Can Apple TV use an external NAS?

Question

Level 1

26 points

Can Apple TV use an external NAS?

I'm looking at buying a LaCie 3TB 2big NAS to use for serving media. Specifically, it will hold my entire iTunes and Aperture libraries.

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Lacie/301508U/

The primary objective here is to have a large, expandable, RAID-mirrored storage for all media content.

Can anyone tell me if I'll have any problems making Apple TV access content directly from a NAS? This one supports AFP, Bonjour, etc. Full specs are at the URL above. I intend to simply move my entire iTunes library off my MBP's hard drive to the NAS.

Dan

Apple TV

Posted on Apr 24, 2011 3:49 PM

Reply

Answer 1

dantrimble Author

Level 1

26 points

Apr 24, 2011 3:57 PM in response to dantrimble

Forgot to say, I'm using a 1st generation Apple TV. Its warranty is expired so I'm not opposed to hacking it, but I really, really, really would prefer not having to do so.

Reply

Answer 2

Apr 24, 2011 4:05 PM in response to dantrimble

Hey dantrimble,,,,

I have not attempted this yet, but I soon want to use my SeaGate Free Agent 1TB USB for the same thing.

Again, not sure, but I plan to USB it into my AirPort Extreme "n". Then it should be available for wireless access via my iMac, PC (POS), iPad, and soon to be iTV2....

I'm pretty sure that'll do it.........Again no first hand experence as yet....

Good Hunting..........

Reply

Answer 3

Apr 24, 2011 4:57 PM in response to dantrimble

I'm pretty sure (but not certain) that this will only stream music, not videos or photos. I've been Googling this for some time, and the conclusion I reached was that a real computer needs to be running iTunes with Home Sharing enabled to get full functionality. With that in mind, I'm probably going to get a Mac Mini (when they're refreshed with Thunderbolt) with a big hard drive attached. That's obviously much more expensive than an Apple TV and a hard drive, but so far as I can tell it's the only way to make it all work.

Reply

Answer 4

Apr 24, 2011 5:26 PM in response to rbrian Scotland

Hey rbrian,

I bet you are correct... I was hopeful that the NAS would be the "holder" of the .m4v files, etc and my iMac / iTunes would be the gateway to the ATV2.......

I guess I could always load the .m4v from the NAS to iMac / iTunes then stream to the ATV2..... whew...!

Reply

Answer 5

MaxHedrm

Level 1

48 points

Apr 24, 2011 5:31 PM in response to Community User

I think that would work. Simply point iTunes on the iMac/MBP to the NAS for its Library. As long as the drive is mounted, & the network is fast enough you should be able to use home sharing for it.

I guess that's not directly, but it's close. As long as the computer is on, it should work.

Reply

Answer 6

Apr 24, 2011 5:39 PM in response to MaxHedrm

dantrimble,,,,,

So,,, it should work... you just may have some "conflict" if others are using your wifi the same time you are streaming a .m4v.....

Maybe not if your wifi stuff is "fast"!!!!

Have fun.....

Reply

Answer 7

dantrimble Author

Level 1

26 points

Apr 24, 2011 5:42 PM in response to MaxHedrm

Now I'm confused. That obviously works fine for iTunes. But what about an Apple TV?

I have two Mac book pro laptops. No desktops. I also have a 1st Gen apple tv in the living room. The goal is to get ALL media content - photos, music, and most especially movies - off the laptop drives entirely. Both those laptops would store their libraries on the LaCie NAS I'm looking at.

I would like for apple tv to be able to access any of the media content directly from the NAS, even if either or both laptops are not around.

Is this possible, or has NAS really been marginalized so much by apple that I'll have no practical option but to buy a Mac mini or Mac pro to serve media?

Reply

Answer 8

Apr 24, 2011 6:03 PM in response to dantrimble

dantrimble,,

OK, I see now that I've cofussed you,,,,,, didn't mean to... Sorry.

It will only work if you have one of your MBP computers on and streaming the movie via iTunes....

Reply

Answer 9

dantrimble Author

Level 1

26 points

Apr 24, 2011 8:20 PM in response to Community User

Oh no, no don't be sorry. It's fine; I just want to make sure I'm understanding this. I'm just utterly blown away how freaking complex it is to deploy an external media server for iTunes content. Apple products in general are so straight-forward, it's just such a strange juxtaposition to then not be able to do something that seems like it should be, frankly, rather trivial.

Anyway, that said, thanks -- and to everyone else -- this is helping quite a bit.

Now, to make sure I understand, I have basically two choices:

1. I can go with the LaCie and store all of my media content on there IF I'm willing to accept that my MBP must be present, turned on, and configured for home sharing to make this work. (Of course, it would have to be the MBP with the iTunes that's matched to the library on the LaCie)

2. If I want a truly stand alone media server, I need to pony up substantially more money for an iMac, Mac Mini, or Mac Pro, and store all the content on there, and have Apple TV connect to that particular iTunes library.

Am I correct on these two points?

IF my understanding is correct, and I wanted to go with #2 (as if I could afford it!), I assume I could simply copy music or videos from that "server" to my own MBP so I can play that content while on the road (I travel frequently)? Provided, of course, that I haven't capped out the five devices all iTunes content can be authorized to play on.

Thanks again for the help.

Dan

Reply

Answer 10

MaxHedrm

Level 1

48 points

Apr 24, 2011 8:45 PM in response to dantrimble

Yes, those are both correct. Though you could use the NAS with the iMac/mini/whatever if you so chose.

Reply

Answer 11

Alley_Cat

Level 7

20,548 points

Apr 25, 2011 3:26 AM in response to dantrimble

2. If I want a truly stand alone media server, I need to pony up substantially more money for an iMac, Mac Mini, or Mac Pro, and store all the content on there, and have Apple TV connect to that particular iTunes library.

There's clearly a gap in the product range for an affordable Apple branded basic media server - we have no idea if Apple will fill this gap or not.

Do not forget that you could also use a PC with iTunes to perform media server duties so a modern low powered compact PC or Netbook running iTunes, or many older PCs would likely fit the bill for far less - the iTunes server aspect it not that power hungry or processor intensive just to serve media.

Also you could look at refurbished MacMinis etc from Apple themselves which are cheaper.

AC

Reply

Answer 12

Apr 25, 2011 6:52 AM in response to dantrimble

dantrimble,

Thanks for the kind words.......

Yes, this "medium" is very confusing for us beginners.... I'm clawing my way up this vertical learning curve and it seems as quickly I inch my way up the technology changes quicker....... It's challenging, but sill fun.

Appears that you are on the right path..... #2 does sound the best, and hey,,, it's only money... (I tell my wife that all the time.)

Don't forget to mark your question as "answered" if you are satisfied..........

Good Hunting.............

Reply

Answer 13

MaxHedrm

Level 1

48 points

Apr 25, 2011 7:30 AM in response to Alley_Cat

Alley_Cat wrote:

There's clearly a gap in the product range for an affordable Apple branded basic media server - we have no idea if Apple will fill this gap or not.

Sadly, they sort of had it half filled with the first gen Apple TV. But when they improved the video output, they removed the storage. 😐

Reply

Answer 14

Alley_Cat

Level 7

20,548 points

Apr 25, 2011 7:57 AM in response to MaxHedrm

MaxHedrm wrote:

Alley_Cat wrote:

There's clearly a gap in the product range for an affordable Apple branded basic media server - we have no idea if Apple will fill this gap or not.

Sadly, they sort of had it half filled with the first gen Apple TV. But when they improved the video output, they removed the storage. 😐

Kinda yes, kinda no.

While they beefed up the processor, the implemented video performance boost is minimal though not insignificant if you wanted to play 720p at >24/25fps - so a prerequisite for many home users not in PAL land.

At the same time they removed hardware upscaling to 1080p and easily selectable PAL/NTSC rate modes.

While I still prefer the overall design of ATV1 as ATV2 still does not have many of it's handy features (storage, purchasing, iTunes Extras, iTunes LP, Airport playback to other Airport devices, nicer menu layout) the AppleTV2 is streets ahead for actual playback transport, and the AppleTV 1 could still not function as a media server to other AppleTV's. That's what's really needed is a server/playback AppleTV that can feed any other on the network but is not the basic functional model.

Reply

Answer 15

dantrimble Author

Level 1

26 points

Apr 25, 2011 7:59 AM in response to MaxHedrm

Well, the presence of a hard drive is better, IMHO. But I will never understand why they artificially limited it's capacity to 160GB; that doesn't hold even a third of our videos, and we really don't have that many. Yes, it can be hacked for bigger drives, but that just seems so far beyond ridiculous to have to go that route. I'm guessing that either it was short sighted or perhaps even quite intentional to force heavy users into buying a Mac mini or other such more costly product.

The bigger issue I see is that the gap--the lack of ability to have a _stand alone_ media server (one that can serve your iTunes stored content without the presence of another computer controlling the interface)--can seemingly ONLY be filled by Apple; they who control iTunes. Smart product marketing, but a great hindrance. I like iTunes. A lot. I have no qualms whatsoever about being required to use it for managing my served media content. But it has effectively locked out the market to anyone else who might want to tackle the storage problem.

The newer Apple TV makes me wonder if Apple will EVER tackle this problem. It sure looks like they don't believe local storage of media content will be that important in the future. Bummer; I'm not sure I believe wireless or even wired streaming are quite as efficient as they should be either, hence my preference for storing as locally as possible.

Hurumph.

Reply