1. The tvOS interface is far superior to the Roku.
2. The ATV works within the Apple Eco System.
3 Overall better user experience with the Apple TV.
I have a Roku and an ATV 4. I never use the Roku.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces 'Apple TV 4K' With 4K and HDR Video Powered by Faster A10X Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1. The tvOS interface is far superior to the Roku.
2. The ATV works within the Apple Eco System.
3 Overall better user experience with the Apple TV.
I have a Roku and an ATV 4. I never use the Roku.
Its a shame they didn't bring down the price of the 4th Gen one.
I don't own a 4K TV and am not in a rush to buy one but would be rather tempted if the 4th Gen model came down to nearer the £100 mark in the UK.
I don't own a 4K TV and am not in a rush to buy one but would be rather tempted if the 4th Gen model came down to nearer the £100 mark in the UK.
I was going to order a 4K Apple TV until I saw it had no digital audio output. Useless! So if I have the HDMI connected to my Philips 4K TV, which only has one 4K-HDMI 2.2 rated input so I will either have to get a switcher or manually change over leads from my Samsung UHD K8500 Ultra B-R player. However, if I want to get high quality audio to my Benchmark DAC3L, I am out of luck other than using the optical TOSlink out from my TV. There I would guess, the audio stripped out of the HDMI signal will have been thoroughly messed about with and degraded. At the moment I use a 2011 Mac Mini as my media server, outputting 1080p to a video HDMI cable but 192khz/24 bit LCPM stereo via its USB out. I think I will just wait and get the next Mac Mini with real 4K output, when it comes out and hope they have not changed the SDD format, so I can move over my 2TB Crucial SSD.
What exactly is there to "restore?" Pretty much everything on streaming devices (not just the ATV) is cloud based.
I can see it either way, if there is a way or sequence to restore it, fine.
I actually finally fixed my 4th generation Apple TV today. It had been out of service since April. When I would switch to the TV's HDMI input with the Apple TV, I would get the home screen for 1 second and it would go away as if there was not output from Apple TV I changed HDMI cable, changed inputs the Apple TV was on, unplugged it for weeks, etc. Nothing would fix it. I tried and tried. I did some kind of hard reset remote sequence too, no help.
I finally bought a USB-C cable and "updated and restored" via iTunes. It brought it back to life, so there was a use for it, but maybe there is some other way to save an Apple TV now that the USB-C is removed.
4. Apple upgrades you to 4K for free.
[doublepost=1505306899][/doublepost]
Does your TV have an optical out? You can always get a receive that can support it.
Several posts about it. Answer is, we don't know.Will there be a special code to boot it a different way? Network boot from an image? Who knows? Somehow they didn't like the USB-C method, and here we go again.
As for the remote, not sure what you mean. I plug it into one of the many lightning cables I have around that are used for charging iPhones or iPads!
[doublepost=1505266296][/doublepost]
Seems to serve no point.
If they actually used the storage for something, great. I've never seen it used for anything at all. I have no problem with the $20 but it has to be for something, good grief.
That was my thought exactly. I have a 64 GB ATV4 that, as far as I can tell, never uses the memory installed. The $20 is a small price to pay for double the memory for sure, but why should I (and thousands more in the "why wouldn't you" crowd) hand over more cash to Apple for something that is not useful? I'm not trying to poo poo Apple here, just trying to be a smart consumer and protect my hard-earned money.…
I have both and never use the ATV4. So there...
1) Not sure how the interface is better. The remote is trash on the Apple TV. The trackpad is a horrible idea and it's fragile as hell. I don't care how 'pretty' the UI is, just how simple it is to get to the TV, show or movie I want to see and the Roku does simple perfectly. The Apple tv your constantly swiping on the trackpad and can't accurately navigate because sometimes it jumps to far left or right or whatever. Give me simple anyday for operating the TV.
2) I don't buy or rent anything through iTunes or Apple Music or anything else so that's a pointless argument. The Apple Eco System was only created to tie you into their hardware, by supporting that closed market you're stuck with whatever they allow you to use.
3) I don't share this experience. To each their own, but Roku costs a fraction of the price and gets the job done. Apple TV is not worth the price and the new update didn't do anything to fix that.
Apple does not control when Amazon decides to release their app. Why is everyone so crazy about Amazon? They have few good 'exclusive' shows made by them and their Prime library is meh.
According to the tech specs on Apple's website the new Apple TV 4K supports E-AC-3. And according to Dolby's website E-AC-3 supports Atmos. So I wonder if the new Apple TV does in fact support Atmos. But it is odd they wouldn't advertise this capability if the Apple TV does infact support it.
Unless I'm mistaken on the whole thing, Atmos support using DD+ would require it to be bitstreamed. If it is bitstreamed, system audio sounds, including Siri, would not be transmitted which would pretty much be a non-starter for Apple. And if it supported it, I'm sure they would have mentioned it as a selling point.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
A big rant about nothing. A 4K
TV doesn't force anything on anyone. If you are worried about your cap but end up with a 4KTV, you can keep downloading exactly what you download now- no net negative effect on you at all. It doesn't force you to only download 4K video and thus doesn't obligate it's owners to burn more bandwidth at all. Just keep doing what you're doing and the net effect is NO difference vs. your data cap.However, even for you, it will be able to run apps more efficiently, bring on improved games, function more efficiently, etc.
If you are shooting your own video- say on an iDevice- you can shoot it at 4K and display it that way easily with this. And that won't burn 1 byte off of your data cap.
In your off-the-grid status, if you perhaps "roll your own" by buying any discs and converting them, this will open up ways to play 4K without having to burn 1 byte off your data cap too.
Since it can work wth HEVC, file sizes can be SMALLER while maintaining quality. If iTunes can "see" the "5" is requesting a file, perhaps even the 1080p or 720p stream you usually seek might be fed as an HEVC file. If so, that will actually REDUCE the amount of data you burn to keep doing what you are doing.
And so on. Apple can't fix your broadband cap issues. Nor should they constrain their development because of the potentially limiting choices of other companies. Apple should develop the best hardware it can in hopes of pressuring other companies to "keep up" with their parts of the equation. If instead, those broadband companies opt to try to constrain with pricing/cap penalties, flex your consumer option of competition. No competition where you are? Move? Or take your computer to work or where you can access fast internet, buy your video in iTunes and download it there, then take it back home and stream it to your
TV.I understand the frustration of broadband caps. But in no way should that make a tech company cling to a status quo that just happens to "fit" now. Else, if your broadband source decides to further pinch that quota, does that press us back to 720p or SD to "fit" the capacity. You have many options to feed your current or new
TV besides the lone option of exceeding a broadband cap by only downloading 4K as if this forces that. It does not.
Last edited:
Would an HDMI splitter work for you ? - at least to split the hdmi from the apple TV to feed your audio receiver, and a second to fed your television? But sadly, that would bypass your beautful DAC.
Last edited:
Looking at the spec sheets someone linked to on Reddit, the 4K upgrade vs regular Atv 4 includes a tweaked Siri remote, a10 chip vs a8, gigabit Ethernet port vs 100 Ethernet port and Bluetooth 5 vs Bluetooth 4.
Edit: I forgot the hdmi is updated to 2.0 vs 1.4 on the older version. I also just read about the enhanced positional data in the new Siri remote vs the older version.
All in all, it may be worth the price difference getting the 4K version even if attached to a 720/1080 tv, depending on your use situation.
Edit: I forgot the hdmi is updated to 2.0 vs 1.4 on the older version. I also just read about the enhanced positional data in the new Siri remote vs the older version.
All in all, it may be worth the price difference getting the 4K version even if attached to a 720/1080 tv, depending on your use situation.
Last edited:
The device you sent me to not only doesn't do 4K @60hz, it isn't HDMI 2.0a, and also doesn't support Dolby Vision. ETA: the second comment is that it doesn't support HDR/Deep color so the customer returned it for a refund.
***Edit to add clarity: my first post was about having to buy a new receiver. If you didn't buy your receiver this year (or one of the like 4 last year that supports HDCP 2.2 over HDMI 2.0a) you're probably going to need a new receiver. If you have a fairly new receiver, the bitstream signal over optical/spdif would have worked fine and you could just have plugged the Apple TV into your new tv's HDMI 2.0a port and the audio into your not so new receiver that most likely has support for Dolby Digital +, etc. Apple chose to not output bitstream audio over optical/spdif, probably because of Siri integration (but you could PCM the same way but over optical imo), and thus requires you to use HDMI to connect to your receiver. If you try to use HDMI 2.0a with HDCP 2.2 on anything but the latest receivers you won't get anything on your new 4K tv because it won't pass through.
This is the only point I am making about the Apple TV 4K
Last edited:
A big rant about nothing. A 4K
However, even for you, it will be able to run apps more efficiently, bring on improved games, function more efficiently, etc.
If you are shooting your own video- say on an iDevice- you can shoot it at 4K and display it that way easily with this. And that won't burn 1 byte off of your data cap.
In your off-the-grid status, if you perhaps "roll your own" by buying any discs and converting them, this will open up ways to play 4K without having to burn 1 byte off your data cap too.
Since it can work wth HEVC, file sizes can be SMALLER while maintaining quality. If iTunes can "see" the "5" is requesting a file, perhaps even the 1080p or 720p stream you usually seek might be fed as an HEVC file. If so, that will actually REDUCE the amount of data you burn to keep doing what you are doing.
And so on. Apple can't fix your broadband cap issues. Nor should they constrain their development because of the potentially limiting choices of other companies. Apple should develop the best hardware it can in hopes of pressuring other companies to "keep up" with their parts of the equation. If instead, those broadband companies opt to try to constrain with pricing/cap penalties, flex your consumer option of competition. No competition where you are? Move? Or take your computer to work or where you can access fast internet, buy your video in iTunes and download it there, then take it back home and stream it to your
I understand the frustration of broadband caps. But in no way should that make a tech company cling to a status quo that just happens to "fit" now. Else, if your broadband source decides to further pinch that quota, does that press us back to 720p or SD to "fit" the capacity. You have many options to feed your current or new
All very good points. Some users will benefit from using the 4K Apple TV as you suggest. From a typical user point of view, I use mine mainly for watching iTunes movies I rent or already own. Or for watching Netflix (Which offers 4K movie and content). For my use, the 4K Apple TV will be limited due to internet data caps and that is frustrating.
I was merely pointing out that internet providers are limiting innovation. Which, I feel may limit the sales of a potentially great product. I feel the weak link with this form of entertainment, is the service providers. Home internet with data caps, and cell service providers that degrade your picture quality after you pass a certain data cap. Kind of pointless to keep releasing more 4K or beyond products when the service providers are set on limiting service. No rants here just plain facts. But again, I do see your point. Some will find the Apple 4K TV very enjoyable for their needs.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
There are caps/tiers on cell service for phone too. Stop developing newer phones?
That's the problem with the thinking. I hear the frustration but it's not pointless to advance technology. Supporting players need to catch up or consumers need to motivate such actions by not paying those holding back the advances. If you can change providers, protest with your wallet. If you can't, find workarounds like the idea of taking the computer to work or where you have fast broadband and buy/rent your video there, then take it back home to watch onTV.
Else, eventually all tech progress would have to cease because a few players opt to not keep up. Rather than just accept that and asking the tech players closer to innovation front to stop, get after those trying to hold them back. However, if consumers "just pay" for such service anyway, don't be surprised if they keep collecting money and avoiding much investment in catching up.
That's the problem with the thinking. I hear the frustration but it's not pointless to advance technology. Supporting players need to catch up or consumers need to motivate such actions by not paying those holding back the advances. If you can change providers, protest with your wallet. If you can't, find workarounds like the idea of taking the computer to work or where you have fast broadband and buy/rent your video there, then take it back home to watch on
TV.Else, eventually all tech progress would have to cease because a few players opt to not keep up. Rather than just accept that and asking the tech players closer to innovation front to stop, get after those trying to hold them back. However, if consumers "just pay" for such service anyway, don't be surprised if they keep collecting money and avoiding much investment in catching up.
Gutted if this is the case. Was hoping that this would be a Dolby Vision plus Dolby Atmos 4k HDR solution.
One question - surely the Xbox One S would face the same problems with system audio sounds (Cortana), together with 4k HDR AND Dolby Atmos...so how did they get around that via HDMI?