Why 4K mattered on ATV4...

[MisterMe]

Perhaps I'm not understanding your point but this is an odd argument in the context of 4K on an Apple TV, a consumer product that frequently undergoes software updates. There aren't many consumer electronics today that don't require periodic software updates. Most are far, far easier to accomplish than the early blu-ray players where you had to load the update via USB stick.

You're just making excuses and lame excuses at that. The primary function of a Blu-ray player is to play Blu-ray discs. I own a Blu-ray player that could not properly handle the most popular Blu-ray movie of all time until it received an update. That is no a model for good user experience. I believe that the blame properly belongs to the disc manufacturer rather than the player manufacturer. However, someone is at fault.

Yes, I understand that consumer electronics need occasional updates and upgrades. I upgrade the OS in my iPhone periodically. I upgrade the OS in my Watch. However, every iPhone that I have ever owned was able to make phone calls without needing an upgrade.My Watch was able to tell time without an OS upgrade.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

This is wrong on several levels. I will deal with the user experience. If I insert a commercial DVD into a DVD player, then that DVD will play. No if's, no and's, and no but's. My experience with Blu-ray is somewhat different. I have very nice Sharp BD player. It plays every commercial DVD title without issue.

The same cannot be said of Blu-ray. What many may not know is that Blu-ray players are Java-based computers that play Blu-ray, DVDs, and, in the case of my Sharp, NetFlix streaming video. I had no issue with my first few Blu-rays. Then, I purchased the Avatar Blu-ray disc. I managed to play it though, but the experience was awful.

A few weeks later, I found a firmware upgrade on Sharp's website. I downloaded and installed the upgrade. As a test, I replayed Avatar. This time, it worked great. However, that is not the point. My Blu-ray player out of the box could not properly handle Avatar. The firmware upgrade needed to handle Avatar was not available when the Blu-ray disc was released.

Sorry about your Blu Ray authentication experience but is it different in the iTunes store experience? For example, buy ANYTHING DRM'd from the iTunes store (how about Avatar?) and then go play it on someone's non-Apple hardware. It will fail. That's a (same kind of authentication) problem too. Is that a "good user experience" or even different than your Avatar experience? And a firmware update won't solve THAT problem. Instead, you and your friend are not watching Avatar tonight.

Buy any iTunes DRM'd media and try to play it through an Apple-approved third party app like Plex running on the same TV4. It will fail too. Why? Because Apple's DRM authentication is just as "walled garden" if not more so than you described in the Avatar playback hassle.

Buy DVD-quality SD video from the iTunes store and try either of the above. Instead of DVD "always just works" experiences on BD players, even SD videos from the iTunes store will fail per the above tests. Is THAT better "customer experience" than your Avatar issue?

Again, Apple has ALREADY picked a 4K standard for now- the one that yields a 4K video file from videos shot by tens of millions of iPhones. If they rolled out a 4KTV, it would be designed to play that (Apple) choice of a standard. And in rolling out a 4KTV that plays that choice of 4K, the opportunity would be there for Studios to offer 4K content that adheres to those same choices. In other words, Apple has ALREADY spoken on a 4K standard for Apple, already IMPLEMENTED a 4K standard and all that's left is this one remaining piece of hardware being able to "just works" play that 4K on a 4K TV set. When Apple launches TV5 "now with 4K", it will certainly be able to play the 4K videos shot on iPhones... so it will certainly be compatible with the 4K "standard" already chosen by Apple.

Is 4K able to evolve beyond Apple's choice? Of course... and it will. And LTE will evolve beyond LTE as it is now. wifi will evolve beyond wifi as it is now. 1080p could still evolve with some of the features slung around here that are still to come in some additional 4K evolution (like wider color gamut and HDR). For example, Apple just released a new TV that can play 1080p at 60fps; prior generations could not do that. That evolves the "well-defined" 1080p standard in Apple hardware. Someone might make something that plays at 1080p 60fps (I've shot 1080p 60fps for many years now). Take that over to grandmas who still has an TV3 or 2 or 1 and it's not going to "just work." Instead, older Apple hardware will try to play it but it will be a stuttering mess. Is that "bad user experience"? Is that even different than your Avatar experience? In your example, you could fix the problem with a software update. In my example, Grandma has to go out and BUY brand new hardware as a software update isn't going to make pre-"4" TV generations play 60fps 1080p.

I get your point but that's not limited to ONLY Blu Ray. And grandma does have to evolve her tech be that BD players or TVs to keep up with either underlying entity's goals of extracting money from wallets by fighting piracy with various forms of ever-evolving DRM or simply evolutions of playback capabilities. If grandma lets her technology get too old, she will have problems with software that demands newer technology. That's ABSOLUTELY the case with Apple hardware and software too.

Waiting for a perfect incarnation of 4K (or 1080p) would be a forever wait... just as not buying another iPhone until Apple rolls out the perfect incarnation of iPhone... or buying another Mac until Apple rolls out the perfect incarnation of Mac. Technology never arrives at perfection. It's more of hitting a threshold and adopting it, then working on another threshold. Apple's 1080p "standard" just added 60fps. Apple's 4K standard is just as established at Apple but not yet playable in this ONE product because Apple chose to leave it out.

Would you knowingly buy a consumer entertainment product for your parents or grandparents if they required upgrades to play their favorite content?

Yes, and I do. I've purchased all generations of TV for my parents:

• Gen 1 capped at 720p
• Gen 2 capped at 720p 30fps
• Gen 3 capped at 1080p 30fps and now
• Gen 4 capped at 1080p 60fps

Note how Apple's "standard" keeps evolving (too). Every single one of those models required regularly software updates. And note that if I held off until Apple got to 1080p standard perfection (are they there yet?), those parents would have NOT YET got to enjoy any TV, as 1080p could still get some of the same stuff to come in the evolving 4K standard.

And, BTW, they also have a BD player to play stuff on discs NOT available via TV or just easier to play because a friend brings over a disc.


Lastly, you might want to scroll up to the top and start hopping through many other threads in the TV forum and read what seems like almost countless posts griping about needing software updates to bring back common & popular features that "just worked" in the "3" that don't (yet) work in this "4". How many software updates has this new "4" already had since it launched? And how many more does it need to fully get on par with "3" functionality? Is that so different than your Avatar firmware update requirement affecting "user experience"?

I have owned every TV and buy them as gifts for family. I love it. But IMO, this "4" should have rolled with 4K playback capabilities if, for nothing else, to deliver an all Apple solution from shooting 4K on iPhones to playing it on 4K TVs. Instead of "just works" that chain is just broken, not because Apple couldn't do it... not because Apple hasn't yet settled on a 4K standard... but because Apple chose NOT to make this "4" have the added feature of being able to (also) play 4K. As is, for grandma to play 4K video she shot on her new Apple iPhone on a 4K TV at 4K she has to jump through something less than a simple "just works" Apple solution, via Roku or Amazon or similar.

Is THAT a better "user experience" for our grandmas than an Apple solution? I think not. Grandma may not live long enough to see a 4KTV arrive to simplify that flow from iPhone video to 4K TV. Sorry grandma.

 

[off_piste]

You're just making excuses and lame excuses at that. The primary function of a Blu-ray player is to play Blu-ray discs. I own a Blu-ray player that could not properly handle the most popular Blu-ray movie of all time until it received an update. That is no a model for good user experience. I believe that the blame properly belongs to the disc manufacturer rather than the player manufacturer. However, someone is at fault.

Yes, I understand that consumer electronics need occasional updates and upgrades. I upgrade the OS in my iPhone periodically. I upgrade the OS in my Watch. However, every iPhone that I have ever owned was able to make phone calls without needing an upgrade.My Watch was able to tell time without an OS upgrade.

Excuses and lame excuses? I wasn't because I simply don't care enough to make excuses for your old Blu-Ray player.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to be confrontational instead of engaging in friendly discourse. I'm also not sure why you feel a one-off problem you had is so egregious. On top of that it was an issue that could be remedied and didn't require the purchase of a separate unit.

 

[priitv8]

Would you knowingly buy a consumer entertainment product for your parents or grandparents if they required upgrades to play their favorite content? At the time that Avatar was released on Blu-ray, 1080p HD video was a well-defined standard. Yet, the nerds responsible for producing the Avatar Blu-ray continue to tinker with their commercial product. The result was a bad user experience. It is my understanding that 4K is still a work in progress. As such, it is almost certain to have some gotcha's if it is deployed outside the nerd world.

You shall thank the DeCSS guy for that. To fix the weak copy-protection of DVD-s, BD was designed from ground up with updateable copy-protection scheme. To bring your player up to the level of DRM on disk, you need to update your player as well.

 

[tanfan]

Can you imagine the difference in responses to this thread if it was reversed and Apple TV was the only one with 4K instead of the only without? Revolutionary! Innovative! Ahead of the curve! Leading the way!

4K isn't coming sometime down the road. It's here now.

 

[MisterMe]

Can you imagine the difference in responses to this thread if it was reversed and Apple TV was the only one with 4K instead of the only without? Revolutionary! Innovative! Ahead of the curve! Leading the way!

4K isn't coming sometime down the road. It's here now.

You are mistaken. Apple is rarely, if ever, an early adopter of technology developed by third parties. In the case of 4K, Apple strategy is following a well-beaten path.

 

[Snoopy4]

Oops! I thought we were talking about 4K RESOLUTION, which is all about pixels. Guess I will move on now.

Not so. It's also about color spectrum capability. Never mind it's proximate capability to 35mm film reproduction.

 

[tanfan]

You are mistaken. Apple is rarely, if ever, an early adopter of technology developed by third parties. In the case of 4K, Apple strategy is following a well-beaten path.

Mistaken? I never suggested Apple's usually leading the pack. I put out a hypothetical....unless you think under my hypothetical scenario many people here would be saying Apple did the wrong thing because 4K is a long way off?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You are mistaken. Apple is rarely, if ever, an early adopter of technology developed by third parties. In the case of 4K, Apple strategy is following a well-beaten path.

Who was just about first to market with USB3C (developed by third parties)?
How about TouchID?
How about 5K retina screen?
Butterfly keys in keyboard?
AAC instead of MP3?
Multitouch?
A9 chip?
Thunderbolt?
Lightning connector?
30-pin connector?
Etc.

Maybe what you really meant is where Apple chooses to lead or adopt early, they are genius for doing so (and everybody should embrace the choices they've made rather than fault them). And where Apple drags their feet, they are genius for doing that too because, by waiting, they can do it best instead of getting in early.

Either way, in this case, we have a split. Apple HAS embraced 4K in just about every other product- even promoting it as part of why we need to buy/upgrade to almost every other product. Only with this Apple TV have they not yet embraced 4K. So 4K is fine, makes perfect sense, is a great feature in all the other Apple products. But here, nobody needs it yet (because Apple chose to leave it out).

This is much like when Apple launched an iPad with Retina and an iPad mini without. Threads gushed about how retina made the new iPad a "must buy"- everyone absolutely needed to upgrade to get retina in that iPad. But threads for the iPad mini spun how retina wasn't needed there... that a slightly smaller screen did not need retina and thus it was "must buy" too... UNTIL a year later when the next iPad Mini launched with the exact same screen size and then it was "must buy" to get retina.

In short: it seems like an awful lot of us works for Apple- whether paid or unpaid- to continuously market whatever Apple has for sale right now. And whatever that is... is exactly right and exactly what everyone needs right now. For Apple products where Apple has already built in 4K, you need 4K in those products... it's part of what makes those "must have." For this ONE Apple product that doesn't have 4K, you don't need 4K here... it's too early, we need to wait for a perfection 4K standard, "the chart", until everything in the iTunes store is 4K, etc... UNTIL next year or so when Apple rolls out the TV5 "now with 4K" and then it will be "must have", exactly as it was when Apple rolled out the "3" and chorus shifted from "720p is good enough" to gushing praise for 1080p in spite of "the chart", "everything in the iTunes store...", etc. Same story again, different resolutions.

Why so many of us work for Apple for free, I don't know. Especially when it comes to THIS particular issue, a 4KTV would not affect ANYONE arguing against it. Nobody would have to upgrade their TV. Nobody would have to download only 4K video files. Nobody would have to do anything different at all than what they do now. And yet, we passionately spin and spin and spin on why it doesn't need 4K... until Apple rolls out the "5" and then this chorus will fall dead silent on the anti-4K spin... until 8K starts gaining some public steam. Rinse. Repeat.

 

[Beerstalker]

You are right, Apple has decided on how they want to support 4K with their phones/tablets/computers.

However, they realize that the 4K content people are going to want on an Apple TV isn't really that content, it is content from the movie/tv studios, Netflix, Vudu, etc. They need to make sure that when they support 4K in the Apple TV that they are going to support what those studios want. I'm betting they took quite a bit of flack over their strange 1080p30 format they used before that required all the studios to make a special version of their content just for iTunes. By waiting for the Ultra HD Premium specs to get finalized now they know how the movie studios are going to start encoding their Ultra HD movies for UHD Blu-Ray. They can set up iTunes to use those same specs so the movie studios can easily port the same files from the UHD Blu-Ray master over.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Studios just want to sell content. They don't care if Apple chooses some oddball format as long as there is some tool that will allow them to be able to get their product into that format. TV1 and 2 required commercial 720p content when many were broadcasting in or favoring 1080i. The one network that most heavily favored 720p was also pushing something called "circle surround" instead of Dolby Digital. And all of them were broadcasting in MPEG2 vs. h.264 in an MPEG4 container suffixed m4v instead of mp4.

They really do not care about what particular format or parameters Apple chooses. They just want to maximize their revenues. Apple just updated their "standard" of 1080p from 1080p30fps to 1080p60fps. In other words, 1080p is not yet "finalized" either as even Apple just updated what their hardware will play at 1080p.

There is no "waiting" for a perfected 4K standard. There is no perfection- just thresholds. Apple has already chosen a 4K standard- the one that is shot by their most important product. Whenever they get around to releasing an TV5 "now with 4K", it will play that 4K standard. Between now and that time, Apple could also be making 30% from 4K movie sales presented in that same 4K standard... and the Studios could be making money on 4K releases via TV too. Instead they'll try to make 4K revenues from Discs, via Roku & Fire, etc and Apple will get 0% of those 4K sales/rentals.

Every model of TV has evolved the "standard". 720p 25fps, 720p 30fps, 1080p 30fps, 1080p 60fps. Rolling out this "4" with the same 4K "standard" Apple chose for the iPhone recording would have been fine. If the larger 4K "governing body" improves upon that "standard" in the next year or two, Apple could roll out an TV5 that still plays the current Apple 4K standard (just as the current one will play SD, 720p and 1080p) AND whatever else improves upon it in some evolving standard.

Apple and the Studios could make 4K content money now and the segment of us that also wanted 4K could enjoy 4K now, AND Apple and the Studios could make better 4K content money in the future when that "5" raises the standard to an even higher level... just as Apple did from hardware generation 1 to 4.

If we genuinely believe that Apple should wait for perfection, let's all wait for a perfect incarnation of iPhone, iPad and Macs too. Because we know the next one won't be the last one... and the future ones will likely be nearer to perfection than the current or next one. In tech, you can't wait for perfection. It's thresholds and Apple has already endorsed a 4K threshold in their most important product.

 

[MisterMe]

...

Why so many of us work for Apple for free, I don't know. Especially when it comes to THIS particular issue, a 4KTV would not affect ANYONE arguing against it. Nobody would have to upgrade their TV. Nobody would have to download only 4K video files. Nobody would have to do anything different at all than what they do now. And yet, we passionately spin and spin and spin on why it doesn't need 4K... until Apple rolls out the "5" and then this chorus will fall dead silent on the anti-4K spin... until 8K starts gaining some public steam. Rinse. Repeat.

There is no need to beat yourself up. Leave Apple products for the competition. Problem solved.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Thanks. Why couldn't I think of that?

More seriously, it's never as easy as following through on that tired old suggestion. There's nothing wrong with doing what Apple has long preached in "thinking different" rather than just worship at the alter of Apple. Faulting ONE thing missing from an Apple product- especially with it's obvious that it could have been there- is just being a free-thinking consumer.

I've owned multiple versions of EVERY TV. I'm "in" (deep in) the ecosystem, so switching to some other company's product is not as easy as just buying some other company's TV equivalent. Even trying to make it all work with- say- Plex on the new "4" is not so easy, as the hooks of the "walled garden" show themselves even within apps made for the new "4."

The point in posting here (for me anyway) is not perpetual, "Apple is always right in all things" rah-rah but to praise them when they seem to get it right and gripe when they seem to not quite hit a target... gaining insights/help/etc from others likely also owning the same hardware. There should be nothing wrong with either stance. But those who can only tow the company line seems to take some great issue with anyone else who can "think different" when that difference is NOT towing the company line... as if they take it personal.

On this particular topic, building in 4K playback would have negatively affected NOBODY. Those happy with "as is" could have continued to enjoy "as is" exactly as they do now- no new TV forced upon them, no 4K files as the only option to download, etc. 4K support would have simply let in another group that DOES want it now (and wants it within an all-Apple hardware chain). Yet, even with that absolute truth, there are people who want to argue hard against the concept which basically does nothing but excludes a group of potential buyers from getting what they want out of an Apple product too. For what? Best I can tell, nothing.

Unless you're paid by Apple to spend time on sites like this to try to spin such conversations into supporting only what Apple has for sale right now, I don't get the harsh judgements, words and/or the spin. Apple doesn't need free marketing forces working hard to sell exactly what is offered right now. They're plenty successful without such volunteers. For example, in spite of my own wants of a 4KTV ASAP, I bought the "4", to replace the "3" which replaced the "2" which replaced the "1". Apple got my money anyway and I think the product is GREAT(!!!) in every way except this one issue. Communicating the latter should not be a crime/troll/gripe/whine/etc. It should simply be an individual opinion not colored by what a massive Corporation has decided to sell right now.

 

[niteflyr]

On this particular topic, building in 4K playback would have negatively affected NOBODY.

The end. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[DevNull0]

Even VUDU, who will let you get digital copies of your BD library for a couple of bones a title, will not let you get the UHD version. I think we're all in for the shakedown. Hence the desire to just go UHD from here on out.

I had a nice VHS library back in the day, then I started buying DVDs including rebuying some of my VHS. Then I asked myself why I kept buying movies at all when it basically means I'm just renting them until the next format comes out. I came to my senses and haven't bought a movie in a good 10+ years. Physical or download-only.

These games with having to pay to upgrade a digital license are just a defective by design concept. If you own a license for the movie, why does the company want to squeeze a few more bucks from a paying customer for a movie they've already paid for? Someone is only going to spend so much on movies in a given month, either upgrading an old title or buying a new one. By always allowing downloads in the latest format the license owners aren't actually losing any money, but they're showing goodwill and encouraging people to continue building their library with confidence that it will always be current instead of feeling like they're flushing money away on next years obsolete crap.

The paying customers get screwed over while the pirates can always re-download the latest format for free. So all these movie industry bean counters do is drive paying customers to piracy.

 

[shandyman]

Who was just about first to market with USB3C (developed by third parties)?
How about TouchID?
How about 5K retina screen?
Butterfly keys in keyboard?
AAC instead of MP3?
Multitouch?
A9 chip?
Thunderbolt?
Lightning connector?
30-pin connector?

Some of your list goes against your argument...

TouchID - Apple's own tech (They bought out the company that was developing it)
Butterfly Keys - Apple redesigned them themselves
Multitouch - In what sense? Touchpad or touchscreen?
Thunderbolt - Apple developed (With Intel)
Lightning connector and 30 pin connector - both proprietary Apple developed.
A9 chip - Designed by Apple.

The person you were responding to said rarely do they, not that they never, so from your list, about 2 or 3 suit your side of the argument, which just makes @MisterMe point even stronger

 

[off_piste]

Some of your list goes against your argument...

TouchID - Apple's own tech (They bought out the company that was developing it)
Butterfly Keys - Apple redesigned them themselves
Multitouch - In what sense? Touchpad or touchscreen?
Thunderbolt - Apple developed (With Intel)
Lightning connector and 30 pin connector - both proprietary Apple developed.
A9 chip - Designed by Apple.

The person you were responding to said rarely do they, not that they never, so from your list, about 2 or 3 suit your side of the argument, which just makes @MisterMe point even stronger

So if Apple jointly develops something it doesn't count. And if they buy out another company before it goes to market it doesn't count. That makes no sense.

 

[2010mini]

So if Apple jointly develops something it doesn't count. And if they buy out another company before it goes to market it doesn't count. That makes no sense.

The original comment was regarding Apple leading in new tech. But the original post just listed proprietary tech which no one else can use.

Remember this thread is about Apple not adopting 4K. The OP thinks Apple should've. But a lot of others, myself included, believe Apple is right to wait as the usually do.

 

[shandyman]

The original comment was regarding Apple leading in new tech. But the original post just listed proprietary tech which no one else can use.

Remember this thread is about Apple not adopting 4K. The OP thinks Apple should've. But a lot of others, myself included, believe Apple is right to wait as the usually do.

You put it better than me. Thanks.

I'm not fussed about no 4K on the Apple TV, as the content still isn't widespread yet. Netflix doesn't have a big collection of 4K content at the moment. Neither does Amazon Prime and even then, it's limited to the US.

4K televisions are still quite pricey. They're getting cheaper, but still not there yet.

So, personally, I think there's no real justification for 4K on the Apple TV yet, other than to show off.

By the time 4K is more common place, Apple will have released an updated Apple TV which will support it.

 

[thadoggfather]

I got a 55" 1080p lg oled (55eg9100) almost a week ago and looks so friggin nice so for me apple tv4 not being 4K didn't matter

 

[off_piste]

You put it better than me. Thanks.

I'm not fussed about no 4K on the Apple TV, as the content still isn't widespread yet. Netflix doesn't have a big collection of 4K content at the moment. Neither does Amazon Prime and even then, it's limited to the US.

4K televisions are still quite pricey. They're getting cheaper, but still not there yet.

So, personally, I think there's no real justification for 4K on the Apple TV yet, other than to show off.

By the time 4K is more common place, Apple will have released an updated Apple TV which will support it.

"Personally" - goes to the heart of the issue

 

[shandyman]

"Personally" - goes to the heart of the issue

Same could be said of the OP. Though my "personally" isn't the heart of the issue. The heart of the issue is, as I said, 4K is still not commonplace yet. That's more likely to be next year. That's more than enough reason to not support it on the Apple TV.

 

[Snoopy4]

I got a 55" 1080p lg oled (55eg9100) almost a week ago and looks so friggin nice so for me apple tv4 not being 4K didn't matter

What were you watching before and have you seen a 4K set on par with this in terms of product line placement? Because it matters.

 

[tanfan]

All it takes is a trip to any place that sells TVs to see that 4K is here. There is more content than some here are thinking. If you are interested in 4K there is no reason to wait. That said, I haven't gone 4K yet.

 

[shandyman]

All it takes is a trip to any place that sells TVs to see that 4K is here. There is more content than some here are thinking. If you are interested in 4K there is no reason to wait. That said, I haven't gone 4K yet.

They're still expensive. The TV channels aren't even broadcasting in 4K yet. Netflix and Amazon Prime Video only have their own content and about 30 films in 4K. So really, there's not much point in having a 4K telly apart from to boast really.