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 Testing 4K Capable Fifth-Generation Apple TV For Possible Release This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just because a lot of people own (or might own) a 4K TV is not sufficient justification for supporting 4K in the Apple TV. 4K TVs are commonplace because the prices have come down, not because they provide any real world benefit for most consumers. The content isn't there. The internet bandwidth isn't there. The compression algorithms aren't there.
Even if you resolved all of the above issues, you'd still be faced with the fact that most people are buying 4K TVs with 40-55" screens, which will be viewed from ten feet away or farther, meaning they won't appreciate the difference in resolution over 1080p content.
The revolutionary vs. evolutionary is the main point here. Apple is playing catch up in the TV game, or at the very best, just keeping pace. Until there's a simple way to unify the TV watching experience, spec bumps aren't going to shoot this thing out of a cannon. They need something no one has thought of before to draw people in. Most likely, that's going to come in a new UI. Otherwise, it's all just too confusing. Explaining how to use our ATV4 to my mother in law who has only ever known how to change channels, is a nightmare I wouldn't wish on anyone...Fix that, and you've hit the jackpot.
But there's not enough content.
-defenders
There isn't, almost all of the content viewed on 4K TV's is upscaled from 1080i or 720P, at best 1080P. It appears you are trying be sarcastic about something that you don't really understand.
Oh Please stop with this "lack of content" argument. All new Netflix and Amazon shows are all in 4k and most in HDR to boot.
My cable box does 4k for goodness sake - if Apple is behind the cable boxes there is a big issue.
I have been waiting ages for an Apple tv with 4k HDR support because I'm fully invested in the ecosystem and prefer to rent all my movies through iTunes. The wait is getting very tiring though and I find myself eyeing the Roku more and more.
There was actually talk that they were going to skip 4k, back when the standards were being bounced around (due to how slow the penetration was for Blu-ray). People don't want to replace their TV's ever 3-5 years. A shame they didn't do that.
That being said, I hope Apple at least has the next gen ATV capable of driving the 4k at 120Hz. (though many people unknowingly have been buying 60Hz TV's)
(and, while you're at it Apple, please do the same for the next Mac Mini - there's a lot of us using that as a HTPC)
As for content - that's a chicken and egg thing guys. If you don't have the 4k TV's in the homes, the movie houses aren't going to author the 4k movies and vis-versa.
Oh good lord did you copy something from 2006 regarding 1080p? Yea that was wrong too.
I can see the difference in 4K. It's often the little things, such as being able to read a street sign in the distance. But for me it adds up to a better experience. Who are you to try to hold it back?
As far as your compression argument, it holds little water if compared to the also-compressed 1080p. On top of that compression has improved over what was available for 1080p. It is indisputable that 4K streams utilize more bandwidth than 1080p. Do you think that extra bandwidth is just wasted?
Mike
Amazing. So we have like 15 tv shows 10 episodes each. Cool.
I understand your point about not having an Apple TV Amazon Prime app and it irks me too but that's on Amazons head, not Apple. Also, for very little effort we watch Amazon Prime videos by streaming from the iPad.
apple 3 years late with 4K, it's still revolutionary and magical
Try over 100 just on Netflix alone. There are more then 15 titles in HDR 4k let along 4K. That doesn't even take into consideration other platforms where 4k is available. How about when you respond with made up numbers you at least do a bit of research to see if you're in the right ball park.
Netflix 4K Ultra HD review: Is it worth paying extra for 4K Netflix?
http://www.trustedreviews.com/netflix-4k-ultra-hd-review
"The important question is what 4K content do you get? The answer? Not as much as we'd like."
"As well as a very fast broadband connection, you will also need not only a 4K-capable TV, but a 4K TV able to decode Netflix’s HEVC H.265 delivery system. Such decoding capabilities are far from universal in the current 4K TV market alas, so you need to be careful which set you buy if Netflix 4K is of any interest to you."
The Adoption Of 4K Streaming Will Be Stalled By Bandwidth, Not Hardware & Devices
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2015/01/4k-streaming-bandwidth-problem.html
"While 4K can in theory be compressed at 10-12Mbps, this is typically achieved by reducing the frame rate or sacrificing quality. As Encoding.com points out, to date, “most of the HEVC we’ve seen in the market is heavily noise-reduced with high frequency details blurred out to fake the 40% efficiency”.
New Data Shows Networks Will Struggle To Stream 4K With Good Quality For Years To Come
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2015/04/networks-will-struggle-to-stream-4k.html
Also, not all 4K TVs support HDR and not most available 4K content was not shot in HDR.
Last edited:
Just because a lot of people own (or might own) a 4K TV is not sufficient justification for supporting 4K in the Apple TV. 4K TVs are commonplace because the prices have come down, not because they provide any real world benefit for most consumers. The content isn't there. The internet bandwidth isn't there. The compression algorithms aren't there.
Even if you resolved all of the above issues, you'd still be faced with the fact that most people are buying 4K TVs with 40-55" screens, which will be viewed from ten feet away or farther, meaning they won't appreciate the difference in resolution over 1080p content.
Yes, 4k is total bollacks at this point. Useful on a computer screen two feet from your face. Useless on a TV 10 feet from the couch.
Now I have a projector setup and I'm projecting onto a 80 inch screen. But my old projector is just 720p. I would like and could notice a move to 1080p. But even on my 80 inch screen, I'm not going to get value out of a 4k projector. And I'm not sure if such a thing exists. But if it does, I know I won't pay for it.
Apple just needs to drop a better chip into their current box, tweak the remote a bit, sell a few more of the new ones to early adopters, then we will hand down our old Apple TVs, and the ecosystem will spread.
Simple freaking rule Apple: refresh everything once a year like you do your most successful product. Is this so hard to understand?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I hope this rumor is true. Personally, I'm ready to buy several units as soon as they hit!
All the people arguing against it should grasp that more-capable hardware can still play less-demanding software to it's fullest. In other words, all happy with 1080p or 720p or SD will still be able to watch those formats on a 4K
TV. The iTunes store will still have lessor file format options to download- just as it does now. Your bandwidth demands can be exactly the same if you just stick with whatever size files you stream now. And so on.
Even more simply: a 4KTV forces nothing on anyone happy with the "as is." You might as well argue against hardware advances in iPhones, iPads & Macs too because you are satisfied with the "as is." What a 4K TV will bring is more TV buyers who refuse to buy one capped at 1080p now. More buyers helps us all.
The iTunes store content argument is practically ridiculous. If we wave a magic wand right now and make EVERYTHING in the iTunes store have a 4K version forTV, how much money can any Studio make? Nothing. Why? Because hardware must exist to play advanced software. Your iPhone can't run software dependent on iOS11. Your Macs can't run software dependent on macOS <next>. Loading the iPhone or Mac app stores with software that can't be consumed today makes no sense (or $en$e) until iPhones & Macs are advanced enough to take advantage of it. This is no different. Hardware must always lead or, at best, launch with a collection of software capable of taking advantage of the advancements. This will be no different.
I am consistently dazzled to see how passionately some of "us" will argue against Apple advancing this ONE product, when just about every other thread for every other Apple product craves the future now. "We" have been coveting a "10th anniversary iPhone" for a couple of years now, longing for it to bring hardware features that do not exist in any iPhone available now. We covet software apps to take advantage of those hardware advancements even though there are zero such apps in the app store today. We want the latest & greatest in new Macs even if there is little to nothing to take advantage of those advances. "We" even argue on behalf of Apple in support of hardware "advances(?)" such as embracing USB3C or jettisoning the headphone jack well before there is much to take advantage of either.
But here- with this ONE product- "we" will passionately spin anything & everything in support of sticking with a status quo established years ago... even when all competitors have pretty much moved on to 4K... and even when pretty much everything else from Apple touts 4K capabilities as selling points. I'll conclude by summarizing the issue with a simple chain...
All the people arguing against it should grasp that more-capable hardware can still play less-demanding software to it's fullest. In other words, all happy with 1080p or 720p or SD will still be able to watch those formats on a 4K
TV. The iTunes store will still have lessor file format options to download- just as it does now. Your bandwidth demands can be exactly the same if you just stick with whatever size files you stream now. And so on.Even more simply: a 4K
TV forces nothing on anyone happy with the "as is." You might as well argue against hardware advances in iPhones, iPads & Macs too because you are satisfied with the "as is." What a 4K TV will bring is more TV buyers who refuse to buy one capped at 1080p now. More buyers helps us all.The iTunes store content argument is practically ridiculous. If we wave a magic wand right now and make EVERYTHING in the iTunes store have a 4K version for
TV, how much money can any Studio make? Nothing. Why? Because hardware must exist to play advanced software. Your iPhone can't run software dependent on iOS11. Your Macs can't run software dependent on macOS <next>. Loading the iPhone or Mac app stores with software that can't be consumed today makes no sense (or $en$e) until iPhones & Macs are advanced enough to take advantage of it. This is no different. Hardware must always lead or, at best, launch with a collection of software capable of taking advantage of the advancements. This will be no different.I am consistently dazzled to see how passionately some of "us" will argue against Apple advancing this ONE product, when just about every other thread for every other Apple product craves the future now. "We" have been coveting a "10th anniversary iPhone" for a couple of years now, longing for it to bring hardware features that do not exist in any iPhone available now. We covet software apps to take advantage of those hardware advancements even though there are zero such apps in the app store today. We want the latest & greatest in new Macs even if there is little to nothing to take advantage of those advances. "We" even argue on behalf of Apple in support of hardware "advances(?)" such as embracing USB3C or jettisoning the headphone jack well before there is much to take advantage of either.
But here- with this ONE product- "we" will passionately spin anything & everything in support of sticking with a status quo established years ago... even when all competitors have pretty much moved on to 4K... and even when pretty much everything else from Apple touts 4K capabilities as selling points. I'll conclude by summarizing the issue with a simple chain...
iPhone shoots 4K -> Apple movie editors edit 4K -> QuickTime plays 4K -> iTunes stores 4K -> TV -> 4K Television
And if you happen to have a 1080p TV at the end of your own chain, no problem: more advanced hardware can downscale 4K video to maximize your 1080p picture OR show 1080p content at it's maximum. There is no effect at all on the "happy as is" people if Apple corrects the one broken link in that chain.TV -> 4K Television
Last edited:
But there's not enough content.
-defenders
To add to the defenders side. Even though they should release a 4k version anyway. I have tried Netflix 4k and to be honest it isn't that big of a difference compared to 1080p. I tired 4k on my Samsung tvs Netflix version but have now switched back to Netflix 1080p. Most movies that are filmed in 4k are later downgraded to 2k in post production. And many 4k movies aren't even filmed in 4k to begin with. The only thing that really looked amazing is Sonys 4k HDR demo. But no movies so far have looked anything close to the quality in that demo.
Anyway, in todays market I still think they should release a 4k version to make it a little more future proof.
http://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/ultra-hd-not-always-4k/
To catch up: 4k, amazon prime sign in, fix the remote
To show serious about ATV: retina colors
To be historic apple wow factor? idk. $10 plugs for my washer and dryer that tell me when they are done the cycle, pop up on the TV screen notifications. something?
To show serious about ATV: retina colors
To be historic apple wow factor? idk. $10 plugs for my washer and dryer that tell me when they are done the cycle, pop up on the TV screen notifications. something?
I fear Apple may cave in to ignorant consumer demand and release a more expensive ATV with no improvement besides 4K support. If only Steve Jobs were still around to do a snarky presentation showing why 4K still doesn't make sense for the mass market.
So let me get this straight - You're quoting an article from 2014 in 2017 while debating a rapidly improving technology?
4k and HDR is infinitely better than the 1080 non HDR counterparts. Yes some implementations are better or worse then others, but in general streaming 4k will provide the most ideal picture in 2017.
Apple had an excuse in 2015 for not releasing a 4k Apple tv, however this is 2017 and that excuse is no longer valid.
Edit - Changed 2k to 1080P
And now you sit here with plenty of 4k content and guess what, you have to buy a NEW apple tv and be able to view it. While you should have gone with a Roku and be enjoying it now.
This is the typical apple BS. Drag their feet and behind the ball on most widely adopted consumer technology. But they're ahead in their magic proprietary stuff. Surprise surprise.
Even though they are going to be very late to the game they need to include the following.
1. 4K HDR support.
2. I GIG Ethernet
3. Audio passthrough to enable ATMOS and DTS x MA to be decoded by AVR
4. DV support.
1. 4K HDR support.
2. I GIG Ethernet
3. Audio passthrough to enable ATMOS and DTS x MA to be decoded by AVR
4. DV support.
Yes and no. I think people are becoming more conscious of quality, and good streaming quality can be expensive to achieve. Disk format helps solve this. Also, most ISP's are starting to enforce data caps, which meaning streaming can start to become even more expensive. 4K is already off to a better start than blu-ray was. Obviously streaming is the future, but I still think the niche for disk is big enough.