Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AirPlay Alternative Mirrors and Streams To TVs and PCs

Posted by Soulskill on from the get-my-content-to-my-flickering-box dept.

DeviceGuru writes "AirTame has developed an AirPlay-like protocol and HDMI dongle for 1080p video streaming and screen mirroring from PCs to PCs and TVs, and has substantially exceeded its $160,000 Indiegogo funding goal. AirTame streams from Windows, Mac, and Linux PCs to other PCs via apps at both ends, and to TVs via the HDMI dongle, and also offers a multicast mode for broadcasting to multiple PCs and TVs for use in classrooms or conferences. But at least initially, there won't be support for Android or iOS devices in the mix, due OS restrictions. The company says it plans to release AirTame's software, API, and protocol source code under a dual-license enabling free use with GPL-like restrictions, and paid use for commercial applications requiring proprietary modifications."

62 comments

  1. plex by therealobsideus · · Score: 1

    Thanks, but I'll stick to plex and chromecast

  2. Video latency by tepples · · Score: 2

    The article claims that AirTame lets users "drag windows over and back to your primary display", which means it might even support latencies low enough for gaming or other interactive access to a machine across a LAN. That appears to be a goal given AirTame's support for "joystick, key-press, and mouse events" How's the video latency on Chromecast?

    1. Re:Video latency by xombo · · Score: 2

      AirPlay already does this. The standard seems open enough that there are many 3rd party apps that I use which can broadcast to the AppleTV. Plus, it has all the infrastructure, updates, and support of Apple.

      $160,000 for this project? Am I missing something?

    2. Re: Video latency by therealobsideus · · Score: 2

      Chromecast is pretty great, but as it is merely an extension on the pc/mac within chrome all you can do is view a single tab of the browser, or use one of the services. I'm not concerned with broadcasting my entire desktop or laptop environment to my tbs, I just want access to all of my tvs, movies and music in he. With plex media server and plex apps, I now have easy, user friendly access to all my media on my tvs or other devices (cell, tablet, and my roommates can access my media content on their devices as well).

    3. Re: Video latency by therealobsideus · · Score: 1

      Alright. Looks like I need to drop the HTC Sense keyboard.. lol.

    4. Re: Video latency by tysonedwards · · Score: 2, Informative

      Airplay and Miracast already do this. So if you are an anti-Apple zealot, you still have a perfectly good option.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    5. Re: Video latency by ichthus · · Score: 5, Funny

      You don't have to be any kind of zealot to dislike Apple. iTunes makes it quite easy.

      --
      sig: sauer
    6. Re: Video latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing, they say Miracast is Windows only for some reason. It's clearly on a bunch of Android devices, so I'm not sure what it's talking about.

    7. Re: Video latency by smash · · Score: 2

      iTunes can be quite happily ignored. I am a self confessed apple zealot and can count the number of times I've dealt with iTunes in the past year on 1 hand. Also, it's nowhere near as painful (like everything else) on the mac.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    8. Re: Video latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iTunes is garbage no matter where it is. There are so many better players out there.

    9. Re: Video latency by CensorshipDonkey · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, how did I not know about Miracast already?

    10. Re: Video latency by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's only on Windows and Android 4. So if your PC runs GNU/Linux or OS X, or your Android device runs 2.x (like old Kindles and some devices that the prepaid carriers were still selling last time I looked), too bad.

    11. Re: Video latency by ravenscar · · Score: 2

      Maybe, like me, you have an AMD-based video card(s). AMD has yet to release (non-beta) drivers that support Miracast for my video cards. It's been talked about for months on the forums. I believe Nvidia provides the support for the majority of their recent cards already.

    12. Re: Video latency by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I don't know about "perfectly good option", I hadn't previously heard of Miracast so I did some reading. It look promising but I can't find much in the way of adapters for it and what is out there has pretty hit or miss reviews. Additionally the range of hardware that might support miracast seems a bit limited. I have a PC with an i5 processor with no WiDi and my video card is a GTX 560 Ti that I can't find any information on supporting miracast. I could possibly update to windows 8.1 which is supposed to natively support Miracast, but a few of my favorite games aparently don't like 8.1.

      You would think that what amounts to a wireless HDMI cable wouldn't be that radical of technology, but the offerings seem pretty limited and the prices extravagant.

    13. Re: Video latency by iamhassi · · Score: 2

      This airplay alternative uses a HDMI dongle to connect to a TV. There are many HDMI android dongles available that run full android and connect to TVs. Connect one of those and run any one of many streaming apps like miracast or logmein and voila, your PC/Mac/Linux is now on your TV

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    14. Re: Video latency by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      If you are only comparing itunes to music players, then yes, it seems bizarrly constructed. If you just wanted to play music, then even mac users can just point any media player to the itunes directory and play music/videos as normal.

      But it is a media management program that interfacese to different portable hardware ( i*(pod,pad,phone) ). And it lets me backup, and update (make playlists), and sync my i*devices just fine.

    15. Re: Video latency by c_g_hills · · Score: 1

      It is also available on newer Blackberry phones running BB10 (i.e. Q5, Q10 and Z30).

  3. I'd go for anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That was documented, open, free, and universally adopted. A woman can dream.

    1. Re:I'd go for anything by weilawei · · Score: 1

      They can also code. If you don't try, nobody will ever have the opportunity to use it.

  4. Android OS rescrictions? by johnsie · · Score: 1

    On my rooted Android device I use AirAudio to steam the sounds/music from my phone and tablet to my PC and sound system. At the PC end I use Shairport4w Yes there are restrictions that stop this from working on a non-rooted phone. I guess Google have failed to produce anything useful for this themselves. Samsung have some music streaming applications but they cant stream all audio output to the PC.

    1. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Android has Chromecast. It's a bit different than AirPlay in that it is designed to let apps on an Android device work together with corresponding apps on a smart TV, and the focus so far has been pulling content from the cloud, rather than playing back local content (even Play Music can only play music that you have stored in the cloud, not locally stored music yet). There are python implementations of the server that work with YouTube, Netflix and Google Play Music.

    2. Re: Android OS rescrictions? by therealobsideus · · Score: 1

      With the exception of Plex, that plays content locally. Www.plexapp.com

    3. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you that dude that did ROM Toolbox?

    4. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Google (or Samsung or any Android OEM) will never make or ship an app that can send all audio or video from the phone to another device because app developers who make apps where they dont want that to happen (or where the providers of the content for that app dont want it to happen) would kick up a major stink.

    5. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Um, Android does have Miracast support. And Samsung also has their own implementation.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    6. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by Zenin · · Score: 2

      So clearly I must be imagining the Samsung WI-FI All-Share Cast Hub, Wireless HDMI Display Adapter, which...and I quote, "Mirrors phone screen on HDTV".

      --
      My /. uid is better then your /. uid
    7. Re:Android OS rescrictions? by tepples · · Score: 1

      "Mirrors phone screen on HDTV"

      Does this work even in applications that turn on LayoutParams.FLAG_SECURE to disable screenshots, such as client apps for video rental services?

  5. Wireless HDMI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Wow, they've rediscovered wireless HDMI, how exciting....

  6. Ah ha! $89 (+ $15 outside of Denmark) by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Informative

    I skimmed through the whole thing, looking for the price. No wonder it's buried at the bottom - this costs as much as an Apple TV!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Ah ha! $89 (+ $15 outside of Denmark) by smash · · Score: 1

      But... it's open! Anything is free to use it! Never mind that neither android nor iOS currently can...

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  7. Miracast by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find it notable that there is no mention of miracast anywhere in the GoGo description. Isn't this what Miracast is supposed to deliver?

    1. Re:Miracast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Isn't this what Miracast is supposed to deliver?"

      Yep. That was my immediate thought as well. There are already many Miracast dongles in the marketplace selling for as low as $30, and support for Miracast has been available for a while now on several mobile and desktop platforms. So the next logical questions would be: why develop AirTame and why would a user choose it over Miracast ?

    2. Re:Miracast by Vlado · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually there is mention of Miracast, alongside with Chromecast and Apple TV. The section you're looking for is the "Competitors" section.
      http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/airtame-wireless-hdmi-for-everyone--2

      I have to say that I haven't been playing around with any of these things yet, but what they (Airtame) are claiming, seems quite cool to me. Especially the part about desktop extension and multicast sharing.

    3. Re:Miracast by Vanderhoth · · Score: 1

      I agree, I don't know how the other things mentioned work, but they seem to only "mirror" one type of device or only certain apps on certain devices. At the moment I have a media server laptop running Ubuntu 13.10 in my bedroom closet with an HDMI cable running though the wall to my TV. It would be much more convenient to be able to move the laptop somewhere else and not have to worry about finding a longer HDMI cable or cutting holes in the wall to run the cables. I do use Plex on the laptop upstairs to play content on my smart TV downstairs, which is fine for the most part.

    4. Re:Miracast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My same thought. Sounds like WiDi and Miracast, which I've been using for way more than a year.

  8. An AirPlay-like protocol? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, so it's HTTP GET on yet-another-non-standard-port?

  9. Perfect by nukem996 · · Score: 1

    An open source based HDMI key so I can finally get one device that plays all my content over DLNA. This has great potential to also work for PC gaming in the living room. From the Gogo description I gather it has a hardware h264 decoded, which would make it an interesting PC in the living room(think NVIDIA Shield)

  10. yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by dltaylor · · Score: 0

    Last century, we had all of this capability, working, as RTP and RTSP. Of course, since that wasn't HTML-based (for very good reasons), we eneded up with DLNA, supported by hundreds, if not thousands, of devices from various vendors. Of course, Apple couldn't do anything already working and standard, which would mess up their revenue model of locking in the fanboys, so they came up with yet another protocol, as did Microsoft. Further, there are a few other minor players (Sonos, for example) that also created their own revenue-protection scheme.

    WTF!?

    I sincerely hope this company dies quickly, and their devices are orphaned and useless.

    1. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Uhuh - they are re-inventing the square wheel again.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by smash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having the capability and putting out and easy to use, working implementation are two entirely different things. Sooner or later nerds will learn that this is where apple excels.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    3. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still haven't found any use for DLNA when I can just use network shares and access anything I want directly, without transcoding and losing quality.

    4. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can access the network shares with your tv without DLNA?

    5. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by madak3 · · Score: 1

      Actually DLNA really sucks bad. It's a non-solutiion to a misunderstand problem. Miracast and WiDi sounds like an actual alternatives to AirPlay, but it's no where to be found yet. And AirPlay just grows stronger and stronger over the years.

    6. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      If they'd put a Apple-centric front end on RTP/RTSP, then there would have been compatibility AND interoperability, rather than pure "get the suckers' money".

    7. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, mounted shares (NFS, in particular) are nearly always the preferred solution. OTOH, there are some devices. like a Marantz "Internet Tuner", that do speak DLNA, but not shares. Mostly, though, many of the devices have pointless DLNA quirks and limited codec sets, regardless of access method.

    8. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually DLNA really sucks bad. It's a non-solutiion to a misunderstand problem.

      DLNA is an awful protocol (just go and look at my iptables rules... nfsv3 bad) but it does solve the problem of in-home media distribution.

      It may not be what we want, but it works, so it is a solution.

    9. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure can.

    10. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of cheap set-top boxes support smb and nfs. I have one branded kdlinks. It also speaks DLNA, but I've never used that.

    11. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > but it does solve the problem of in-home media distribution.

      No. It does not solve that problem at all. The crapulence of DLNA is why people mess with things like Plex and HTPCs.

      DLNA just takes something that's already well established and standardized and ads pointless cruft to it.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    12. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Last century, we had all of this capability, working, as RTP and RTSP. Of course, since that wasn't HTML-based (for very good reasons), we eneded up with DLNA, supported by hundreds, if not thousands, of devices from various vendors. Of course, Apple couldn't do anything already working and standard, which would mess up their revenue model of locking in the fanboys, so they came up with yet another protocol, as did Microsoft. Further, there are a few other minor players (Sonos, for example) that also created their own revenue-protection scheme.

      DLNA and UPnP go hand in hand with Microsoft (in fact, part of the problem with DLNA is incompatible implementations between Microsoft Windows and other devices (back when it was DLNA and UPnP). This was solved years ago when DLNA and UPnP merged into one standard, which was fine as the various DLNA versions were incompatible. Yes, this is the same UPnP that opens holes in your firewall and all that - same protocol level, all done by Microsoft.

      Apple's protocol is based on ZeroConf, which is an IETF standard for doing things like service discovery, except instead of broadcasts and multicasts, it relies solely on multicasted DNS (hence mDNSResponder), and is, for the most part (excepting the fact it's multicast) DNS.

      AirPlay is a proprietary extension on top of it to allow output of lossless music, videos and other media. Of course, with the size of the Apple ecosystem and the age of AirPlay, changes to the system are impossible (and the keys are well known) without breaking a pile of things.

      Also, with AirPlay so prevalent (it's in a lot of devices) there are more AirPlay sources than Apple devices - many Android apps support streaming output through AirPlay as a compatibility measure, and even things like XBMC support both input (i.e., it can act as an AirPlay target) and output (it can play to AirPlay targets).

      Of course, if you want to be successful, make it work over Bluetooth. Sure you have A2DP, but that's an awful protocol with an even worse mandatory (lossy) codec ("high quality" 768kbps mode can sound worse than 128kbps MP3).

    13. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, Samsung and LG TVs and PVRs can access NFS and SMB shares.

    14. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having the capability and putting out and easy to use.

      Sure you aren't describing one of your fantasies here?

    15. Re:yet another stupid, incompatible protocol by smash · · Score: 1

      No. I've been using airplay for several years now and it is seamless. It just works, and works well.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  11. A few issues.... by DraconPern · · Score: 1

    No mention HDCP issues... Also, PC-PC streaming only works after online registration.

  12. real man should put screw by AndreyWelsh · · Score: 1

    .... and screw it like real man

    1. Re:real man should put screw by AndreyWelsh · · Score: 1

      I speak poetry... lol fire inspire ;)

    2. Re:real man should put screw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... are you guys still going to blow up the Earth for a hyperspace bypass?

  13. Oblig. XKCD by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    927

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose we could invent a new standard specifically for linking to XKCD references. Even though it violates the spirit of that comic here's a standard HTML link for that thing.

  14. This Shit Pisses Me Off! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yet another one to add to the list.

    WiDi, Chromecast, AirPlay, MiraPlay, DLNA and now this all in the already over crowded and virtually unusable 2.4GHz spectrum. Yet I still can't get my Samsung Galaxy S4 to stream to an Android dongle!

    Connecting... Single frame... Black screen... wait wait wait... single frame... time out.
    Oops, format not supported.
    Video blocked due to lack of DRM! Fuck you!

    TBH, at $35 Chromecast seems like the best chance at the moment, but I have to buy another dongle that I can't modify to accomplish what I want, putting my OWN video overlays, pop-ups, and security cameras on my TV. Also, Google.

  15. Get Auto Commissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get Auto Commissions
    Get Auto Commissions