on congestion and distance to the AP. Some of the problems could be overcome if streamers used UDP as a transport, but they typically use TCP, which is not good at maintaining bandwidth during packet loss. There are lots of cases (some posted here) where people using media streamers end up needing wired ethernet or powerline networking to overcome WiFi QoS issues - with HD, not 4K, and in some cases full DVD rate (which is 6-8 mbs).

xeltros wrote:
Apple is definitely a great brand in many regards, they only have two things to work on : prices and compatibility.

I agree they have a great brand, and people buy their products for good reasons. But they do create and protect a closed ecosystem. Their goal is to have you only buy Apple Tech. Even when they use standards they often use them in closed ways - Facetime and Airplay are two of several examples. The compatibility issues are generally designed in, they are not accidental. IMO the only thing that might change this is competition from Google/Android. So far it hasn't though.

Yeah Miracast is pushed by android devices.

Ok, I thought of it like a stream, didn't take AP retransmit into account but makes sense.

8mbps ? Doesn't even cover up half of my internet connection (got 20mbps or 100mbps depending on where I am). They definitely had to do something either using repeaters, wires or powerline adapters.

I agree that Apple's ecosystem is what makes apple that good and I also agree that sharing was not Steve Job's best skill.
They will clearly not release OS X or IOS for other devices and they will maintain their other softwares (Itunes, Final Cut, Logic...). They will want you to have both iCloud and Itunes Match subscriptions, to buy movies and music from itunes and they will make sure that those are tightly integrated in OS. They also tend to make non-upgradeable machines because they need to slim them... Or because they just want you to spend 200-600$ more on your config when you buy and add a few thunderbolt adapters in the process...
Clearly they have some things locked up like airdrop, airplay or FaceTime but I don't feel that their core value is in there. The core values of Apple are well designed, appealing hardware products, good customer support and simple to use software. I believe Tim Cook understood that and is wanting to provide more innovation by loosening a little bit of control (not all). Innovation sells way more than what they could get with a 100$ box, aTV is merely a sell helper for itunes and Iphones. You would still end up with all Apple products, but because each one is the best (or close enough) rather than because it has an Apple logo on it. Time will tell us if I'm right or wrong on that.

Android has not the same target than Apple devices. Android is either low cost or for techies. They are not fast, they are cluttered, they are fragile (at least all the devices I had between hands). They do not even get updated ! I am able to get my galaxy camera crashing just by using the photo app, and I already tried to restore factory and check for updates with no luck. It's still under warranty and didn't get updated since it went out (ok, there was one update to android 4.1 just after the release). I also have a friend that was told by Samsung that, to update the galaxy S3, he has to get a new computer. It was after he told them he had tested on 2 OS X versions, 3 Windows versions on 3 different computers from 3 different brands...
HTC seems to be the only one to try to provide decent android products to my knowing. In my friends, I never heard any iphone or Nokia user having problems with its phone, I never heard an android user NOT having problems with his... That pretty much sums it up I guess.

I feel that Nokia, now Microsoft, does a really good job with long lasting batteries, decent materials, quality build and performance and Microsoft Office in standard. They deserve more shares than what they have on the market. Given that they have windows ecosystem with them they can be dangerous for Apple, particularly with enterprises that use exchange, sharepoint and other Microsoft services. They truly aim the same target than apple (it's to say people having some money, renewing their phones often and wanting to avoid any technical concerns, therefore buying from a single brand). I just let a friend try Windows 8 on his computer, he already had a surface tablet he bought for office. He bought Windows 8 and is willing to buy a windows phone next month (switching from android...). I can't think of any better proof that Microsoft does some good job. I myself am an Apple user and clearly I feel that Nokia's phones are in some way superior to Apple's but I still prefer OS X over windows (windows just feels so slow and messy, they need to start the code from scratch to clean it up and lose the registry base IMO, even if this means dropping compatibility (they could have two editions)). So I'm gonna stick with Apple / OS X combo as I already have all Apple stuff and am satisfied with my Iphone 5, but clearly features like using phone with gloves, or having a better battery could be of some use although not compulsory.
Like Apple I thinks Microsoft is rejuvenating with its new CEO and I can't wait to see what it will do for both professionals (office, sharepoint, exchange...), gamers (xbox) and consumers (phones, tablets...).

xeltros wrote:
8mbps ? Doesn't even cover up half of my internet connection (got 20mbps or 100mbps depending on where I am). They definitely had to do something either using repeaters, wires or powerline adapters.

If the player isn't that close to the access point, or if they are still running 802.11g then even 8 mpbs streams can be a problem. That's especially the case if the wifi is 2.4 ghz. Theoretical throughput should more than enough, but TCP doesn't give you anywhere near the full bandwidth if you have much packet loss. A lot also depends on how well the player manages its playout buffers.

On Apple generally, I do know people who switched from iPhone to Android and who are quite happy about it. If that you want to do doesn't quite fit into the Apple use model, then you are going to be very frustrated.

On Microsoft, I am thinking Nokia is not enough to make them successful in mobile - and if that is the case, they will slowly starve to death. Though I thought Apple's days were numbered a few years ago. :shock: