× NETGEAR will be terminating ReadyCLOUD service by July 1st, 2023. For more details click here.
Orbi WiFi 7 RBE973
Reply

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

schalliol
Aspirant

Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

Last I checked there weren't any options to let an Apple TV play content from a ReadyNAS (any variation). Last thread I found on this was last year. Is this condition still the case? Thanks!
Message 1 of 22
chirpa
Luminary

Re: 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/
Message 2 of 22
mdgm-ntgr
NETGEAR Employee Retired

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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.
Message 3 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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.
Message 4 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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).
Message 5 of 22
schalliol
Aspirant

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

mdgm, I'll definitely have to try that out, thanks! 😄
Message 6 of 22
schalliol
Aspirant

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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.
Message 7 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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.
Message 8 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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.
Message 9 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

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...).
Message 10 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re:

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:
Message 11 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

UDP was meant for streaming, I guess it can't do anything else on everything less than a perfect network... TCP is connection oriented so the checks/reemit take some bandwidth, that was to be expected.
I share your analysis about bandwidth, but I can't understand how they can get something into a room that has such a problematic signal. Either you patch it or you use another room, but the bare minimum is to have a signal higher than the internet bandwidth before putting a piece of network connected thing in a room IMO. There are many cheap options to do that out there. I would pick powerline with wifi extender on one end if the signal just doesn't get through (I have a wall like that at my mothers, 80% signal from one side of the door, 5% on the other side) otherwise simple wifi extenders to cover the distance.

Yes, Apple (on iphone) doesn't let you do anything fancy. That's why there are jailbreaks out there although IOS 7 reduced the need for it and IOS 8 will clearly do the same. So yes for techies that want peculiar stuff android is better.
On OS X that's quite open. You have a shell (a decent one with autocompletion), you have app store but you also have third party apps.

Well, I'm not saying that Nokia is enough per se. But that's enough to begin serious work and drive other vendors in. Microsoft is a big tech enterprise, it sells softwares (windows, office, various servers), services (one drive, office 365...), and hardware (Xbox, Surface, Nokia Phones...). Most enterprises have contracts with microsoft. How hard would it be for Microsoft to handle Phones like active directory computers ? Not hard, thus keeping costs down for enterprises (no training, no additional server...). Now make sure they have models tailored for enterprises with pre installed enterprise software, connecting to sharepoint, exchange and active directory would be a breeze. And for maintenance contract ? Just add an option to the actual one, no big paperwork. Make sure you hit a good price spot for big clients and here you go.
Phones always have been a problem to manage in enterprise, give the admin what he wants (less work) at a good price, he will do the work for you, don't doubt it. If Microsoft gets to this point for enterprises we will see Nokia fleets spawning everywhere, and when you are satisfied with your phone, you buy the same for your wife and kids... The problem is that Microsoft isn't there just yet. They still have work to do.
They still brand colorful Nokia phones, they designed them for young people IMO (at least some of them). They need to change that image and brand some professional models with all the stuff (communication encryption, multi user authentication, remote administration, better PC/phone interaction (like Apple will do with yosemite)...). Enterprises always have been Microsoft playground, they just have to push there, even losing money for a year or two, locking up their customers. Then they will have a solid basis to go after consumers, making packs with surface or PC for example, using Xbox integration (your phone as a controller or as a secondary gaming device (like vita for PS4), or even using the phone to boost console speed). They could also pay developers to get their apps on the windows store.
They have plenty of possible strategies, they just need to take some risks, make a move soon and to make sure it counts. IMO there is no place for subtlety anymore, they need a hammer but they have some room for now.
Message 12 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

We are seriously off topic...

Some people have construction constraints that are difficult to get around. Moving your home theater setup to another room to get better signal is something that many people simply can't or won't do. WiFi extenders are not always a good option, especially if the spectrum is already congested with too many access points. Powerline also can be hit-or-miss on some circuits. Ethernet always works if you can run the cable (sometimes a big if).

On Apple, I find that basic things can be very frustrating, like no SD card support in the ipad, not being able to play an xvid avi, mkv, flac with the built in players, no flash support, not being able to sort your email by read/unread... I disagree with your tech/non-tech classification here - I know several non-techies who prefer android (and also techies who are fine with iphone). I'm glad there is serious competition, since both software platforms need improving.

We'll see what happens with Microsoft. I hope they recover in mobile, but I am not sure they can.
Message 13 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

You are right for wifi but having the 3 problems (signal congestion, multiple electric installation on the same house, non drillable walls) at the same time is also pretty rare IMO but not impossible I grant you that.

For Microsoft, if they are not moving fast they won't be able to recover, I trust their ability to do so with their new CEO but that's merely a bet. They can mathematically recover, but still that means taking risks and that means doing it now. If they need 3 to 5 years to do something they are over until either Samsung and/or Apple make a stupid move, if they can pull something big out for next year, maybe... I think they plan it since they bought out part of Nokia.

I guess everyone is different, I just said what I've seen. I would be very presumptuous to say I've seen everything 😉 I think Androids don't have flash anymore either (I think it was removed in 4.1 and is now impossible to install under 4.4, needs checking) and you have an "unread" mails category on iphone/ipad. But that doesn't really change the debate anyway and remarks for SD and player that need third party app or adapter are still valid.

You are right we are way off topic 😉 I guess I (and my friends) had too much problems with android devices. We can continue by MP if you wish to, but although I am pretty flexible before making my mind and easily listen to people (hoping to learn something), although once it's made I'm quite stubborn and I'm afraid I'll need at least an outstanding Android device to change it. So I suggest to end it here. I hope we'll have the opportunity to speak constructively about another subject but I feel this is not a good one.

So, back to the topic. To my knowing : Airplay is a solution, apparently plex is also. You could also bypass the aTV completely and use DLNA on your TV if compatible. I can't see any other solution right now.
Maybe we could advise on a better setup to help you stream your films depending on your budget, available hardware/software and needs.
Message 14 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

I'm also wondering, does the Itunes server handle the videos ? if so you can use it to share video directly to the Apple TV if they are in Apple compatible format (MP4).
Message 15 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

xeltros wrote:
I'm also wondering, does the Itunes server handle the videos ? if so you can use it to share video directly to the Apple TV if they are in Apple compatible format (MP4).
No, that needs home sharing. The Apple TV doesn't even "see" the iTunes server.

If you have a standard iTunes server with home sharing enabled on your network, then things get a bit better (but hard to explain). It's been a while since I tried this, so I won't go into details (I don't want to get them wrong). But some things will start working, because the standard iTunes can act as a proxy for the sever on the NAS.
Message 16 of 22
xeltros
Apprentice

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

Ok. I have trouble differentiating Home sharing and Itunes server, for me they do exactly the same thing... Since I left my apple TV to my mother I couldn't test.
Message 17 of 22
jelockwood1
Guide

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

schalliol wrote:
Last I checked there weren't any options to let an Apple TV play content from a ReadyNAS (any variation). Last thread I found on this was last year. Is this condition still the case? Thanks!


The older ReadyNAS families i.e. those running OS 4.1.x or 4.2.x come with and use the Firefly iTunes server software. This extremely old software does not support Apple TV clients and also only supports music files. However it is my understanding the the newer ReadyNAS models i.e. those running OS 6.x come with instead the forked-daapd software. This software does supposedly supports Apple TV as a client. This might therefore meet your requirements.

For what it's worth, this same issue applies to all NAS makes as pretty much all of them use Firefly. The QNAP does also have the option of a user supplied forked-daapd package.

Both Firefly and forked-daapd have been abandoned by their original developers however companies like NetGear have continued to make very small tweaks to the code to keep it just about working, for example a while ago Apple made a change to iTunes which broke compatibility with Firefly but (someone made) a patch to fix this.

Hmm, thinking further about this I think Apple have since moved the goalposts again. iTunes Sharing is not the same thing as HomeSharing. I will have to test to see if an Apple TV can still connect to an older iTunes (pre-HomeSharing). Obviously the latest Apple TV firmware now supports HomeSharing but I will have to see if it still also supports iTunes Sharing. If the latest Apple TV firmware is now HomeSharing only then it will no longer be able to connect to forked-daapd.

Ironically, even if the latest Apple TV firmware cannot connect to iTunes Sharing anymore a Mac or Windows client running iTunes can.
Message 18 of 22
StephenB
Guru

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

Apple TV requires "home sharing" - which is available in Apple's iTunes, but is not available in any linux server (neither forked-daap nor the older firefly). That's because Apple hasn't opened that particular feature up, so no one but Apple can implement it.

So you can't access the NAS directly from your Apple TV. You can open the NAS iTunes library on a PC, and then use AirPlay from the PC to play it on the Apple TV. That's about the best you can do.
Message 19 of 22
jelockwood1
Guide

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

StephenB wrote:
Apple TV requires "home sharing" - which is available in Apple's iTunes, but is not available in any linux server (neither forked-daap nor the older firefly). That's because Apple hasn't opened that particular feature up, so no one but Apple can implement it.

So you can't access the NAS directly from your Apple TV. You can open the NAS iTunes library on a PC, and then use AirPlay from the PC to play it on the Apple TV. That's about the best you can do.


You are of course correct. The current solutions and supported devices would therefore be as follows -

1. If you use Firefly then you can share only music to iTunes running on a Mac, to iTunes running on Windows, or to a Roku SoundBridge. Firefly does not support any generation of Apple TV even for just music.
2. If you use forked-daapd which is available for OS 6 models, then you can share to iTunes running on a Mac, to iTunes running on Windows, music only to a Roku SoundBridge, and in theory music and video to an Apple TV 1 (the original)
3. If you run a virtual machine within the NAS and within the virtual machine run either Windows or OS X then you can run real iTunes software. Then you will be able to use iTunes Home Sharing which does support streaming video as well as music to Apple TV 2 and 3 models as well as to other Macs and Windows computers.

Currently as standard no ReadyNAS units can run virtual machines but apparently people have managed to get VirtualBox working. It would be legal to run Windows in a VM via Virtualbox but not legal to run Mac OS X. It is technically possible (but illegal) to run OS X in a VM unless it is hosted on a real Mac. Note: the QNAP has built support for hosting virtual machines.

See viewtopic.php?f=35&t=26468&p=296922#p296922 and http://www.readynas.com/?p=6111 and https://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopi ... 4&start=15
Message 20 of 22
grimloch
Aspirant

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

You can set up your iOS or android device as an iTunes remote that can control [forked-daapd] playback on the NAS and switch speaker playback (airport express, Apple tv, etc)

Use Apple's remote app or there are several android apps. You must manually pair the remote app with the forked-daapd server, though.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Message 21 of 22
Kalel63
Aspirant

Re: Still No Apple TV Audio or Video Streaming Options?

Hi I wasn't sure if I should have start a new thread or just post in this one so apologies either way however is there any more info on this as I am look to buy an AppleTV and I am hoping I can stream from my ReadyNAS 102

 

Cheers for any info

Message 22 of 22
Top Contributors
Discussion stats
  • 21 replies
  • 6213 views
  • 0 kudos
  • 8 in conversation
Announcements