8 ms·

Back Row

104 points by olivercameron 14y ago

saddino 14y ago
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.
- obviouslygreen 14y ago
  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.
- DHowett 14y ago
  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.
  - derefr 14y ago
    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.
drivebyacct2 14y ago
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.
- smith7018 14y ago
  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.
  - drivebyacct2 14y ago
    >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.
rkudeshi 14y ago
If you're interested in Apple TV apps, also check out what Firecore is doing (http://firecore.com/atvflash-black http://firecore.com/atvflash-black). 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).
- recuter 14y ago
  What's wrong with actual XBMC? The TV is an officially supported target platform and works quite well.
  - rkudeshi 14y ago
    When I tried it, it crashed a lot. I mostly just use iTunes in the Cloud or hook up my computer to the TV nowadays though.
- cjensen 14y ago
  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.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
prawn 14y ago
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.
- danielrhodes 14y ago
  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.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    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.

104 points by olivercameron 14y ago

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.

obviouslygreen 14y ago
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.
DHowett 14y ago
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.
- derefr 14y ago
  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.

drivebyacct2 14y ago

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.

smith7018 14y ago
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.
- drivebyacct2 14y ago
  >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.

rkudeshi 14y ago

If you're interested in Apple TV apps, also check out what Firecore is doing (http://firecore.com/atvflash-black http://firecore.com/atvflash-black). 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).

recuter 14y ago
What's wrong with actual XBMC? The TV is an officially supported target platform and works quite well.
- rkudeshi 14y ago
  When I tried it, it crashed a lot. I mostly just use iTunes in the Cloud or hook up my computer to the TV nowadays though.
cjensen 14y ago
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.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

prawn 14y ago

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.

danielrhodes 14y ago
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.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  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.