Apple Testing 4K Capable Fifth-Generation Apple TV For Possible Release This Year

[nebo1ss]

The facts and observations in that article are still true today.

Rapidly improving technology?

Most Americans still don't have the bandwidth required to stream 4K video without terrible compression levels. With the Trump takeover of the FCC, expect cable bills to skyrocket while internet speeds stagnate or become slower.

There has been no revolutionary development in compression technology in the last three years.

Most Americans don't own 80" 4K TVs. Most 4K TVs in this country are 55" or smaller and are viewed from ten feet away or more. Humans have not evolved to have superior vision that can discern 4K resolution on a 40" TV from ten feet away.

Of the limited 4K content that is currently available (excluding home video and GoPro movie clips), most was not shot natively in 4K and certainly not in HDR and most 4K TV sets in the installed base do not support HDR.

Most 4K TVs in the wild don't have the processing power to decompress h.265 video with full quality.


[doublepost=1487263590][/doublepost]

1. Most 4K content is not HDR. Most 4K TVs currently in homes don't support HDR.
2. Wifi is more than fast enough to locally stream full quality 4K content. There is no need for gigabit ethernet in the Apple TV.
3. No idea what this is about, and I suspect 90%+ of ATV owners don't either.
4. Lol! What is this, 1999?
[doublepost=1487263867][/doublepost]

I doubt it. Either you're referring to an entirely different chart from a less qualified source or you are mis-remembering the argument at the time. The chart I posted is based on facts corroborated by none of than Sony and THX, not to mention independent experts in the field.

And guess what? if you bought a 40" 1080p TV to be viewed from ten feet away, you aren't going to see the resolution there either.

This is science, buddy, not "alternate facts."

The fact that you do not understand the market is not my problem.

Any 4K device being launched today not supporting HDR would be just stupid.
in 2017 putting Gigbit ethernet on any device instead of 100Meg has little cost an lots of benefit.
The fact that you do not understand the HD Audio formats that have been around for a few years now is not my problem.
You apparently also do not understand that DV is Dolby Vision.

I am afraid it is you who is still in 1999 not the rest of us.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If you were among those demanding 1080P support in the first Apple TV model I certainly hope you had something more than a 40" TV to view it on unless you were prepared to sit five feet away from it. Otherwise, you were just a lemming focused entirely on specs with no understanding of their real world implications.

I haven't seen a single link, quote, or citation from you, just vague arguments and ill-defined references to unattributed sources. My arguments are based on expert data you can find here:

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Data to argue the other side is not required. Consumers want what they want. I don't need to see "scientific data" arguing for Apple to advance an iPhone, iPad or Mac to be convinced I'd like to buy one. I'd like to buy more advanced iPhones, iPad and Macs. No tech is "good enough for everyone" for long.

Do you argue that iPhones are good enough as is- no need for Apple to advance them any further? How about Macs? How about iPad? Just stop until some scientific study can irrefutably support that we need a new edition of iPhone, etc?

I appreciate the same, tired old arguments that are recycled from before Apple rolled out the 1080p TV. If you really believe what you are saying, do come back and rail hard against Apple's ignorance when they roll out a 4K TV, using these very same arguments as "scientific proof" of how stupid Apple is for doing so. Will you do that? I doubt it. Instead, I expect the exact same outcome when Apple rolls out the 4K upgrade... the sound of crickets from the "1080p is good enough" crowd... just like the "720p is good enough" crowd right after Apple went 1080p... in March 2012 (almost FIVE years ago now).

 

[freediverx]

I bought a 4K Vizio TV to join the 4K revolution. I still watch my 1080p TV most of the time because it is bigger and there is nothing in 4k for me to watch without jumping though hoops.

In fact, I don't know how much 4K content I have actually viewed, because I can't be sure that the content really is 4K even when the TV says it is receiving 4K, and it doesn't really look that different to me.

I'll bet that doing ABX testing will show that most people fail to be able to consistently tell the difference, just like happens with MP3 versus CD.

Duck! How dare you admit that the emperor has no clothes?!

 

[JoeShades]

What I find hilarious is people giving stats about number of 4K TV sets sold as proof it is popular. A few years ago most tvs being sold had 3D, how is that 3D working out ?

 

[Release]

Its too late for Apple with me.

I've had a 4K TV for 2 years now, I've replaced 3 AppleTV's with Roku's and I can watch Amazon in 4K.

Its laughable that they're only now "thinking" of adding 4K support. I'm not a big fan of the UI in Roku but I'd much rather have 4K and access to everything than a pretty experience that I only look at when I'm choosing which app to open.

 

[thekeyring]

Don't skate where the puck is, skate where it's going to be. That's how Apple is supposed to think, isn't it? It's funny, I've seen you (if I'm mistaking you for someone else, apologies) on the other side of this argument when it comes to Apple getting rid of legacy tech and embracing the future. What's so different now?

Apple's development of the ATV has been lackluster compared to their other ventures. All of their other products support 4K in one fashion or another and the one product specifically designed for viewing doesn't support it. It makes no sense. Even just taking into consideration all of the 4K content that can be created on iPhones, you'd think they would have an outlet for that content on the ATV.

I totally agree: skate to where the puck is going to be.

Sorry if it ever came across differently, but I wasn't saying "Apple shouldn't do 4K" or even "Apple was right not to include 4K" but simply: I don't feel that the new Apple TV is a bad product, or a crippled product because it lacks 4K - either for me, or for most average consumers.

There are things about the Apple TV which means I can't recommend it to friends, just yet. But it's lack of 4K output is not one of them - truly. On a similar vein, I'm not upset with the processor inside the thing, either, despite that being a few years old.

I feel that while some customers are affected by the decision to leave out 4K, most aren't. You're either going to buy an Apple TV despite it's lack of 4K output, or you wouldn't have bought it even with 4K.

 

[jakeowens]

I would love a 4k apple tv. Currently I have to switch to the built in Netflix app on my tv when I watch Netflix original shows to watch them in full quality..... then switch back to the apple tv for their 1080p content (the apple tv upscales 1080p content to 4k better than the built in tv app on my 4k tv.

 

[Juicy Box]

Besides, with bandwidth caps fast becoming the norm in the US, 4K would be a painful($) experience for many.

Comcast increase their data cap to 1TB, up from 300GB. This is a pretty good size, but I guess if my family went to all 4K streaming, 1TB wouldn't be enough.

Actually a lot of people in this thread ARE arguing Apple shouldn't do it. My question is just because You (the royal YOU) don't have a 4K TV doesn't mean no one else does or wouldn't want a 4K Apple TV. Why would YOU (again the Royal YOU) care?

That seems to be a popular argument for many things on this forum. I remember when Apple removed iTunes Radio from Match subscribers there were many posters praising the change even though it did not impact them at all.

IMO, 4K content is still not common, and many people still do not have 4K TVs. But, all the competition has 4K and there was very little reason not to have in on the ATV4. 4K TVs are only getting more popular, and it is not like 8K is coming out tomorrow, Apple should have included it.

 

[Pbrutto]

There isn't enough content yet.....BUT I am 100% for a 4K Apple TV. Why? Because I have a 4K TV and have been shooting 4K for almost 2 years. I need to stream this to my tv! Try to find a reliable, high quality, USB-C to HDMI 2.0 cable to hook a MacBook Pro into a 4K TV. Go ahead.....I'll wait....

 

[nodealio]

Almost no one buys 1080p HD TVs any more. Only Apple could believe they can sell a high-end 1080p streaming TV box in 2017 to people monied and savvy enough to want one. So 4K is a no-brainer, as is HDR support. They need these things yesterday.

And because of the massive failure of that clownish and clueless, smug idiot Eddy Cue (how on Earth does that guy keep his job after years and years of screw-ups?) to negotiate real partnerships with Hollywood, Apple needs to face the fact its hand has been forced in the content space and it now needs to cough up billions to establish a beachhead in LaLaLand.

That beachhead should be Disney (Marvel, Pixar, Star Wars, princesses galore etc). Yeah, $190 billion is going to sting, but that's the price of having kept clueless Cue around. Planet of the Apps, pssh...

 

[kcamfork]

It's sort of Apple's mojo to wait a little on things and then bring out something good. There was alot of debate as to which enhanced 4k standard to use (different Mfr TV's would only show one or the other), so frankly I think it made sense to wait some on this. On the other hand its the high end customers (who might likely be Apple customers) who were getting the 4k TV's in the first place.

Glad to see them doing this as 4k is becoming popular now...hopefully they cover both 4k enhanced standards (if memory serves its Dolby and a lower end standard that Samsung and some other MFR's use).

Like Thunderbolt 3 on the new MacBook Pro, eh? I think they held off on 4k because of corporate greed. Apple released a fat, ugly Apple TV 4 for $149/$199 that only does 1080p the same time Amazon releases a sleek, small fire tv that does 4k for $99. Amazon even give you an option of paying $40 more and getting a game controller bundled in.

Apple releases a crap product because they are worried about their profit margins.

Speaking of all this, why did they push TB3 down our throats? They didn't wait for it to become a standard. They didn't wait for headphone jack removal to become a standard. I honestly think they did it so they would force people to buy their extremely overpriced dongles.

Apple releases yet another crap product because they are worried about their profit margins.

I'm seeing a pattern here and I really don't like it.

And before all the apologists and fanboys can respond: yes. I am voting with my wallet.

 

[osohardy]

4k is still a high-end toy for early adopters - the vast majority of people have neither the equipment nor the content to do 4k. But if Apple wants to silence the very noisy minority who actually care about that, by all means. Let them put out a 5th Gen ATV so I can pick up another couple 4th Gen ones at a discount.

When will this nonsense stop. You almost cannot even buy 1080p TV anymore unless it is total garbage or small. 4K is here, prices are down, content has arrived. What about your ***** iPhone that shoots 4K? Or your mirrorless camera? How about seeing your pics at 8MP instead of 2MP on a big screen? Wide color gamut? HDR?

Not interested? Not upgrading yet? Great, but I and others are and would welcome 4K/HDR Apple TV. Apple IS behind the mainstream market, and need to catch up whether you personally want it or not.

 

[69Mustang]

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.

That would be pretty funny. I imagine he would use the 4K capable iPhone as a prop. Or maybe the 4K capable iPad. He'd send Cue out to do a demo on a 5K iMac showing how 4K is bad. Jony would stand in front of an MBP explaining why it's 4K capability is an affront to thinness.

{fast forward to later in 2017}

Steve's now on stage extolling the virtues of the great new 4K capable ATV. Showing everyone how Apple's ecosystem is now seamlessly integrated with 4K capability at it's center. Shortly thereafter the ads will appear:
The shot on iPhone 4K ad with a group of friends sitting around watching the video of Kyle, the kite surfer, majestically floating above K2 in the Himalayas with a Capuchin monkey sitting on his shoulder holding a GoPro filming Kyle holding an iPhone shooting 4K video of the elusive Yeti taking 4K "food selfies" of the yak it just gutted.

The MacBook Pro ad -complete with heavy dubstep track- features Kyle (clearly un-bathed) hunched over an MBP that's attached to a couple of 5K LG monitors. Kyle's editing that delicious 4K video in FCP X. The dubstep bass drops are perfectly timed with Kyle smacking the flickering monitors because he forgot to move his damn router.

The final ad will feature freediverx. He'll walk into a friend's 4th floor apartment where a group of friends are watching a 4K video on the new ATV4K. He'll simultaneously start yelling at everyone and pulling out a tape measure. freediverx stretches the tape measure across the floor, draws a line, and pushes everyone behind it. He then goes on a 36 minute rant about correct viewing distances. Ad closes with freediverx being shown the door... via a shortcut over the balcony.

Steve Jobs is proclaimed brilliant. ATV4K sets new record with numbers Apple won't report.

 

[CarlJ]

This just isn't true anymore. Anybody buying a TV in the last year or so could choose 4K at $500. I would say apart from the very low end, it is standard.

Do you buy a new TV every year? Do you think everyone else, or even a majority of people do? If yes, I have some surprising news for you. If no, then likely the vast majority of the existing installed TVs out there, to which an AppleTV could be connected, are not 4K compatible.

 

[fiddysent]

There still isn't. I happily bought an Apple TV 4 and I won't miss anything by not having a 4K version.

Not trying to 'defend' anything but I don't feel the remotest bit of concern by not having 4K.

I'm more irritated that most UK tv companies still haven't released tvOS apps.

you just don't know what you're missing?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Do you buy a new TV every year? Do you think everyone else, or even a majority of people do? If yes, I have some surprising news for you. If no, then likely the vast majority of the existing installed TVs out there, to which an AppleTV could be connected, are not 4K compatible.

Does this matter? Contrary to your confusion (or spin?) a 4KTV doesn't REQUIRE a 4K television. Better video hardware can work perfectly fine with lesser video playback displays. If you buy a 4KTV but have a 1080p or 720p HDTV, that better hardware will play 1080p or 720p on your existing TV to it's max. It was the same back when Apple rolled out TV3. Those perfectly happy with a 720p HDTV could hook it right up and display everything at 720p on it.

What a 4KTV will do is allow those who have already replaced increasingly aging HDTVs- or just outright bought a new one- max out what THEIR TV can display too. More simply, it welcomes those people into the TV base instead of potentially turning them away.

Those worried about what you appear to be worried about seem to not understand that a 4KTV doesn't force anyone with anything as is to do or buy anything new.

 

[Galatian]

...and: iTunes Store still will charge me twice for getting a TV show in English and German. Perhaps people would invest more in hardware if the "software" is on par as well?

I'm not even going to talk about what a piss poor shopping experience the Apple Store Berlin is (there is no cashier and no line...you have to find somebody who will sell you something and simply hope that they will know which customer is first...already had a fight with a women who thought the "line" was where she was standing and she demanded to be served first, because I was supposedly not in line) and that it was nigh impossible to get an appointment to have the battery of my 1000€ + iPhone 6S Plus exchanged (which incidentally is not one of the supposedly affected models, but still shut off randomly with like 45% battery remaining). I was literally told (while being there to get an appointment), to use the support app and start looking everyday if an appointment slot opens. All in all I really think Apple needs so start to turn around: ricing prices usually also qualify for better support and I simply don't see it with Apple anymore.

 

[CarlJ]

I'd love to see Apple release a new version of Apple TV. Sure, make it do 4K and HDR. Not because I need either of those, but why not. What I'd love to see is just hardware that's a year newer and smarter, informed by what they've seen from the ATV4 being in wide use for the past year or so. Since I cut the cord, the ATV4 has become pretty much the only source and user interface I use on my TV (because I prefer it over all others), and I'd cheerfully invest another $150 or so to make that experience even better.

 

[mazz0]

If you think the American Apple TV is bad value you should try the UK edition. Costs the same, but with the biggest features missing.

 

[name99]

"Today's new disclosure appears as part of an investigation into Apple's apparent inability to keep pace with rivals like Amazon and Roku in the TV streaming market."

I call BS. There is no "Apple's apparent inability to keep pace with rivals"
We see the same thing in phones. Constant whining that Apple is "falling behind" but the size of this supposed gap never seems to increase.
Apple has a long tradition of not shipping excess functionality that would compromise the rest of the package --- they didn't ship 3G immediately, they didn't ship LTE immediately, they haven't yet shipped wireless phone charging. Shipping 4K when the aTV4 came out would have saddled most users with a more expensive, hotter running device to almost no benefit. This year the tech is closer to mainstream and, big surprise, this is also likely the year Apple ships it.

And likewise enough with this "Apple TV users still have to buy individual TV episodes via the iTunes Store, pay extra for services such as Hulu,"
WTF is the alternative that you imagine? Yes, yes, we all want a world of free (and ad-free) TV. Since that isn't going to happen, the alternative is we pay for it. And I'm much happier CHOOSING what I pay for than being forced to pay a lump sum $150 a month most of which goes to crap like sports that I am utterly uninterested in.

 

[Santabean2000]

making things for the sake of making them achieve nothing.

What? USA is not the world; here in Asia 4K TVs have been the norm and affordable for years...

4K content has lagged slightly, but in the time of the latest tv there have been plenty of options.

 

[Basic75]

I'm just waiting to update my ATV3 with something that can both install Apps, and has an audio output. Won't complain about UHD capable.

 

[CarlJ]

Does this matter? Contrary to your confusion (or spin?) a 4KTV doesn't REQUIRE a 4K television. Better video hardware can work perfectly fine with lesser video playback displays. If you buy a 4KTV but have a 1080p or 720p HDTV, that better hardware will play 1080p or 720p on your existing TV to it's max. ...

Those worried about what you appear to be worried about seem to not understand that a 4KTV doesn't force anyone with anything as is to do or buy anything new.

Confusion? Spin? Really? Do you really think you're the only one who understands how video hardware deals with multiple formats and resolutions? But thanks for the patronizing "explanation".

Let's recap: the OP (Lord Hamsa) said the vast majority of TVs currently out there would not benefit from a 4K AppleTV (this is true). FasterQuieter countered that many new TVs sold in the last year were 4K. And I pointed out that, again, the vast majority of TVs that are currently in homes are not 4K (TVs don't tend to get replaced as fast as, say, smartphones). The only way that FasterQuieter's point would have any bearing is if TVs had a huge turnover rate (i.e. everyone - not just the tech-obsessed, but everyone - replacing their TVs every year or two), and this isn't the case.

I'm all in favor of the ATV5 supporting 4K and HDR (because why not, and Apple should be at the technological forefront), but from Apple's perspective, looking at the entire market of currently installed TVs, it isn't the "sky is falling" scenario that many here try to make it out to be.

 

[Basic75]

I'm all in favor of the ATV5 supporting 4K and HDR (because why not, and Apple should be at the technological forefront), but from Apple's perspective, looking at the entire market of currently installed TVs, it isn't the "sky is falling" scenario that many here try to make it out to be.

An improved chip would help the game console part of the ATV, even for HD users. I'd probably switch it to HD for gaming, even if I had a UHD TV.

 

[malexandria]

Duck! How dare you admit that the emperor has no clothes?!

Then why would you waste your money if you aren't willing to go through "hoops"? And what "hoops?" Just subscribe to Netflix or Amazon or whatever streaming service you like and look at that, you get 4K content. If you are too cheap to get the apps then you shouldn't have purchased a 4K TV to begin with.

Most 4K TVS UPSCALE just about all your content to 4K anyway to say there's no 4K content is just stupid. You may not like the content, but that's a different argument then the blanket, lazy "there's no content, wha, wha..."

The only question you need to answer for yourself is if your viewing experience is better than what you had, regardless of whether it's in "4K." 4K TVs aren't strictly about the 4K resolution, it's about everything else - upscaling, better processing, HDR, 10-Bit panels, wide color gamuts, better contrast, blah, blah.