Airplay on old Apple TV

Lots of techie stuff here. What I remember Steve Jobs saying was that one could stream to AppleTV from a iOS device. Yes, its too bad he didn't say it would only work with the soon to be announced AppleTV2.

My question is: can a iPhone4 or iPad stream a video to an AppleTV2?

This is what Pratik (Remote HD Tech support) wrote to me yesterday:

"Apple has not yet made is possible to stream freshly shot videos from Camera roll or Photos app.
Freshly shot videos cannot be streamed to the old or the new AppleTV.
When Apple releases an update with this feature enabled, your old AppleTV will be able to accept these videos and play them on your TV; just like the new AppleTV will be able to.

However there are 2 workarounds with which you can watch these videos on your TV.
1. Upload the video from your device to youtube and watch them using the youtube app
2. Sync these videos to your computer. Then import them as videos in iTunes and sync them as iTunes videos back to your device. These videos will then show up in the iPod app (in videos section). From there you can stream these videos your AppleTV.

Regards,

Pratik"

So it appears that what Mr. Jobbs stated could be done still hasn't come to fruition... and that specific task... (my being able to walk in my room or a friends front room and stream a video I have on my iPhone4 to an AppleTV) was and is the only thing I wanted... and isn't yet possible. And no, I don't want to send it to YouTube 🙂

capaho wrote:

I do understand the difference but I would still maintain that AirPlay is a protocol. It may also be the name of a component of iOS and OSX but it uses a proprietary protocol to stream the audio.

You seem to be saying that an application is a protocol because it uses protocols.

I don't feel that you're trying to understand me here.

frankly, whether the name "AirPlay" refers to an application, a protocol or a component of iOS is irrelevant. the AirPlay system uses a proprietary protocol to stream audio and video. the older AirTunes system used a similar protocol to stream just audio.

These protocols may use standards within then, but the protocol you'll see on the wire is not an open standard and the senders/receivers have to know how to decode them.

AirPort Express firmware is not relevant to AirPlay and the ATV1. ATV1 software predates AirPlay by a considerable amount of time and was written to restrict streaming sources to local iTunes libraries and the sources available directly from the ATV1 menu as part of its DRM scheme. It simply does not contain the code necessary to accept a stream from a mobile iOS device using AirPlay. If it did the much discussed third-party hack wouldn't be necessary for that third-party AirPlay simulation app to work.

I'll tell you (again) why I feel that the Airport Express firmware is relevant, and I'll try to be as basic as I can so that we understand each other.

The Airport Express supports the older AirTunes system for streaming audio
The AppleTV1 supports the older AirTunes system for streaming audio

The Airport Express has not had a firmware update to support the AirPlay system
but the iPhone can stream audio to an Airport Express

thus, logically I would say that the iPhone supports the older AirTunes system as well as AirPlay.
If it did not support AirTunes, then how could it possibly be compatible with the Airport Express?

Let me say that again in bold: *I believe that the iPhone supports streaming audio via the older AirTunes system.*

Do you see why I think this? Do you disagree with me on this point? if so, please tell me why. please tell me which of my statements above you feel is wrong?

following on from this, if the iPhone supports AirTunes, then why does it not support streaming to another AirTunes device, ie the ATV1?

I don't feel that you're trying to understand me here.

It's more a matter of you not understanding the technical issues you're trying to hypothesize about. People seem to be under the impression that debate dominated by personal opinions will alter the technology and business considerations involved here. That isn't going to happen.

I'm pretty sure this is why Steve Jobs considers this product a hobby. I can only imagine the conversations they have with content providers regarding what the public can and can't do with the devices they make and sell. I've come to the conclusion that just because Apple can overcome the technical issues (as we know they are capable of) doesn't mean they will. As much as there is a technical reason why this hasn't been done yet - there is the commercial consideration. It seem plain as day that that decision has been made.

As much as there is a technical reason why this hasn't been done yet - there is the commercial consideration. It seem plain as day that that decision has been made.

There are ample indications that the current ATV1 software simply lacks the code necessary to support AirPlay compatibility. It would be extremely unusual for a company to invest in a development project to upgrade an obsolete product in order to give it the same features as the model that replaced it. It's neither an unusual nor an unreasonable business decision. The ATV1 was so fraught with problems that it probably made more sense to replace it with a completely redesigned model than to try to upgrade it again.

capaho wrote:

I don't feel that you're trying to understand me here.

It's more a matter of you not understanding the technical issues you're trying to hypothesize about. People seem to be under the impression that debate dominated by personal opinions will alter the technology and business considerations involved here. That isn't going to happen.

look, I'm happy to engage in this debate with you and I'm putting in a lot of work to explain my position but when you're arguing with me, you're just telling me I'm wrong and giving no detail. It feels to me like you're wilfully not engaging and just ignoring the points I'm making.

I've been working in computers for over a decade, I've been using computers for over 2, I've been a programmer and network engineer, I'm currently a systems architect. I feel I understand the issues pretty well. I've put my logic in what I think are simple, easy to understand steps about why I think the iPhone supports airtunes, and thus should support the ATV1 for audio.

If you say that I don't understand the technical issues, then please tell me which of my logical steps is wrong. Where am I in error? I'm enough of a man to accept when I've made a mistake, but so far you've not told me what I have said that's incorrect. please have enough respect for your fellow poster to do that.

to be clear, now that apple have changed the documentation, I don't think they'll ever officially make audio-only airplay work with the appletv1, but I still maintain they made a conscious decision not to support it rather that it being an architectural issue. it may well have been some minor bug they couldn't be bothered to fix, or just a wish to move people to the new ATV, but I think there is code in iOS that specifically removes ATV1's from the airplay list.

David

PS. to other posters, is it just me? am I not being clear?

look, I'm happy to engage in this debate with you and I'm putting in a lot of work to explain my position but when you're arguing with me, you're just telling me I'm wrong and giving no detail. It feels to me like you're wilfully not engaging and just ignoring the points I'm making.

It is not my intention to slight you, I merely believe that debating technical issues with philosophical arguments or personal opinions is not particularly relevant.

I've been working in computers for over a decade, I've been using computers for over 2, I've been a programmer and network engineer, I'm currently a systems architect. I feel I understand the issues pretty well. I've put my logic in what I think are simple, easy to understand steps about why I think the iPhone supports airtunes, and thus should support the ATV1 for audio.

I'm a software developer and I've been in the computer business going back to the days before the advent of the desktop PC.

If you say that I don't understand the technical issues, then please tell me which of my logical steps is wrong.

All of them. You're constructing philosophical arguments to make your point, then you feel slighted when I disagree. I don't think it's a valid assumption to make that AirTunes or AirPort Express firmware have any relevance in relation to the ATV1 and AirPlay. The only things that matter are source code and hardware specs, and none of us in this discussion have access to those.

I suspect the problem lies with the DRM scheme for the ATV1 in that it restricts the sources it can stream from. It was not possible to stream from an iPhone or iPod touch the last time the ATV1 software was upgraded, and iOS and the iPad didn't even exist then.

Without access to the source code there is no way to know for sure, obviously, but I believe the ATV1 software does not contain the code necessary to identify itself as an AirPlay compatible device or to accept a stream from a mobile iOS device. It would take a software upgrade to resolve that problem, and, as I've said many times before, I just don't see that happening for a product that has been replaced by a newer model.

{quote:title=capaho wrote:}
It is not my intention to slight you, I merely believe that debating technical issues with philosophical arguments or personal opinions is not particularly relevant.

I hadn't realised it was philosophical arguments I was making. I had thought I was laying out sound technical arguments as to why it should work and why I felt that apple had deliberately blocked it.

All of them. You're constructing philosophical arguments to make your point, then you feel slighted when I disagree. I don't think it's a valid assumption to make that AirTunes or AirPort Express firmware have any relevance in relation to the ATV1 and AirPlay. The only things that matter are source code and hardware specs, and none of us in this discussion have access to those.

I suspect the problem lies with the DRM scheme for the ATV1 in that it restricts the sources it can stream from. It was not possible to stream from an iPhone or iPod touch the last time the ATV1 software was upgraded, and iOS and the iPad didn't even exist then.

but the iphone itself didn't exist when the airport express came out and it doesn't identify itself as an airplay compatible device either.

the ATV1 shouldn't care what source send it an audio stream, merely that one arrives in the right format, ie according to whatever the AirTunes spec is. whether the data comes from itunes or an iphone should not be relevant. that's the whole point of network protocols. and we know that the current iPhone knows how to send AirTunes compatible data streams.

Without access to the source code there is no way to know for sure, obviously, but I believe the ATV1 software does not contain the code necessary to identify itself as an AirPlay compatible device or to accept a stream from a mobile iOS device. It would take a software upgrade to resolve that problem, and, as I've said many times before, I just don't see that happening for a product that has been replaced by a newer model.

I agree that it would take a software update to resolve this, but I bet the software update could be made on the iPhone alone to enable it. I doubt the ATV1 doesn't need any updates.

that said, we're obviously not convincing each other and as you say, Apple are very unlikely to tell us so I'm not sure how much point there is in going on.

Without detailed technical information, I don't see how we can conclude one thing or another from the fact that Airplay works with Airport Express. The fact that Airport Express appears in a menu of Airplay compatible devices doesn't necessarily mean that Airplay is communicating with it in the same way. The Airport Express has been around for along time, and it is quite possible that iOS devices have code to special-case it as a legacy device. Such code would not be likely to work for ATV1, which is very different hardware.

I hadn't realised it was philosophical arguments I was making. I had thought I was laying out sound technical arguments as to why it should work...

You attempt to use logical progression based on a premise, that's a philosophical argument. If the underlying premise is faulty the entire argument is invalid. A sound technical argument requires relevant technical information that none of us here have access to.

...and why I felt that apple had deliberately blocked it.

There is simply no rational basis for making such an assumption. The long-term profit potential in a device such as the ATV of either generation is in the sales of content, not the device itself. The ATV1 is still suitable for that purpose, so Apple would have nothing to gain by engaging in such chicanery.

the ATV1 shouldn't care what source send it an audio stream, merely that one arrives in the right format, ie according to whatever the AirTunes spec is.

That is your faulty premise. There is simply no basis to assume that AirTunes and AirPlay are inherently identical without the actual technical information. The ATV also has specific DRM restrictions that an AirPort Express does not have. It should be rather obvious that the ATV1 is restricted to streaming only from local iTunes libraries and the remote content it's coded for in its own menu.

Digital devices cannot perform functions they lack the software for. The ATV1 doesn't work with AirPlay because its software lacks the necessary code. It isn't any more complicated than that.

STOP

please stop this debate and share each other's e-mail address or phone number... carry it on there.

This discussion is about/concerns people that invested i an AppleTV1 and got blind-sided by the promised new features of the upcoming iOS that would provide some really nice features to our AppleTV's..

Many of us went out and bought another one (me).

Your fighting is helping? Not.

I want what I heard, and saw, Steve Job's state: streaming from the new iOS to AppleTV. He did not say which one.. so I took him at his promise/word and bought another as a gift to a friend. That was only months ago... ok last year as the calendar goes.

Either he keeps his promise or he is a liar. Bottom line for the CEO.

I say it's up to Steve to decide what his hobby is or not... but not screw us around.

Steve probably won't care, but I agree that his statements were misleading. We obviously won't agree here, but my 15 years experience with digital real-time audio processing lead me to the conclusion that enabling audio streaming to ATV1 would have been a no-brainer (i.e. less than two man days of work) and the only possible explanation for its absence is that Apple deliberately disabled it on purpose.

We've seen similar politics before. For example, multi-touch gestures were restricted to the original MacBook Air (although the trackpad and OS of previous models were just as capable). I can understand the motivation from a business perspective. But "it's new technology" is nothing but a bad excuse to hide the true reason (Apple doesn't WANT it to work), and technically informed people do not believe such blabla.

Yes, a company needs to make revenue. I'm fine with that. Actually I spend 2500$ on a new MacBook every year. But no, I won't spend 150$ (German price) on a new AppleTV because I feel screwed by that company. That's why I got my LG player, why I will migrate my playlists to a file based structure and buy my music elsewhere in the future. And when something doesn't work due to poor product design, that's still much better than when something doesn't work because the manufacturer made it incompatible only to sell more products.

You have the right to find this ridiculous. Anyways I'm very happy with my decision. And to all the people who feel screwed as well: you can debate this forever but they're not going to fix it. You'll have to pay the price. But you decide to whom 🙂

Hi, just been reading through all this...it's an interesting thread!

To stream video shot on an iphone to atv you can use the app 'quickplay' from the app store.

It was free when I got it. It's a little clunky but easy enough to use.

It 'compresses' the movie (i.e. screen displays a message to that effect-I don't know what it's doing nor if it's affecting movie quality) and then allows you to send it.
This does take a minute or so for a 2 min video.
The original movie file is not affected BTW.

I have atvgen1, with remotehd and have streamed videos as above. But only twice to test that it works, so I've not checked video quality other than thinking 'yeah-it looks fine' on the tv.

Why do I like Airplay?
I like being able to scoot around youtube on the iphone and then play stuff to the tv, it's a better user interface than using the atv's menu to search youtube. Also, if a website I'm reading on the phone links to a youtube video, I can watch it large!

I also enjoy reading music websites which may have links to mp3 streams, again it's cool to be able to listen on the stereo directly from the iphone.
At the moment for audio streams I have to switch to an airport express also connected to the stereo.
Remotehd say audio streaming to atvgen1 is coming....that'll save me switching inputs on the stereo (all that 'finding the remote and having to push a button' hassle!).

My view on Apple's stance is that they could have 'easily' enabled the atvgen1 for full airplay with an iPhone software update and atvgen1 software update. They chose not to, but they haven't- as a far as I know- tried to stop remotehd having a go.

Al

Just one thought on the issue of serving investors:

A corporation that produces a product has two groups of investors. The first group is the one that owns the corporation's stock and expects a dividend. The second group, which seems to be the one forgotten in this debate, is the consumer that "invests" in a product.

As a consumer, those products that offer a good investment are those that operate as promised and offer good support. Those products that offer a superior investment are those that have long lives and can be expected to improve over time. A product that "keeps up" rather than becoming obsolete is a superior product.

When I started my business 25 years ago we ran Macs. Unfortunately, the product at that time could not keep up with the demands our growing business. We switched to Windows though I've always maintained a soft spot for Apple all this time. In the last 24 months, I have started to come around again and have been contemplating announcing to my partners and investors that in our next round of IT refurbishments we would be switching back to Apple. The reasoning I planned to use was "Apple offers a superior investment" in no small part due to what I had perceived as Apple's long term commitment to it's products.

Regrettably, this thread of comments leads me to the inescapable conclusion that Apple may care about it's first group of investors but not necessarily the second group- it's consumers. If Apple is willing to sell one it's now "obsolete" ATV1 devices just weeks before it makes it "obsolete" by the introduction of a completely different product without a modicum of warning or effort to accommodate those consumers, how can I justify the switch back to Apple to my investors? How can I risk spending many thousands of dollars in new equipment, servers and software for nearly 75 users when there is a great risk that the product I select today will be obsolete just weeks later?

In business we sometimes make investments for no other reason than to keep our present customers satisfied. To take the position that spending any money in supporting the older product is just throwing away money is highly misguided. Keeping an old customer is always cheaper than bringing in a new one. Apple, of all companies, should know that lesson well.

Dp52X wrote:
Regrettably, this thread of comments leads me to the inescapable conclusion that Apple may care about it's first group of investors but not necessarily the second group- it's consumers. If Apple is willing to sell one it's now "obsolete" ATV1 devices just weeks before it makes it "obsolete" by the introduction of a completely different product without a modicum of warning or effort to accommodate those consumers, how can I justify the switch back to Apple to my investors?

This seems kind of silly. Virtually every product is sold up until the day that the manufacturer releases a new, improved version that provides new features that the old one lacks. But it is absurd hyperbole to term the old product as "obsolete" if it still does everything that it was advertised to do. Sometimes, companies will sell upgrades that add significant additional features to existing products. For example, both Microsoft and Apple periodically offer extra-cost operating systems upgrades that add new features to older computers. Now Apple has released a new device that happens to share the same name as the older device even though its features are substantially non-overlapping. Yet customers who want can add those new features for a fraction of the cost of the original device, while retaining the features of the original device, simply by purchasing an Apple TV2 to work alongside their hardly-obsolete original model.