Apple Says New Apple TV 4K is Tremendous Value at $179, Not Designed to Compete Directly With Xbox or PlayStation

[Scipster]

I don't understand why Microsoft and other are testifying for EPIC. It they win, either epic itself, or another company will turn around and use the same logic on the console maker's "exclusive app store."

Logically, this same rule would prohibit (or allow workarounds) to lockout chips/software, then not only will the console makers lose money on each sales, but they won't be able to get as many direct sales, and the shovel ware will start flooding the market. (A good history lesson is the 1983 video game crash, the Atari 2600 did not have any lockout chips or other security, and the unlicensed games almost doomed the industry.)

That would only occur in the event the Court rules partly for Apple (i.e. their market definition which includes Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo) and partly for Epic (i.e. compelling a competitive marketplace in terms of app distribution and payments), a potential compromise the Court may hand down.

It would not occur if the Court rules in favor of Epic. The reason for this is that Epic's market definition excludes PlayStation, Xbox, and Switch. Instead, Epic is arguing that iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and Android are general computing devices like macOS and Windows and therefore subject to anti-trust legislation (PlayStation, Xbox, and Switch are gaming devices, not general computing devices).

Apple is arguing that they directly compete with PlayStation, Xbox, and Switch, and as a gaming device manufacturer they are not subject to anti-trust legislation as they do not hold a monopoly in that market. Interestingly, it appears that this Apple Exec missed the memo.

So in this case, it is actually advantageous for Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo to support Epic as it allows them to launch their own platforms on iOS, iPadOS, and tvOS, without impacting their own devices. I'm sure Microsoft and Sony will jump at the chance to launch xCloud and PlayStation Now on iOS, which they will surely do if Epic wins. Lots of $$$ to be made by them if iOS opens up.

 

[topdrawer]

Actually try Infuse. Infuse is "Apple-like". Plex is "Windows/Linux-like".
I find Infuse so much easier to deal with and so much nicer to look at. I have it playing movies off a drive connected my mac mini, and shared via SMB -- works very nicely.
(If you are using macOS Mojave or later you do need to set some permission to share the external drive via SMB -- be sure you do that otherwise neither Plex nor Infuse will see the drive.)

infuse takes a while to update media info from the server where plex is almost instantly. i find infuses icons to be jejune and ugly. i only use it because it decodes on the apple tv itself unlike plex that does it on the computer while streaming, which i really dislike. if plex ever changes that behavior i'm dropping infuse immediately.

 

[kyleh22]

it is not a good value. You can buy a 4K chromecast or 4k firestick for 25% of the price. They both have 80-90% of the features IMO.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

But if they come up with one costing $500 would you buy it? I definitely would, and I’m sure a lot of other people would too.

I would not for $500. $300 is even pushing it, TBH. At least in the platform's current state.

I don't know if Apple has this planned, but with the cash they have in hand, buying a game studio to make first party titles would be a huge step toward showing some seriousness to this gaming idea. Nintendo can sell something with less power than MS/Sony because they make great first-party games that pretty much sell the hardware all on their own. The Arcade concept kinda does this, though Apple isn't making any of the games themselves. If Apple threw money into their own studio, I think other studios would be more willing to come along since it showed a real commitment to the platform. Maybe Arcade is currently in the platform building phase, where they can implement some performance and control standardization across all their devices. I do like the arcade concept where all content is free. Free to play and microtransactions are huge turn-offs, and offering a simple one-cost platform has a lot of appeal to me.

I think there is a market for fun, playable games that aren't graphically complex. Sure, we all like the pretty games, but not always when the studio chooses style over substance. If the mechanics are sound and the story is good, there's a lot of value there.

 

[drlamb]

infuse takes a while to update media info from the server where plex is almost instantly. i find infuses icons to be jejune and ugly. i only use it because it decodes on the apple tv itself unlike plex that does it on the computer while streaming, which i really dislike. if plex ever changes that behavior i'm dropping infuse immediately.

It sounds like your media is encoded in such a way that your AppleTV can't direct play and thus is transcoding on your Plex server. You shouldn't be transcoding, especially not 4k. This becomes more of an issue with weaker systems.

 

[Crow_Servo]

They should release a stick version of the Apple TV HD and give it an A10 chip. Price it at $99. Then discontinue the current Apple TV HD being sold for $149.

But what they should have really done is give the new 4K Apple TV an A14 and put out a new version of the HD version with the A12.

Still don’t understand why the hot new premium Apple TV has an A12, and then Apple says they’re not trying to compete with consoles. Sounds like an excuse, rather than a solid game plan.

 

[Druggar]

The fact that he came out and said this tells me that is what they are planning. Say this was completely unnecessary unless it’s to change the subject. There have been quite a few times that Apple has made these kinds of statements to kill rumors and then come out with something that changes the market in ways previously unimagined.

Maybe they are waiting to launch the VR headset with a ATV Pro that manages the heavy computational lifting

 

[Druggar]

Not really. I already own a Series X, a PS5 and a Switch. Not sure what Apple could bring to the market that is not covered by those devices.

The point is you are willing to pay big bucks for a console and probably you have a separate steaming device. Heck, you have paid $1,500 for all this. Next time just maybe you would pay only $500 for one that has it all.

 

[Druggar]

I would love that, but it would be difficult for the following reasons (in my opinion):

1. While they could build the hardware, pricing the hardware would be an issue. As stated in the Epic lawsuit, Microsoft has never made money on the Xbox console sales, rather they get the money back via game sales (the Razor Blade profit model.) Apple has really never really (to my knowledge) used that model before, although they do make money on app store sales.

2. It's all about the games. Microsoft has been buying up lots of game studios, just to fill out their exclusive library. Apple would have to start completing in that inflated market with Sony/Microsoft, making acquisitions even more expensive.

3. Developer and Customer confidence: Apple has more that once promised increasing gaming tools/focus, but has then backtracked. (I am thinking of an interview a few years ago by former Doom/ID software's John Romero.) Customers in the high end gaming market are a skeptical bunch as well, and Apple would really need to work to win them over.

4. Censorship. Xbox/Sony have allowed some games in the past that have really tweaked off the "Think about the children" groups. Even the Wii had Manhunt 2, where you used the nunchucks as a strangulation wire motion in the game. I honestly don't think Apple is willing to have anything that controversial or violent on the service. (I believe they also prohibit lots of things the other consoles allow, as you can't do a civil war sim game accuratly without the stars and bars, or a WW2 game accurately without the Rising Sun or Nazi flag.)

At one point (maybe still) you were not allow to put firearm images in the app previews, I believe. I am not sure if that has changed. Good luck with putting anything sexual like are in some modern games as well.

(It's a double standard vs content in movies available on iTunes, I agree.)

Apple is doing a couple of good things for gaming however.

One of Microsoft's strengths is that the xbox/windows are build off of the same base. DX graphics pretty much are universal, so it makes porting very easy. Apple is even better, metal is metal is metal, and the game porting between iOS/ipados/macos/tvos should be extremely easy (even more so when intel macs are discontinued.)

iCloud makes universal same saves, should developers implement it. It should make it stupid easy for a gamer to pick up and play on any device.

I personally would love for apple to get into the "hardcore" game system market. They are putting some good things together, but I am very skeptical that they would follow through.

Agreed. Apple in the past has said they are willing to enter a new category only when the can bring something new and exciting… so maybe a VR centric ATV gaming console? What do you think?

 

[brucewayne]

This device is already irrelevant. If the AppleTV had incorporated the M1 processor the pricing and ability would be worth discussing. Incorporating the A12, a 3 year old processor makes this product dead in the water.

Apples most powerful chip in a $179 device running tvOS?

 

[Ion-X]

No lossless audio support for movies, no disk playback. kthx

Apple doesn’t support discs in any of their devices.

 

[Ion-X]

Apples most powerful chip in a $179 device running tvOS?

The original Apple TV 4K is chugging along quite slowly these days. The newer chip will help dramatically but it does feel they cheaped out by not including a newer processor from the A14 series (M1 would be overkill for a streaming device). Apple TVs should not have to be replaced every other year.

 

[JippaLippa]

Mine's coming tomorrow and, as an owner of a tv-less setup, I can't wait to finally be able to watch Prime Video and Apple TV+ at 4K HDR, as my display is well capable pf displaying such content

 

[Ronnie Zolverda]

Honest question: What advantages does Apple TV bring to a Smart TV?

Very smooth and response UI and tons of apps.

It's like asking why the world needs an iPhone when budget Android phones also exist.

Even the premium brands on their premium sets can't help themselves by installing ancient and slow SOCs. They look awful, are sluggish, and often can't handle even 4K on 4K sets, let alone HDR and DV.

 

[sharpimage]

Honest question: What advantages does Apple TV bring to a Smart TV?

My TV already has a smart hub that does more than I can use, it can record shows and AirPlay comes built into it, so I can seamlessly mirror my iPhone or iPad screen, or even use it as a monitor wirelessly. I do not even have a set top box, the TV can already handle the TV-input from the provider.

Cannot use Zwift on my smart TV.

 

[Kulfon]

I don’t think that it’s a update aimed to actual owners of the first gen Apple TV 4K, except for the remote that you can buy separately anyway. In my case I will update from an Apple TV HD, so it seems worth, but I would definitely buy only the remote if I had the 4K first gen

I see. I do not even see what is wrong with the current remote. I have never had any issues

 

[turbineseaplane]

This feels like a test to see how dumb their customer base really is.

 

[Realityck]

Apples most powerful chip in a $179 device running tvOS?

Most never asked for that, just double the memory and a more recent SoC.
But most here probably suspect if you did want to play games other then Apple Arcade on the TV you would use a M1 Mac Mini using HDMI to your smart TV.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Honest question: What advantages does Apple TV bring to a Smart TV?

I've only had two smart TVs, but the interface isn't very good on either of them. I very much prefer the Apple TV experience over those built into TVs and even the Amazon 4k Firestick.

Moving between apps is fast, the homescreen isn't riddled with ads, app finding and installation is (to me) faster...

It's just a smoother, more integrated experience, especially if you are in the Apple ecosystem.

As for the article, $179 as a "tremendous value" is up for interpretation, but I've still got my 1080p Apple TV from a few years ago and it works great, still gets updates, is still fast and because I use it on a smaller TV at a distance (a 4K set but only 32 inches), the 1080p to me is just fine. I got a Firestick 4k for my big screen which will soon be replaced with the new 4K Apple TV. I do like the Firestick... its cheap and works pretty great, but it doesn't compare to the ATV.

Also, Airplay on my LG tv is spotty at best. Streaming from the Apple apps works fine, but using third-party apps to airplay is hit or miss. On the Apple TV, it always works pretty well.

 

[FrogHat1]

Honest question: What advantages does Apple TV bring to a Smart TV?

My TV already has a smart hub that does more than I can use, it can record shows and AirPlay comes built into it, so I can seamlessly mirror my iPhone or iPad screen, or even use it as a monitor wirelessly. I do not even have a set top box, the TV can already handle the TV-input from the provider.

I have the latest Samsung QLED 83" 4K HDR+ tv. Paid big money. However, the WIFI and Ethernet port are 100MB - slow as heck. You would think the TV manufacturers would put in the latest WIFI specs and a 1GB ethernet port.

The apps on TV are slow to launch, connect to WIFI, so it takes about 10-20 seconds for the picture to become clear.

If I switch to using my ATV 4K box, I get 450-500 MB WIFI speed, apps launch faster, and the picture quality/resolution only takes about 2-5 seconds to occur. The picture quality is also better.

I'm going to get the latest 4K ATV and i assume the speed will even be faster plus HDR10+ capability. This is another benefit, - you can up grade to the latest HW specs (CPU processor speed, video specs, WIFI Specs, etc.) by using an external device. The Apps on the TV have to be updated and my guess is that they are not updated as much as they would be for the ATV Box.

Hope this helps.

 

[JCCL]

The point is you are willing to pay big bucks for a console and probably you have a separate steaming device. Heck, you have paid $1,500 for all this. Next time just maybe you would pay only $500 for one that has it all.

Don't think Apple could be the only device that would have it all. While Xbox is my preferred platform and my go-to device for the multiplatform games, I own also PS5 & Switch for their respective exclusives. Unless Apple buys both Sony's Gaming division and Nintendo, there's no way around that.

 

[QFace]

Airplay on my LG tv is spotty at best

Airplay 2 on my 2017 Vizio Smartcast TV is also super spotty; the TV also has Chromecast built in, and that is much more reliable. Airplay 2 on my Roku Premiere streaming box crashes frequently, and the Roku has to be restarted for Airplay to work again.

I'm personally more disappointed with Apple for this poor performance. I get that Apple isn't manufacturing these products. However, I would have thought that in order to license Airplay, Apple would've required certain specifications in order to ensure any product that advertised Airplay would operate smoothly and reliably.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Twerdahl didn't really explain why the Apple TV is a tremendous value.

 

[EricNau]

Airplay 2 on my 2017 Vizio Smartcast TV is also super spotty; the TV also has Chromecast built in, and that is much more reliable. Airplay 2 on my Roku Premiere streaming box crashes frequently, and the Roku has to be restarted for Airplay to work again.

I'm personally more disappointed with Apple for this poor performance. I get that Apple isn't manufacturing these products. However, I would have thought that in order to license Airplay, Apple would've required certain specifications in order to ensure any product that advertised Airplay would operate smoothly and reliably.

Honestly, I have an all-Apple setup (iPhone, Apple TV 4K, 2 homepods) and airplay is pretty bad.

You’re right to blame Apple for the poor performance. They aren’t devoting sufficient resources to the software.

 

[Realityck]

Twerdahl didn't really explain why the Apple TV is tremendous value.

You know if you look up his title you get this from LinkIN

Timothy D. Twerdahl
VP Product Marketing Apple TV, HomePod, AirPods

Now this guys is over seeing Apple killing the larger HomePod, now reduced to HomePod mini, lack of lossless with AirPods, and Apple TV is tremendous value with no real speed improvements. So really he came on board about the same time as Apple TV 4K was released. So what got accomplished?
Is this the Bermuda Triangle of technology marketing for Apple?

His employment history

• Vice President​

  Apple​

  Feb 2017 - Present 4 years 4 months
  San Francisco Bay Area

• Director & GM, FireTV​

  Amazon​

  Mar 2013 - Dec 2016 3 years 10 months
  Seattle & Silicon Valley

• Vice President, Products​

  WIMM Labs Inc.​

  Nov 2009 - Nov 2012 3 years 1 month
  San Francisco Bay Area

• Vice President, Consumer Products​

  Roku, Inc.​

  Jan 2008 - Sep 2009 1 year 9 months

• Sr. Director, Internet TV​

  Netflix, Inc​

• Jul 2007 - Jan 2008. 7 months​