Apple TV and NAS?

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Correction, If you want the best NAS functionality buy a Mac-mini w/ the HDMI out.

That's not a correction. It's an OPINION. Perhaps you could learn the difference? In any case, a Mac-Mini is a pretty darn expensive "NAS". It's more like a media PC. The problem is Apple doesn't have any way to rent the vast majority of movies from a Mac-Mini or you could use it in lieu of an Apple TV (well you still can minus iTunes rentals).

like i said earlier, unless your NAS supports sharing iTunes libraries natively, you wont be able to look at the movies stored on the NAS.

Sorry, but that won't help either because of the security code check. Since there is no way to enter it from the NAS, there is no way to pair an AppleTV to an NAS iTunes server.

In any case, NAS units are just small (usually headless) PCs that tend to often run Unix or Linux. One's only concern for leaving a PC on should be its overall power draw. Compare what an NAS uses to what a small PC would use with its monitor turned off. I'm thinking a low-powered PC Netbook (some are under $250, which is comparable to an NAS unit) might be ideal for operating as an iTunes server. They're designed to use as little power as possible (most don't even have fans). Set it up with iTunes, plug in a big hard drive and set the monitor to turn off after a short interval. Instant low-power iTunes server. Heck, I'm tempted to test the idea out with my hacked Dell netbook running OSX just to see how well it can serve movies.

 

[DoFoT9]

Sorry, but that won't help either because of the security code check. Since there is no way to enter it from the NAS, there is no way to pair an AppleTV to an NAS iTunes server.

oh! damn well that really sucks the!

In any case, NAS units are just small (usually headless) PCs that tend to often run Unix or Linux. One's only concern for leaving a PC on should be its overall power draw. Compare what an NAS uses to what a small PC would use with its monitor turned off. I'm thinking a low-powered PC Netbook (some are under $250, which is comparable to an NAS unit) might be ideal for operating as an iTunes server. They're designed to use as little power as possible (most don't even have fans). Set it up with iTunes, plug in a big hard drive and set the monitor to turn off after a short interval. Instant low-power iTunes server. Heck, I'm tempted to test the idea out with my hacked Dell netbook running OSX just to see how well it can serve movies.

its called an Atom CPU+mobo combination, 10W perfect for any NAS!

 

[Hmm]

It would be nice if they could at least make iTunes run as a service like the Squeezebox does so we don't actually have to be logged in with iTunes open on the machine.

 

[DoFoT9]

It would be nice if they could at least make iTunes run as a service like the Squeezebox does so we don't actually have to be logged in with iTunes open on the machine.

that would be a wonderful feature!

any of these help?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

It would be nice if they could at least make iTunes run as a service like the Squeezebox does so we don't actually have to be logged in with iTunes open on the machine.

Some of the Apple engineers are MORE than aware of this problem. I saw one talk about NAS for the original Apple TV and he said he'd like to see it, but then implied that they have to tow the company policy, which is to be unfriendly to 3rd party equipment so you have to buy Apple brand equipment. If they could keep 3rd party mice from working and get away with it, I sometimes wonder if they'd do it. Apple (and Steve) doesn't CARE what YOU want. It's all about maximizing profits, not making life easier and they have a HUGE vested interest in trying to monopolize online media sales. You WOULD think they would at least make a server that functions like an NAS for the system for their own Time Capsule product line, but perhaps they're afraid that would lead someone to finding a way to do with any NAS. It is more likely that they simply DON'T CARE because it's considered a "hobby" product whereas someone like Sonus CARES VERY MUCH how their product is perceived. It's a shame too because Apple's GUI interface kills all the other products I've seen thus far. Other than the file format limitations and the 1080p thing (currently not THAT big a deal for me since my projector is still 720p and I already did the painful conversion of everything to M4V so other than new rips, it's fine), my Apple TV setup is just stellar for accessing all my media from my home theater.

I'm not thrilled about the prospect of viewing photos on the new Apple TV, though. If I view photos from XBMC on it, it takes a few seconds to load large images from my PowerMac server, whereas I SYNC (store locally) my photos on my current Apple TV which means they come up almost instantly even for large files. I think something like a 8GB or 16GB SSD drive would have been ideal. I have yet to hear how much space it DOES have on its boot drive, though. I just hope it's enough to handle a hack/XMBC type setup since I have the feeling this setup could be made to handle 1080p without too much effort (unlike the original ATV) since even an iPhone4 can handle 1080p files (try playing an Apple HD trailer on it; it works).

 

[crackermac]

Anyone?

So, has anyone tried this yet? Any success stories? I have a Lacie Big5 NAS and I was hoping the Apple TV could mount the iTunes library that is stored on there. When I load up iTunes, it loads my local library, but then the library on my NAS also shows up as a shared library. I'm hoping since it shows up as a shared library on my computer, it would show up on a new Apple TV. I've been slowly converting all of my DVDs over to m4vs in anticipation.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

So, has anyone tried this yet? Any success stories? I have a Lacie Big5 NAS and I was hoping the Apple TV could mount the iTunes library that is stored on there. When I load up iTunes, it loads my local library, but then the library on my NAS also shows up as a shared library. I'm hoping since it shows up as a shared library on my computer, it would show up on a new Apple TV. I've been slowly converting all of my DVDs over to m4vs in anticipation.

Not a chance. The only NAS devices that could possibly work would have to be using either Windows or OSX as the OS and you'd have to be able to set up iTunes on them and register the AppleTV device at least as a streamed library. I think there is one out there that uses Windows, but it's not cheap. A more simple way would be to buy a dirt cheap Netbook (i.e. $200) and then plug a large external drive into it with your library on it and then have the machine set to run 24/7 with the monitor disabled after a timeout and you'd essentially have a Windows based iTunes/NAS device. After all, an NAS device is simply a small networked computer (usually running Linux) anyway. There's nothing magical about them. Some newer routers even feature a full set of UPnP type controls for a USB attached external drive and basically let it function as an NAS. Mine has this function, but it would be useless for Apple TV unless iTunes were running on another computer anyway (you could store the library on it, but iTunes has to be running to sync or even stream an iTunes library).

Like I said in a post above, Apple engineers know all about these limitations, but Steve doesn't want real UPnP support because that would mean less control (i.e. he wants you running iTunes only so you're more likely to buy all your crap from Apple) and that is the ONLY reason AppleTV cannot access NAS devices directly. Like everything else, Steve will decide what you can and cannot use when it comes to his devices. For example, he says, "Thou shalt not covet Blu-Ray" and you either obey or leave the church of Steve because this false deity wants you to buy movies on iTunes, not via Sony devices, even if he cannot offer very many titles to sell. Better to delay, avoid and lie than admit someone else does something better than Apple.

 

[Cliff3]

that would be a wonderful feature!

any of these help?

iTunes won't run as a service on WHS, but you can run it in a disconnected console session. That's what I've been doing for the past year on my WHS machine (HP EX490 with 7TB HD and an Intel E6300 CPU).

 

[DoFoT9]

iTunes won't run as a service on WHS, but you can run it in a disconnected console session. That's what I've been doing for the past year on my WHS machine (HP EX490 with 7TB HD and an Intel E6300 CPU).

interesting to know - i was not aware of that. i wonder why not

 

[CLuv]

I have an TV connected to an HP MediaSmart Server EX490 to stream my media from iTunes to my TV in the living room. You can run iTunes as a service, I have not done that yet, but I have iTunes running on the server.

You can install iTunes 10.x the same way as the instructions are listed for iTunes 9. I've installed both versions without issue. The link below provides steps on how to make iTunes work on an WHS.

http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/11/help-key-install-itunes-9-on-windows-home-server/

On my WHS I have the add-in Advanced Admin Console installed so I can create a launch button for iTunes.exe. You can open iTunes, but you will get an error saying there is an error with your audio/video configuration since it's a headless device. Just click OK and iTunes will open. I then quit my RDC session within Mac OS X and I'm all set to stream to my TV with no issues.

I like this setup better then using HP's built in iTunes server. Reason being their built in iTunes server will only stream music and movies you've ripped. If any music has DRM, no streaming. If you have movies/tv shows from iTunes, no streaming. iTunes eliminates that issue by being installed on your WHS. Another benefit is the Home Sharing feature, if I buy something on my Mac, my wife's Mac, or my iPhone once it's in my library it's synced to the WHS. I don't have to depend on HP's flaky media collector.

Runs great and I plan to use it to connect my TV v2 that I plan to put in the bedroom. Especially after seeing this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76JY...9to5mac.com/frontpage&feature=player_embedded

Hope that helps. If you get an HP EX490, I recommend upgrading your processor. The Celeron in there is poo poo magoo. I upgraded mine to an Intel Pentium E6600. Nothing like some dual core action running at 3.06Ghz.
Pretty easy to do:

http://www.mediasmartserver.net/2009/09/16/a-closer-look-at-the-ex490-and-ex495-hardware/

Cheaper to buy an EX490 and upgrade the processor than buying an EX495. Plus you can get a better processor then stock.

 

[Cliff3]

You can run iTunes as a service, I have not done that yet

I have used the resource kit to package iTunes into a service. The service starts, but the AppleTV can't connect to it. Since running it as a service doesn not result in a client window being created, there is no way to configure it to connect to the Apple TV. iTunes has to be run as an application on WHS.

I like this setup better then using HP's built in iTunes server. Reason being their built in iTunes server will only stream music and movies you've ripped.

Firefly only streams music. No video.

--
FWIW, I began a thread over on mediasmartserver.net last month talking about a way to manage the WHS/Apple TV environment: http://www.mediasmartserver.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=9119

 

[SonicStomp]

You must own a PC and not a mac. Macs will happily sleep for days if not months sipping very little electricity. No fans running, no spinning disks, etc unless needed.

The Mac will also wake from sleep in response to apple tv as well!

 

[CLuv]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

Cliff3, before installing iTunes with the media collector you can have it scan for videos and I had no issues streaming movies I had ripped with handbrake. Granted my AppleTV is hacked. No need to use the hack now that I have iTunes on my WHS.

I can't find the thread or site right now, but there are some running it as a service without issue.

I'm not worried or have a need to run it as a service since my WHS is up 24/7. I'm happy with the way it is since it works without a hitch.

 

[jcschlic]

The no direct NAS support is a dealbreaker for me. I'll be sticking with WDTV which allows direct NAS media server support without Itunes running.

Who wants to have a MAC/PC on all of the time with Itunes running just to back end the AppleTV when you already have a NAS? Just ends up sucking more power up with fan's running cooling off the motherboard, and spinning disks etc.

I tried out the WDTV Live Plus for a while and found the negatives to outweigh the positives. I returned it. I am an original Apple TV adopter, waiting to get the new one. Nothing beats (in my opinion) the interface and overall slickness of the Apple TV. I have tried out a lot of media players too. I have also tried out a lot of recently-produced blu-ray players, which suck for things like streaming content, especially local content.

The best way to incorporate NAS storage with Apple TV is to add that content to your iTunes library, then stream to Apple TV. It has worked incredibly well for me (and my wife) for the since the original Apple TV was released.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

The best way to incorporate NAS storage with Apple TV is to add that content to your iTunes library, then stream to Apple TV. It has worked incredibly well for me (and my wife) for the since the original Apple TV was released.

But that defeats the entire point of an NAS. You might as well just use an external hard drive and save a lot of money. The whole point of an NAS is you can shut off your computers and let it serve the data out, saving electricity and wear (and freeing them up to do other things) on your main computer.

The HP "NAS" units work because they are running Windows (and offer monitor and keyboard support to configure; basically it's just a limited PC) and therefore it can run in the background just like an other Mac or PC running iTunes. Like I said above, you could build an "NAS" using a small PC or even a Mac (Mac Mini would work great, if you don't mind throwing $700 at it when you could get a Netbook for under $250 plus a hard drive). A netbook might not be fast enough to serve multiple ATV units at the same time, though. I haven't tried it, although I could since I have one downstairs. I'd just need to set up an external hard drive (I have one stored off-site already set up as an off-site backup; I should have tried it out when I had it here the other day to update it).

 

[Cliff3]

The HP "NAS" units work because they are running Windows (and offer monitor and keyboard support to configure; basically it's just a limited PC) and therefore it can run in the background just like an other Mac or PC running iTunes.

They are actually headless PCs, so no keyboard or monitor support comes with the box. You manage it remotely via RDP. The CPU needs to be low enough TDP to be able to be passively cooled as there isn't room for a full size CPU cooler in the chassis nor is there any provision on the mobo to power a fan.

The thing that really sets the HP servers apart from a Mac Mini are the four internal drive bays. And they're quite a bit less expensive.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

They are actually headless PCs, so no keyboard or monitor support comes with the box. You manage it remotely via RDP. The CPU needs to be low enough TDP to be able to be passively cooled as there isn't room for a full size CPU cooler in the chassis nor is there any provision on the mobo to power a fan.

The thing that really sets the HP servers apart from a Mac Mini are the four internal drive bays. And they're quite a bit less expensive.

I guess that isn't the model I was thinking of, then. I remember seeing one advertised that had very basic GPU capabilities to set it up.