Apple Plans to Debut New Apple TV in September With Touch-Based Remote, Full App Store

[drewc1138]

Apple is planning to introduce its long-awaited next-generation Apple TV in September, reports Buzzfeed's John Paczkowski. According to sources familiar with Apple's plans, the new set-top box will be unveiled in September at the same event where Apple will unveil the next-generation iPhone 6s and 6s Plus.

As has been previously rumored, it is said to include an A8 processor, a touch-pad based remote that's "drastically improved" compared to the current version, a new operating system that supports a full App Store, developer APIs, and Siri voice control, and more on-board storage to accommodate apps. Physically, the Apple TV will take on a new, slimmer look.

Apple will not be introducing its rumored television service at the same time, with sources telling Buzzfeed that the Internet-based streaming service could possibly launch in late 2015, but 2016 is more likely. Current rumors suggest Apple's television offering will bundle approximately 25 channels and cost between $30 to $40 per month.

Apple was widely expected to introduce both its new Apple TV and its upcoming streaming television service in June, at its annual Worldwide Developers Conference, but the two products were not ready for launch at that time. Apple postponed its release of the set-top box because it was "not ready for prime time" and held off on the television service because deals were not completed.

Apple has not introduced a revamped version of its Apple TV since 2012, so an updated set-top box with App Store support and other features will be a major change from the platform that we know and use today.

Article Link: Apple Plans to Debut New Apple TV in September With Touch-Based Remote, Full App Store

No need for a fancy new remote, just make a Remote app that isn't atrocious.

 

[Mattsasa]

Hope its true this time, I figure its only a matter of time.

I am curious how deep Apple is going to go into gaming on this device

Poor developers these days. They've got apps to write for watches, TVs, phones, tablets, desktops, convertibles, fridges, and whatever else you want to stick an LCD on. Pretty incredible.

job security

?!?!

iOS devices are about as powerful if not more powerful than 7th generation video game consoles, but they have a ways to go to catch up with 8th generation consoles

Do you guys think it could work as a gaming console such as the Wii for kids?

yes

 

[CarlJ]

No need for a fancy new remote, just make a Remote app that isn't atrocious.

Frankly I'd rather have a separate remote, with a few hard buttons in addition to the display - the remote app sounds cool, but then the iOS device in question is tied to being a remote while you're watching and can't be used for anything else, or you have to switch back and forth between apps, which is annoying when you want to pause the video right this second.

 

[ProfGT]

I love my Apple TV and I looking forward to a updated version. However, I have what is probably a naive question. If TV's are getting smarter, why do we need an Apple TV? Couldn't we have an Apple App on the televisions that gives us all of the links to iCloud, Apple Music etc?

 

[CarlJ]

If TV's are getting smarter, why do we need an Apple TV? Couldn't we have an Apple App on the televisions that gives us all of the links to iCloud, Apple Music etc?

Because the software that comes in "smart" TVs is often pretty crappy, and it would involve Apple having to plead with TV manufacturers (like, say, Samsung) to put their apps into the TVs.

Apple has a very long history of struggling to be independent of other companies that were holding it back:

• Long ago, lots of major software (e.g. Photoshop) was written with Metroworks' C compiler, which never got updated to work with more modern frameworks on OS X. Meaning a lot of important software looked crappy and ran poorly far longer that it should have. Lesson learned, you can only use Apple's Xcode to write software for the iPhone, and Apple doesn't have the same magnitude of problems with old decrepit apps.
  
• Motorola got bored with making faster PowerPC processors, leaving Apple stuck with years of tiny speed "improvements", while PC's leapt ahead. Apple jumped ship, switching Macs over to Intel processors. Now Macs are comparable in speed to PC's. And Apple's designing their own processors for the iOS devices, not having to wait for anyone, to make the devices perform the way they want.
  
• Smartphones before the iPhone were sold by makers to the carriers. The carriers were the customers (the end users were just cattle), and the carriers dictated what features the phones would have and what features they weren't allowed to have. They controlled the ecosystem (remember $3 midi ringtones?). Apple managed to talk a carrier into letting Apple largely dictate how the phone worked (the entire end-user experience). It changed the whole equation for smartphones. Now they're not just useful, everyone has one.

So, I think the chances of Apple putting control over whether an Apple App gets into smart TV's (and what features must be removed to meet approval) into the hands of the TV manufacturers, is pretty close to zero.

There was an article on Engadget the other day about how Vizio "smart" TVs collect data about you and send it back to headquarters for (at best) marketing purposes. Where Apple has taken the standpoint, "look, you pay us big bucks for the product up-front, you're our customer". Remember, "if you're not the customer, you're the product."

I'd be much happier with a cablemodem, a TV that's basically operating as an HDMI monitor with speakers, and the AppleTV box providing all the content (via apps akin to the "channels" it has now, plus Apple's eventual streaming TV service - I'd rather pay Apple $40/mo for Discover(History,Science,etc)/Syfy/ComedyCentral than paying the cable company $75 for those plus several hundred channels I don't care about). Also hoping "apps" on the AppleTV will mean access to things like Amazon's streaming video offerings.

 

[carmimar]

I agree with what has been said here. Traditional TVs and STBs suck. I look at my Samsung SmartTV remote, or at my Sony blu-ray STB, and I really cannot figure out how to do most things.

The beauty of the AppleTV was its simplicity, especially the remote (though I agree, it tends to get lost in the living room). I hope they don't change the remote. If I want to use it with a touch-based remote, I control it with my iPhone or iPad.

For the streaming service and the channels, I think they are getting too late to the party... Netflix et al. are already years ahead in terms of content and recommendation engines.

 

[Michael CM1]

How is this any different than the six other times i've heard this in the last three years?

It's sourced from BuzzFeed, man -- the most trusted name in clickbait and lists of photos!

 

[omenatarhuri]

Sounds great, I hope this is not US only like many good things in the past like Apple Pay.

 

[wdfly]

tv service to cost 30-40 bucks. if i wanted to pay that much for TV i'd switch my internet back to cable and just pick up cable service, the TV portion of it would cost almost exactly that much and i'd get over 100 chanels. it will need to cost less than that for me to be interested.

 

[recoil80]

What's wrong with the Apple TV remote we got?

Ive thinks it is too thick

 

[darkknight14]

I hope on the new remote we have a setting on iOS / iWatch that will send out a 'ring' when we lose it after unboxing. This would be pretty neat..

The little things!

 

[TWSS37]

The curent cost of cable or satellite is $100-$150. You don't understand people who want to cut their bill down in half?

I sincerely doubt what you'll get for $30-$40 will compare to the channels you'd get for $100-$150. When you factor in the requirement of having a decently fast internet, you can get a basic cable (including HD) generally for a few bucks more per month on top of your internet service. Heck, even DirecTV has a package for over 150 channels for $30 a month.

But you know this...

 

[zapnyc]

It MIGHT make sense if you have a good internet service, but little choice in the way of TV. I have relatives who can't get OTA signals, so they have to choose between cable and satellite. If I were in that situation, I might pay for a $30 TV package that didn't tie me to cable or satellite.

I think you've put your finger on it. That's the niche. I live in a rural area and it's far better than a cabin in the woods, but I am faced with few choices. Dish signal can cut out in heavy winter weather & costs the same as the rape-y TimeWarner. If Apple can slide between and offer a new option that beats their prices, great. I just need it to have diversified channels like Science Channel, BBC America, USA Network, etc...

 

[bbeagle]

Heck, even DirecTV has a package for over 150 channels for $30 a month.

But you know this...

No they don't.

DirecTV's CHEAPEST lineup is $30, called the 'Family Package'. They don't even advertise it. The ones you see on their advertisements are PROMO rates you get for the first year and that's it. The cheapest package is 'Select' with 145 channels for $49.99.

You're also charged a $6.50 fee for each TV in your house, and $15.00 for the receiver. So, the MINIMUM you can get away with is $30 (FAMILY PACKAGE - about 50 channels) + 6.50 + 15.00 + 3.00 taxes = about $54.00

(And all you get for the family package is a few Disney channels, Nickelodeon, religious channels, shopping channels and National Geographic and Science channels)

http://cdn.directv.com/cms2/support/20120323_family_channel_lineup.pdf

The cheapest package with ESPN is 'Entertainment' for $59.99

Some channels you can only get in packages that start at $86.99. THIS is why people want to be able to buy the channels they want. - to save money. If I can buy ONE channel I want for $5, that's a HUGE savings from having to buy a $86.99 package to get that ONE channel and hundreds of others I don't care about.

 

[bbeagle]

I love my Apple TV and I looking forward to a updated version. However, I have what is probably a naive question. If TV's are getting smarter, why do we need an Apple TV? Couldn't we have an Apple App on the televisions that gives us all of the links to iCloud, Apple Music etc?

Because the 'Apple TV' IS the software that would run on these 'smart TVs' - it's really the Operating System. The Apple TV is not just an 'app' that runs on other people's software.

 

[Gasu E.]

To people who keep losing it? Why not leave it on your coffee table or foot stool. If you leave it there every time you never lose it.

That's what I do; but I would never be so presumptuous as to assume everyone else has a coffee table and/or footstool in front of their TV. /smh

 

[John Amundsen]

Not really revolutionary by BuzzFeed to say that a popular device which was scrapped from the last event at the last minute will make an appearance at the next event. Besides, this news was much more extensively covered on NinjaTeched http://ninjateched.com/2015/07/31/r...le-tv-unveiled-in-september-details-features/

 

[erinsarah]

Seems like one thing has been missing in the comments here...I have a hunch Apple is aiming towards making "just having an AppleTV" less enticing than having one WITH the monthly service and fee, just like they've done with music. While I'm happy they might finally be releasing something, I want to see what the new service is going to be like before I'm all like "take my money" and such.

 

[jephrey]

-new appleTV, cool, I can't wait to see what new features it has
-new remote, cool, I like this one but the typing situation reeks. It'll be interesting to see how that's handled
-$25 bundle, wha? the whole of crap that is sat/cable tv sells you a bundle so to get the few stations you want, you have to weed through a bunch of crap. Apply the $25 to the stations you watch from that group and it's idiotic. I want to pay a single broadcast a single amount of money to watch their station, like $.99 or $1.99 a month for cheaper stuff and the HBO type stuff can be priced as they already have it. The paradigm should shift to the consumer's benefit.

Combining a bunch of small subscriptions to broadcasts treated like apps where a general volume discount could be applied makes some sense, defining a package by saying select x channels from each tier might work.

But please, don't bundle me man.

 

[samcraig]

I still have an AT2... because - plex.

I might upgrade (although I really only use my Apple TV for renting movies and rarely watching something from my library). For every thing else I use my Roku and Chromecast.

However, "slimmer" concerns me just a bit given that at times, that puck can already get pretty hot.

Also - I'm going to wait to see how the new OS is. There's no way I'm going to dive in if they still haven't enabled the ability to search for a movie in your own collection without endless scrolling. I'm assuming Siri integration would help here so you can just ask to find a move in your library. But how can in be 2015 and Apple hasn't made that available (without using a companion device) is beyond me.

Honestly not interested in any bundles or content. I prefer a "dumb" device...

 

[snebes]

What's wrong with the Apple TV remote we got?

The batteries last too long, and are replaceable. All devices need to have non-removable batteries that last no longer than 1 week per charge.

 

[uid15]

Sheesh, touchy. I'm a video professional and never have to use vlc so I was just wondering why you would need it. Most of my work is in ProRes and H.264. I rarely have to touch those formats you list, with the possible exception of MPEG. The only time I touch .flv is when I'm basically extracting something off YouTube, lol, so I'm sticking with my story. MPEG Streamclip works great for viewing many different file formats and converting them when Quicktime with Perian won't work for you. But if you have your heart set on using VLC, which is mainly a PC thing on an Apple device, have at it. From what I've read recently, VLC comes and goes from the app store so I suspect it's not that well supported.

VLC has been available on all platforms for many years, and you can still get the DMG from videolan.org. I take it you realise you can get things OUTSIDE the app store, which is only a very recent installing concept?

As for being a video professional, maybe you would benefit from acquainting yourself with rtmpdump and avconv/ffmpeg too, and releasing yourself from the restrictions of only using a GUI? I think so.

 

[Tech198]

well, i'll be a monkey's uncle....

You never think such a thing would be possible without the TV service. I would have thought this went hand in hand, like peaches and cream. *yum*

i was half right at least....... TV service is not tired to Apple TV, so why should it be announced at the same time...

This will be on ATV 3 too.... There is no reason why it can't.

3 years is a long time for any product to not have an major update.

 

[foobarbazqux]

Looking forward to a new Apple TV but not that remote. Touch-based remotes suck.

I have no interest in their TV service though. If I wanted to pay $30-$40 per month for TV, I'd just resubscribe to traditional cable and most likely pay less. OTA + Netflix is more than enough for my family.

 

[Tech198]

why do we need buttons anymore .... conveniently touching stuff as we always do now ... and its extended to our tech gadgets.. let the remote join in.

If there is one good thing about it, at least there is no buttons that can wear out over time. How it integrates is so meting else.