I am routinely amazed that big hardware companies like Samsung or LG put out reasonable TVs with such mediocre software and interface design. They seem like an afterthought.
They have a computer in every living room. They could be the point through which all media runs, through which all console games are played, a total disruption to the TV industry, and they have squandered it on some of the worst software I have used in a long time.
Yet Apple will eventually release something "visionary" (i.e. a TV with software that works well), and they are going to spend years making second-rate copies of it.
The difference with TV is that content is a big differentiator, and it could well end up playing out in such a way that you need an Apple TV to watch certain shows.
The benchmark in set top box software at the moment is probably the xbox360. Plug it into any TV and it basically turns it into a smart TV.
Plus it has the advantage of being decoupled from the big expensive screen part so you can switch out to the new xbox when that is released without replacing your entire TV set.
Their "aTV Flash" product is $30 and can be added to a jailbroken Apple TV 2 (the third-gen ATV has yet to be jailbroken). It makes it easy to add weather, RSS, a browser, XBMC, Plex, and some other apps to the ATV.
Most notably, however, is their own "Media Player" app, which is a pleasantly robust media center (think XBMC if it were made specifically for the Apple TV). It handles almost any file format I throw at it without fail and is a much better experience than XBMC's own ATV app in my experience.
I can't wait for Apple to officially release the ATV SDK and really open the floodgates, but it feels like pre-March 2008 all over again (when Apple announced the iOS SDK).
The linked article isn't about hacking the AppleTV to run apps. It's about figuring out what the API looks like today as a way to guess what it will look like if released. The point is not to do interesting things today; the point is to be among the first to release an app if the ecosystem does open up.
Although I agree an AppleTV API is a given, I wouldn't assume this existing private "BackRoom" API represents anything interesting. The current slate of apps have to be developed in something and thus the existence of a private API for doing so shouldn't be surprising.
After all, if Apple wants to dominate in this space (and I believe they do) then I have to believe the actual public API will be much, much more powerful then a bunch of lightweight UIKit inspired layout classes.
These aren't just "UIKit-inspired layout classes" - it's a full complement of remote-navigable controls: text input fields, buttons, detail disclosure views, scrubbers, sliders, keyboards, so on and so forth. It's also remained largely stable since AppleTV 1 - BackRow is as valid an API as any.
They've already got partners providing javascript-driven "applications" for the AppleTV (ala iPhoneOS 1 - "web apps are king!"); I've no inclination to believe that they're going to make public an API that provides for code execution, especially in this environment. See, not only are BackRow appliances not applications, they're not run in separate execution contexts either. The primary/only application on an AppleTV is AppleTV.app, and all appliances are loadable bundles (on AppleTV OS < 5.0) or simply compiled in (>= 5.0) and run in the same shared context.
That alone makes binary bundles extremely dangerous. It also means that a full re-architecting of the system would be required before third party applications were supported.
I think I just find it odd to think that Apple isn't considering making the AppleTV into "the iOS app+game console for your TV": Apple's version of the Wii, with compatibility of every iOS app ever produced, and presumably using iPod Touches for controllers or something.
Now I'm not an Apple person, but looking at the article, it does not seem like there's actually such an API or a promise of an API... so is there actually a reason to believe an AppleTV API actually is forthcoming?
Because I don't doubt they want to (and to some extent have the potential to) dominate this space, but I don't think it's necessarily valid to assume that means opening a public API.
Does anyone else groan when people exert all this effort to be part of a closed ecosystem that Apple only tolerates to remain competitive? I thought it was a joke after the first paragraph to be honest, it sounds like someone being sarcastic about Apple dragging their feet.
Still don't know why people want Smart TVs anyway. Buy a GBox Midnight, flash j1nx's nightly build, use uPnP to push content to your TV. So simple, your mom can do it. Mine complained and then was queueing stuff up faster than I was able to.
Blech, I'm so tired of hearing people complain about Apple's "closed ecosystem." Seriously, we get it; you don't like buying a device you don't have absolute control over. Though, you do realize that a lot of people LOVE buying closed systems and breaking into them, right?
This website is called Hacker News, not "So simple your mom can do it News." The fact that someone class dumped the ATV's private headers, provided the tools to create 3rd party apps for it, and even lists POI for the API is amazing! That's hacking. That's fun. Telling someone to buy an $80 Android box just to be done with it is curmudgeonry and is, well, boring.
>you do realize that a lot of people LOVE buying closed systems and breaking into them, right?
Yeah, that's probably the common starting point for me just "not getting it".
>Telling someone to buy an $80 Android box just to be done with it is curmudgeonry and is, well, boring.
Yeah, how dare I recommend a cheaper solution that already has an open development platform for it without having to rely on Private Headers that are likely to break and forcing me to kowtow to Apple. It's "cool", but I don't know why ANYONE would want to expend any effort to create an app usable by almost no-one. That's why my comment is relevant to "hackers" who want to build something useful for other people to use.
There is some really special irony that allows you to mock me for wanting control of my device and then turning around and acting like I'm an idiot for not wanting a locked down device JUST so that I can jailbreak and use private headers to develop for that almost no one will be able to use.
Also, if you're paying $80 for the cheap Linux/XBMC set top boxes, you're paying way too much.
Sigh, this comment makes me kind of sad. It shows a lack of understanding of the tinkerer/hacker mindset.
People enjoy doing what they're told not to. Half the fun of owning an Android phone is overhauling the UI, flashing a completely different ROM, and over clocking it to test its limits. Sure, you could just buy a phone and be done with it, but why? Isn't it fun to which your tech speed up, be altered, and even sometimes break? It's the feeling that you're making it YOURS. Not to mention that you learn so, so much in the process.
Remember, hacking isn't about making something that everyone will use. If so, then why aren't hackers making Angry Birds or Microsoft Word? Hacking is about pushing the boundaries, sharpening your skills, and hopefully learning in the process. If I were to make an AppleTV app(liance) that I really liked and put it online for 3 people to download then I would be happy. That's 3 people's AppleTV's who are better due to my hobby; isn't that great?
Also, please note that I never meant to "act like you're an idiot." I disagree with your viewpoints but I'm sure you're intelligent; you come to HN, don't you? :) I'm just tired of people who complain about Apple's "closed ecosystem" and then turn around and suggest an Android system which usually involves rooting (Android's "jailbreak") and flashing a custom ROM. Android actually is more involved than jailbreaking an iPhone is as far as time, energy, and scope go. I apologize if I took my frustration out on you but this whole "anti-tinkering mentality" that's being spread solely because people dislike Apple is getting to me. Technology should be about having fun using and abusing your systems!
> I'm just tired of people who complain about Apple's "closed ecosystem" and then turn around and suggest an Android system which usually involves rooting (Android's "jailbreak") and flashing a custom ROM. Android actually is more involved than jailbreaking an iPhone is as far as time, energy, and scope go.
Nothing about creating an app for Android or GoogleTV requires any of those things. "Jailbreaking" my phone involved plugging it in and typing two solitary commands. On my old phone it involved three. The Android set top boxes come with root out of the box and have no signature protection in recovery.
Well, jailbreaking an iDevice usually takes one click or a visit to a website. I was just noting that many people forget that "rooting" is, in principal, the exact same as jailbreaking.
Jailbreaking is not nearly as easy as you make it out to be, and you don't do anybody any good by exaggerating it like that.
A viable jailbreak for iOS 6 has only just become available, and all indications are that it will stop working with 6.1.3. Maintaining a jailbroken device is requires fairly substantial effort and research, and extreme care when it comes to OS updates and device restores.
I didn't mean to make jailbreaking sound "easy" or exaggerate the effort involved but my point still stands; to jailbreak iOS, the end user only really needs to do one step.
Sure, there are versions without jailbreaks and there are updates you can't use but that's beyond my point. I never said that jailbreaking an iDevice is easy for every version and that it's permanent; I said that only one button is needed to jailbreak a device. Remember, there are Android devices that can't be rooted, flashed, or updated, too. Risking the loss of updates comes with the territory of hacking any device (see Xbox 360, PS3, Hackint0shes, and more).
If you're talking about the exploits themselves, then I'd just like to say that I've watched the method to jailbreak progress from "one symlinked folder" to "6 kernel and user land level exploits." Discussing the complexities of how a jailbreak is achieved is beyond the scope of what I was saying, though.
So, uh, you had to restart the device? You're specifically talking about placing the phone in DFU mode which is restarting the phone and holding the home button while it's turning on. I really don't mean to sound crass, but that's hardly painful.
Assuming this was supposed to be a reply to me, I can't tell if you missed the part with the timer and the multiple attempts to get it right, or if you just don't think it's relevant, or what.
They're rarely "only one button" these days. Last time I jailbroke, I believe I had to, approximately, restart the device while holding down buttons in a precisely timed sequence (the jailbreak app actually had a built-in timer to help) while sacrificing a live chicken over the dock cable. (I did make that last part up.) I had to try it several times before I got it right.
For very creative definitions of "usually". I watch the iOS jailbreak scene as most of my friends have such devices. Exploits that easy haven't been around for a while now.
This conversation is quickly becoming pointless anyway.
It is amusing however to watch my karma bobble with intervals of 4 as people vote enmasse by username.
The objection is not that you're an idiot for not wanting a locked down device. It's that you're a socially inept whiner for showing up in stories about Apple products to complain that Apple continues to make Apple products rather than Android products.
You'll note we're not in your Android threads telling you how much better Apple products are–at least, not on HN. The conversation is one-sided. We understand why you like what you like, there's no need to barge into our conversations to condescendingly remind us that Apple is Apple. We get it. If you can't understand why we might value other things besides openness, it's your limitation, not ours.
