TiVo Mini and Apple TV

I am dedicated to TiVo - I've had multiple boxes for nearly 15 years.  I like the ease of use, the reliability, etc.  It's a great product and service (but very expensive).

I love the TiVo app for iOS.  It works great, it has a lot of flexibility, and has a pretty good interface (pretty good as it tries to do a lot, including acting as a soft remote control for multiple TiVo boxes).

TiVo makes a TiVo Mini. This is sort of a weird product - it is like a headunit for a TiVo that allows one to replicate the functions of a TiVo on a different monitor.  But, at its heart, is really just the TiVo app in hardware form.  And it is very expensive ($149).  And, even weirder, it is inconvenient to set up - it requires a hard wire (coax or ethernet) connection.  No wireless permitted.

My wish: that TiVo would release its app for Apple TV.  I know this would cut into TiVo Mini sales but I wonder how many people are really buying a Mini. I also wonder how many people would find TiVo more attractive if they could own one and watch in multiple locations with an AppleTV.  AppleTV seems to work fine on WiFi (unlike the TiVo Mini).  And the programming effort for TiVo is likely trivial (I believe tvOS is closely related to iOS).  I know that the TiVo remote won't work but, given that the main benefit of the TiVo Mini is just to stream from the "main" TiVo box, I think it would make sense for TiVo to offer this.  It would bring more people into the TiVo fold and that's probably a good thing.

Chromecast Audio

Chromecast Audio makes good sense - it seems like Google's approach to Airplay and so allows a phone or computer to "cast" audio to a speaker.  Apple TV and Airport Express do the same thing but, as Apple TV morphs into a more full-fledged console and given the Airport Express's wider mandate (router, printer hub, etc.), this is a reasonable slot to fill.  And the 3rd generation Apple TV is still a little pricey (and big) to act merely as a speaker bridge.

A simpler "Apple Audio" dongle could respond directly but I still think an even more interesting approach would be to take the Airport Express (and Airport Extreme - which, bafflingly, does not have speaker output) and allow Apple Music to run directly on the router rather than simply act as a bridge between the computer and speaker.  This would avoid lag and help battery life enormously.

New Apple TV (4th generation)

I understand that the new Apple TV will be available in two different storage sizes: 32GB and 64GB.  What I can't figure out is why we would need 64GB.  I'm sure there is a good reason but I can't find anything that gives the answer.  Movies, music and photos are currently streamed and that shouldn't need to change.  And I understand that apps will be downloaded in chunks on an as-needed basis so we shouldn't need to have every single app onboard at all times.

A few guesses:

1) to avoid stuttering from slow or choppy downloads.  Lots of storage will help avoid this BUT: any meaningful size should be enough and the initial download will still be at the mercy of download quality (assuming the app or stream is used immediately)

2) to use when not connected to the internet.  Maybe?  But seems weird for an at-home device.

3) to store non-internet based items.  Home movies?  But 64GB (or even 32GB) seems like either too little or too much.  Too little if you really want to use the Apple TV for storage.  Too much if it is just a temporary repository.

None of these makes sense.

A crazy guess: for people on satellite internet?

Note that none of this explains why 32GB is the base amount (although perhaps, given the 20GB app limit, perhaps Apple figured the first 10 minutes of the most likely 25 movies to be streamed could be onboard for instant start? or something similar where the device tries to predict usage and have some portion onboard?).

A small bonus question: is the memory solid state?  I assumed it was but, really, don't see why it needs to be given that the device will probably just sit on a shelf.  And I don't think I've seen any confirmation of the storage type.

New Apple TV?

If so, this is a true and long overdue "finally".

AppleTV and gaming

I had expected games to be announced for AppleTV by now (so much so that I foolishly deferred buying an AppleTV for our new television).  I had originally assumed that the announcement would be dependent upon a large enough installed base of AppleTVs to resolve the usual chicken/egg problem for game devices (no games means no one buys the console; no console owners means no one develops games).

However, I think that, beyond installed base (seems like it is about 20m units so far, but perhaps some of these are older models? In any event, at 7m units per year, it will reach a respectable number quickly), perhaps the delay is because of the poor reception for the MFi controllers.  And, until Apple can figure out if it wants to sell its own controllers or try to simply set standards, it is holding off on gaming?

A good controller is hard to design but worth getting right.  And a good controller at a reasonable price (especially as it will be compared to the relative cost vs. the AppleTV itself) is even harder.  If we don't see games announced when the installed base of third generation AppleTVs (running at least an A5) is 40m, I will be more convinced that it is a lack of good controllers at a good price that is deferring games.

Separately, the fact that Apple has stuck to A5s for the AppleTV is suggestive of trying to create a meaningful base.  At the same time, the 64bit A7 likely makes more sense for quality gaming and future proofing so, if Apple wants the installed base to be 64 bit, we may have a long wait for games on AppleTV.  I may go buy that AppleTV now that I think about it...

AppleTV

If I understand this right, AppleTV now streams/redownloads video as well as audio previously purchased from iTunes.  Which means that (setting bandwidth issues aside), when traveling, I can just bring my AppleTV and plug it into a hotel TV and have my entire (to the extent iTunes purchased) video library available.  I currently use the iPad as a video library but even with 64g, the library is limited.  Too bad hotel bandwidth makes this more hypothetical than useful for now.

airport express

I understand that Airport Express is due for a refresh soon.


I wonder how expensive it would be to add iTunes Match to the Airport Express as part of the "demotion" of the pc.


I know I can use Airplay to stream from my iPhone to an Airport Express or, alternatively, use the Remote app to stream from my computer to an Airport Express. But the first is somewhat taxing on the phone and the second becomes less attractive if pcs really do stop acting as central repositories for music.

Buying a dedicated match device solely for music seems unlikely to succeed but it could work as a bonus feature of an Airport Express (controlled through Remote, naturally). Sort of the way iTunes Match is a small feature of Apple TV.  Given that the Airport Express is already internet connected and has an audio out, this is a natural feature to add (and continue to distinguish it from other routers).

airplay theory on daring fireball

I really like Daring Fireball.  But one post today didn't really make sense.  Mr. Gruber posits that the reason iPhone may not be able to push recordings from its video camera to Apple TV might be because "the iPhone doesn’t have the processing power to compress movies" tight enough.  He knocks down the theory on other grounds (because the same video streams just fine after being imported) but I would note that the iPhone seems to compress video on its own anyway - remember how an emailed or uploaded video gets compressed.  Perhaps he meant high quality compression (not the grainy stuff in emails).  Just a small note and of no consequence as the theory was rejected anyway.