Amazon Announces Fire TV Stick 4K With Dolby Vision, Atmos, and HDR10+ for $50

[MacRumors]

Amazon today revealed its latest streaming TV device, the Fire TV Stick 4K, which includes support for Dolby Vision, Dolby Atmos, and HDR10+. The device also comes shipped with a revamped Alexa Voice Remote, all packaged together for $49.99.

Amazon says the 4K stick is over 80 percent more powerful than the previous generation, with a new quad core, 1.7GHz processor for quicker load times and enhanced picture quality. With 4K support, users can watch Amazon's catalog of thousands of 4K Ultra HD, Dolby Vision, and HDR10+ titles. The company says this is the first time a streaming media stick has supported Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos, the latter of which requires a compatible connected home audio system.

The Fire TV Stick 4K also provides access to the usual array of apps and Alexa skills that users expect, like Netflix, Prime Video, Hulu, Starz, Showtime, CBS All Access, and more. There's also over 500,000 movies and tv episodes available directly on Fire TV through Amazon Prime.

The company announced new apps are gaining in-app voice control on Fire TV, including A&E, AMC, Sony Crackle, Hallmark Movies Now, HBO Now, HISTORY, IFC, Lifetime, and VH1. These join Netflix, Prime Video, and others, and the feature allows users to call up Alexa to play, rewind, fast forward, and navigate through menus with just their voice.

"We've listened to our customers and pushed to deliver the complete 4K solution they are looking for, all within a compact stick form factor," said Marc Whitten, Vice President, Amazon Fire TV.

"The team invented an entirely new antenna technology and combined that with a powerful 802.11ac Wi-Fi chip that optimizes for the best possible 4K UHD streaming experience, even in congested network environments. Our new quad-core processor delivers a fast and fluid experience and support for Dolby Vision and HDR10+ provides an amazing picture. Plus, the all-new Alexa Voice Remote lets you control your complete entertainment experience and use your voice to quickly find the content you want. Just say, 'Find 4K movies.'"

The Fire TV Stick 4K can be paired with an Echo device and Alexa to control streaming content with far-field voice recognition. Customers can also opt to use the bundled-in Alexa Voice Remote, which combines Bluetooth and multidirectional infrared technology to power on compatible TV and AV equipment, switch inputs, or even tune to a channel on a cable box. The new remote also has dedicated power, volume, and mute buttons, and users can speak directly to Alexa by holding down the microphone button.

Roku has also recently cut down the cost of entry-level 4K streaming devices, announcing the Roku Premiere with 4K support at $39.99 in the U.S. Comparatively, the Apple TV 4K is $179.99 in its cheapest 32GB option, although it has dipped down to as low as $105 in previous sales.

Today's news comes a few weeks after Amazon announced a long list of new products at an event in Seattle, including new Echo speakers and Alexa-enabled subwoofers, amplifiers, a microwave, wall clock, and more. In total, senior vice president of Amazon Devices Dave Limp said that the event marked the largest number of devices and features that Amazon has ever debuted in one day.

Amazon has put the Fire TV Stick 4K up for pre-order today for $49.99, and the device will start shipping on October 31 in the United States and Canada. The United Kingdom, Germany, and India will see a launch in November, and Japan will get the 4K stick by the end of the year. Customers can also pre-order the new Alexa Voice Remote separately for $29.99, and it will launch on October 31 as well.

Article Link: Amazon Announces Fire TV Stick 4K With Dolby Vision, Atmos, and HDR10+ for $50

 

[Delgibbons]

Holy moley that's cheap

 

[itsmilo]

Cannot wait to get my get my hands on one. I use my gen 1 one almost daily but it has gotten really really slow

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Would someone who has invested THOUSANDS on an AV system with at least 9 speakers, an expensive AV receiver, and a pricey 4K TV with HDR10+ really consider a $50 device that streams over WIFI (how many people have the bandwidth to stream 4K) for their system?

Is this all about boasting specs or is there really a market for this?

Despite this, if they go on sale for $39 during BF, I'm in for one. Just because.

 

[MacOH21]

For only $79, you can also get the 4k stick plus the newest echo dot - a $20 savings. Just ordered mine.

 

[Juicy Box]

Roku has also recently cut down the cost of entry-level 4K streaming devices, announcing the Roku Premiere with 4K support at $39.99 in the U.S.

Amazon has put the Fire TV Stick 4K up for pre-order today for $49.99

Comparatively, the Apple TV 4K is $179.99 in its cheapest 32GB option

Apple's device and OS is much better imo, not enough to justify the huge price difference for most users.

The majority of people probably use the same few apps like Netflix, YouTube, HBO, and if they can get access to the apps on the much cheaper device, why go for the very expensive ATV?

 

[rmoliv]

Apple's device and OS is much better imo, not enough to justify the huge price difference for most users.

The majority of people probably use the same few apps like Netflix, YouTube, HBO, and if they can get access to the apps on the much cheaper device, why go for the very expensive ATV?

Can you watch iTunes movies and other Apple content on Amazon’s junk? Plus AirPlay...

 

[seinman]

Would someone who has invested THOUSANDS on an AV system with at least 9 speakers, an expensive AV receiver, and a pricey 4K TV with HDR10+ really consider a $50 device that streams over WIFI (how many people have the bandwidth to stream 4K) for their system?

Yes, there's a market for this. 4K streaming uses 15-20 mbps from most subscription services. That's not much bandwidth at all. If you're ripping and streaming your own 4K blu-ray discs (say, from your own Plex server, which is how I manage my media), then you're going to see a max of maybe 100 mbps, more like 50-ish for most titles. Again, not a ridiculous requirement these days, seeing as home internet service is faster than ever and wifi has become fast and somewhat reliable if done right. And if you're really concerned about bandwidth, or live in an area with lots of wifi interference, get the ethernet adapter for it and hardwire it to your router. Problem solved.

I don't have a 4K TV yet, but I am interested in getting one of these. I'm shooting and editing all of my family's home movies in 4K now to future-proof them, and acquiring 4K movie and TV content where available, even though I can't actually view it in full resolution yet. Some day I'll be able to. And I want to be prepared for that day.

 

[duervo]

Would someone who has invested THOUSANDS on an AV system with at least 9 speakers, an expensive AV receiver, and a pricey 4K TV with HDR10+ really consider a $50 device that streams over WIFI (how many people have the bandwidth to stream 4K) for their system?

Is this all about boasting specs or is there really a market for this?

Despite this, if they go on sale for $39 during BF, I'm in for one. Just because.

Well, considering that 802.11n will get you around 450mbps after overhead, etc., and 802.11ac gets you about 1000mbps, I’d say the number of households that can stream 4K to one of these devices vastly outnumbers the ones that cannot. Especially when 4K streaming uses about 25mbps (according to Netflix.)

Even the real bandwidth bottleneck in my house (my mid-tier internet package (150mbps)) is plenty for that.

 

[Juicy Box]

Can you watch iTunes movies and other Apple content on Amazon’s junk?

I don't think so, but unless the user has a decent iTunes collection currently, they probably would use one of the many other options out there that are more universal. Especially when they find out they need to get a streaming box that is many times the price of competing boxes to watch iTunes Content.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

Well, considering that 802.11n will get you around 450mbps after overhead, etc., and 802.11ac gets you about 1000mbps, I’d say the number of households that can stream 4K to one of these devices vastly outnumbers the ones that cannot. Especially when 4K streaming uses about 25mbps (according to Netflix.)

Even the real bandwidth bottleneck in my house (my mid-tier internet package (150mbps)) is plenty for that.

25Mbit for 4k is HIGHLY compressed. You're going to have impact on picture quality at those levels. Streaming 4k is a completely different deal than non-streaming media 4k.

 

[Juicy Box]

Would someone who has invested THOUSANDS on an AV system with at least 9 speakers, an expensive AV receiver, and a pricey 4K TV with HDR10+ really consider a $50 device that streams over WIFI

You are probably correct, I don't have expensive AV equipment, but I much rather have things wired when possible.

But, most of the people out there don't have thousands of $ on AV equipment on all of their TVs.

how many people have the bandwidth to stream 4K

Lots of people.

Well, considering that 802.11n will get you around 450mbps after overhead, etc., and 802.11ac gets you about 1000mbps,

I agree with your point, but I have never came close to any of these speeds with my devices at home.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Well, considering that 802.11n will get you around 450mbps after overhead, etc., and 802.11ac gets you about 1000mbps, I’d say the number of households that can stream 4K to one of these devices vastly outnumbers the ones that cannot. Especially when 4K streaming uses about 25mbps (according to Netflix.)

Even the real bandwidth bottleneck in my house (my mid-tier internet package (150mbps)) is plenty for that.

802.11n and 802.11ac are INTERNAL WIFI speeds and do not take into account the internet speed coming into your house. Some ISP's do offer great speeds for cheap, but I would say most do not and many homes are still working with 25-50Mbps service. Of those with high speeds, many are data-capped and not 4K-friendly.

 

[CJM]

I’m glad that Amazon is so aggressive on their pricing. I feel like tech prices have just been creeping up higher and higher instead of getting cheaper for better technology.
Unless I just had money to spare, I’d always choose this over the Apple TV.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Yes, there's a market for this. 4K streaming uses 15-20 mbps from most subscription services. That's not much bandwidth at all. If you're ripping and streaming your own 4K blu-ray discs (say, from your own Plex server, which is how I manage my media), then you're going to see a max of maybe 100 mbps, more like 50-ish for most titles. Again, not a ridiculous requirement these days, seeing as home internet service is faster than ever and wifi has become fast and somewhat reliable if done right. And if you're really concerned about bandwidth, or live in an area with lots of wifi interference, get the ethernet adapter for it and hardwire it to your router. Problem solved.

I don't have a 4K TV yet, but I am interested in getting one of these. I'm shooting and editing all of my family's home movies in 4K now to future-proof them, and acquiring 4K movie and TV content where available, even though I can't actually view it in full resolution yet. Some day I'll be able to. And I want to be prepared for that day.

Missing my point that the main selling points of this new stick is Dolby ATMOS and Dolby Vision, both of which require a substantial investment in equipment.

I know if I had tons of money invested in the best equipment for my home theater and wanted to enjoy the latest Atmos and Vision, I wouldn't rely on a $50 wireless stick. I'd have a BOX, hard-wired into my home network, for the most reliable playback.

 

[Mabus51]

ISPs putting data caps on home internet is the death of 4K streaming.

 

[seinman]

I wouldn't rely on a $50 wireless stick. I'd have a BOX, hard-wired into my home network, for the most reliable playback.

https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Ethernet-Adapter-Fire-Devices/dp/B074TC662N

 

[Juicy Box]

ISPs putting data caps on home internet is the death of 4K streaming.

There is a large portion of US homes that do not have data caps or they are not enforced.

Even in places that do have data caps, many ISPs have options to pay extra for a non-data capped plan.

For example, Comcast charges $50 to remove the data cap in places that they enforce it.

 

[dvanwinkle]

Thanks for this thrilling Apple news!

 

[uecker87]

If only Amazon and Google weren't in their little spat. I use YoutubeTV for live sports and Fire TVs are a no-go since no YTTV app on them.

 

[Juicy Box]

I’m glad that Amazon is so aggressive on their pricing. I feel like tech prices have just been creeping up higher and higher instead of getting cheaper for better technology.

Me too.

I think the ATV4k is much better than the competition, but it is really expensive.

My baby boomer parents just recently cut-the-cord on their cable TV and they are using DirecTV Now. They would have likedto get ATVs for all their TVs in their home, but it would have been very expensive to do so.

On amazon day, I bought them 3 Fire sticks for a fraction of the price of what one ATV would have cost. It isn't as pretty or fast, but it plays the apps they need.

 

[euvnairb]

Honestly, I wish the 4K ATV was cheaper -- I'm so ingrained into the Apple ecosystem that I have to get the ATV. I have a bunch of movies and tv shows on itunes, and I have apple music so I'm always streaming through the ATV. I also like that I can seamlessly connect my airpods to the ATV and watch shows and not disturb my family.

I always wait until there are black Friday style sales to justify buying something like an ATV.

 

[FelixDerKater]

Couldn't see that one coming from a mile away with all of those discounts leading up to it...

 

[SBlue1]

Didn't find it in the press release but looks like this is Wifi only? Is there a way to connect my iPhone with my por... umm my latest netflix movies on it to the hotel TV through bluetooth? Most hotel TVs have free USB slots nowadays so that would be great.

 

[Zimmy68]

It's easy to say you support Dolby Atmos when you host zero content for it.