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 Confirms No Software Update for Original Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ok lilo777, you seem to be ignoring everyone else's sensible comments so I'm probably wasting my breath BUT:
Support = Apple helping you if your product goes wrong. That's called a warranty. If you bought an ATV a few days ago, you still have a warranty. Your ATV is not 'obsolete' (the term Apple uses for products discontinued over 5 years ago and therefore no longer supported). ATV v1 will not be obsolete until 2015. Not bad eh?
Support does not equal free software updates for an indefinite period. Apple are not obligated to provide any software update to any product. Stop being so self-entitled.
This has been said before but you don't seem to understand, so I'll try again:
The old ATV runs a modified form of OS X on an Intel chip. The only future for a product of this nature (a future that would allow Apple to easily add features and move forward) was to move to an ARM (A4) chip and run iOS.
What you were hoping Apple was going to do was to write a version of iOS from scratch that would run on an Intel chip. Have you ever developed an entire OS? I haven't, but I know it takes a very long time and an awful lot of work. So Apple should spend all that time and money rewriting iOS just so it can run on old ATV's, a product which sold in a relatively small number? No company in the world would call that a sensible business decision.
Anyone who bought an ATV in the last 30 days can go back to the Apple Store and get a refund, no questions asked. Anyone who bought one before then still has a perfectly good, working and supported ATV.
All I can say lilo777, is that I and the majority of people here are glad you are not on the board or directors for Apple, else the company would be doomed.
You never cease to amaze me on the amount of smarts you have.
. Did it ever occur to you that if other companies have less cash, that might be because they don't make much money, because they don't have a product that their customers want? Maybe competitors like Apple (I know this hurts you to hear this) make products that people actually want and do buy. For the record, Microsoft has tons more cash than Apple, but MS doesn't nothing for their customers but make them spend money on upgrades.
Since Snow Leopard they wake on network request now. I stream from my Drobo, via my MacMini, to my current AppleTV and everything wakes up at the AppleTV's request.
Even my iPad can wake my MacMini and my Drobo from the other side of the world and stream my movies, using AirVideo.
My current AppleTV is like a small sun inside my Home Theatre cabinet, I will jump ship in a heartbeat to the new one. I'm guessing it will also wake up instantly, like other iOS devices.
I see. It looks like many people here care more about Apple than about themselves. Weird. Happens only in Apple land. I am very well aware of the differences in the processor architecture. I happen to work in related industry. And no I do not ask Apple to port iOS to x86 (btw, who said that new ATV uses iOS? not Apple). All people want is a new application for legacy ATV that would stream Netflix. Is it too difficult? Just use Safari with Flash - both are available for OSX/x86.
BTW, I am also glad I am not on the board of directors for Apple. From everything I know, none of the directors who actually are on this board (but Steve Jobs) are happy either
You never cease to amaze me on the amount of smarts you have.
For the record, Microsoft has tons more cash than Apple, but MS doesn't nothing for their customers but make them spend money on upgrades.
This one is actually pretty simple. Dell probably sells more stuff than Apple (definitely more computers). So apparently they do have stuff that people like (and even more so than the one from Apple) yet they do not have cash. Still puzzles me. Same is true for HP and Nokia and just everybody else.
Apple - King of disposable electronics
I am saying (since I already own an AppleTV), it would not have taken much to add the feature to the existing AppletTV OS. Since it is an old product, doesn't mean it is not beyond having "some" features to be added. The Netflix feature is something that quite a few of the existing AppleTV owners have been requesting. Previously, such requests were simply ignored At first blush, it appeared that Apple was opposed to that marriage (due to conflict with the Itunes store). Now, that they are demonstrating there are no issues with that feature going forward, why not add it to the existing AppleTV OS? Or is your opinion to throw out a functioning unit, to get a long awaited feature? Yes, we all know that eventually there will be features that cannot be supported by the hardware.... and that's the way it goes. It's not like THIS requires additional hardware!
I am saying (since I already own an AppleTV), it would not have taken much to add the feature to the existing AppletTV OS. Since it is an old product, doesn't mean it is not beyond having "some" features to be added. The Netflix feature is something that quite a few of the existing AppleTV owners have been requesting. Previously, such requests were simply ignored At first blush, it appeared that Apple was opposed to that marriage (due to conflict with the Itunes store). Now, that they are demonstrating there are no issues with that feature going forward, why not add it to the existing AppleTV OS? Or is your opinion to throw out a functioning unit, to get a long awaited feature? Yes, we all know that eventually there will be features that cannot be supported by the hardware.... and that's the way it goes. It's not like THIS requires additional hardware!
I'm liking all these "online streaming only" services and devices. Maybe it will help those dirtbags at Comcast raise the 250gb cap-a-month on residential plans. Doesn't take very long to hit that cap once your family is constantly listening to Pandora, watching Netflix, downloading demos on the PS3, Slingbox, and renting content from iTunes.
You never cease to amaze me on the amount of smarts you have.
For the record, Microsoft has tons more cash than Apple, but MS doesn't nothing for their customers but make them spend money on upgrades.
For the record, you are factually incorrect. Apple has $46 billion in cash. Microsoft has $36.8. You can find more data in this article. Microsoft could have had more but they are just being more responsible both with their customers and shareholders. Unlike Apple, they pay dividend.
Sue them. I and many intellectual people on this forum don't give a rat's ass about you and your poor TV. So complain to the right people.
I'm sure Apple's shareholders would not have bought into Apple had they felt Apple was not "responsible".
That was not very intellectual, was it? I doubt that too many people on this forum share your sentiment.
I'm sure Apple's shareholders would not have bought into Apple had they felt Apple was not "responsible".
Just give it some time. AAPL has been falling since June. Also, check this article:
A renowned technology analyst has called upon Apple Inc (NASDAQ: AAPL) to start returning some of its massive cash balance to its shareholders in the form of dividends.
Analyst Toni Sacconaghi of Bernstein Research said in his "Open Letter to CEO Steve Jobs and Apple's Board," that the company has been exemplary in its performance, which came in the form of a tenfold earnings gain and increase in market value by 487% over the past five years.
Through the performance, the company was able to hoard a huge cash pile totaling roughly $46 billion by the end of the most recent quarter.
Sacconaghi stressed that AAPL’s cash balance was the highest among all companies that are listed in the US. The reserves also exceeded the total market capitalization of all but 49 of the firms on the S&P 500 index.
Sacconaghi mentioned that one common dissatisfaction surfaced in his conversations with shareholders, “the company’s unwillingness to return it to shareholders or discuss its vision for how the company plans to use it."
It is a well known fact that the company has not paid a regular dividend and has rarely authorized share buybacks. AAPL has also been very lax in undertaking acquisitions, with its last biggest deal dating back to 2008.
I find it hilarious how naïve you are that you actually believe the reason why MS has less money than Apple is because they're 'nicer'!
No, the reason is MS is becoming increasingly irrelevant. They've put out a load of poor products (Kin, Vista, Windows Mobile etc.) and they aren't doing as well as they used to.
If you think MS is choosing to make less money for the sake of being nice, then I give up, you're beyond help, you're completely crazy.
You kidding? Comcast will bleed you white for more as soon as they figure out a way to justify it to consumers. Comcast is loving this trend and will pretend raising their capabilities is not possible as long as they can create the illusion that you're getting a deal. I wouldn't care if somebody dropped a nuclear bomb on that company's corporate headquarters.
No, I am not that naive. But did you notice that Microsoft actually still makes much more money than Apple (18.76B in income for the last year vs 12.24B for AAPL) and yet they have less cash?
Well, I am glad they didn't get rid of my AppleTV's capability of purchasing directly on the unit. I could care less about Netflix, my 360 has that capability.
Grammar PoliceCouldn't care less...if you could care less, well, you would. Your not the only one, it's a pet peeve of mine.
It's just $99 and you get a new Apple TV unit with it!
It's really only $80.00 and u get a $19.00 remote with it.
And it would be "you're not the only one," not "your." "Your" is a possessive. "You're" is a contraction for "you are"; the apostrophe stands for the missing 'a.'
Couldn't care less...if you could care less, well, you would. Your not the only one, it's a pet peeve of mine.
If you want to talk the talk, you better walk the walk.