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
15% of homes in the US had a 4K TV at the end of 2016. That number is rapidly growing and is expected to exceed 50% within 3 years. Just about everyone but Apple seems to think it's worthwhile to have a product out now that serves this sliver of a market.
Who cares what some dumb "stastics say?" I CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE. And gasp, that's ALL that matters to ME. I don't need research or stats to try and support my argument.
The chart! It always must make an appearance in 4K
TV discussions.
If you will use the wayback machine and hop back to before Apple launched
Then, Apple launched an
In short, apparently there is a group of "us" who feels compelled to write and spin anything in support of what Apple has for sale today, arguing about the foolishness of what Apple seems likely to inevitably roll out soon... UNTIL Apple does roll it out and then these same people aren't in those threads arguing about the stupidity of Apple for launching hardware with such gimmicky features like 4K.
The segment coveting a future feature that would not affect the "happy as is" crowd at all is completely wrong- even fools- for hungering for hardware advancement. But then Apple is not foolish for rolling out that very same hardware advancement as soon as they do it.
And note: you keep spinning this idea that a 4K
I really don't get people. adding 4k impacts NOTHING, yet there are pages and PAGES of people arguing over something that only matters to those of us with 4K TVs. It's all people proud of the fact that they don't have 4K TVs. As if those of us with them give a crap that they don't have 4K TVs. We should be celebrating that for a change, Apple is ADDING a feature.
Last edited:
Unfortunately "HDR support" isn't as straightforward as you might think, because this is still an evolving field with multiple competing standards (HDR-10, Dolby Vision, Samsung Tone Mastering System and others). There is also the problem that only the upcoming HDMI 2.1 fully supports dynamic HDR formats, so you may not only need a new TV, but also a new AVR to get a fully HDR-capable playback chain.
If you buy new equipment now, you may have to buy again soon to get support for the latest formats.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Not true. Just about every TV would benefit from a newer hardware
TV. If it's TVs that can't display 4K, the box would still maximize the picture while bringing other benefits of newer tech with it. For the non-4K set owner, that might just mean faster or newer UI but newer Apple hardware generally delivers more than just a single benefit.OK, but that argument can be applied against EVERY technology advancement. How many iPhone 8s are currently in homes. None. So no need to develop the iPhone 8.
New technology must come along to move into homes and advance consumers. If we have to wait until the majority of homes have any new technology, we get no new technology. Who needs a TV when the vast majority of homes have radio? Who needs color TV when the vast amount of homes have B&W? Who needs HD when the vast majority of homes have SD? Etc. It doesn't require much of a trip back in time to be at a time when not a single home had a cell phone in it. So who needs cell phones? Good thing that technology advances doesn't wait until "the majority of homes" have something.
I do agree with the slow PACE of turning over televisions, but a 4K-capable
TV doesn't force anyone to buy a new TV, nor does it work only work with 4K televisions. It's just better hardware capable of more for those who are already there or going there soon... just like new iPhones, Macs, iPads, etc.I don't read anybody wishing for a 4K
TV implying "the sky is falling"- just the reverse. I do read very passionate arguments from many against the idea even though it would have absolutely no effect on them whatsoever. Anyone happy with 1080p or 720p could stick right with the TV they have, downloading the same file format they download now using the same broadband pipe they use now. Yet, they're in every one of these threads passionately putting down the idea of a 4KTV anyway. For what?
Funny how Apple is too forward thinking-leading to the point of pissing people off (headphone jack, touchbar, USB-C, etc) and also how they are slowly adopting-following to the point of pissing people off (bigger phones, smaller computers, Music, 4K, OLED, wireless charging, etc).
Music, 4K, OLED, wireless charging, etc).
Well for one, how many people are buying 4k movies from google of wherever they are available compared to the HD version.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Right. It's like an exclusionary mentality: "we don't want those 4K people in our little group."
I have to believe they don't grasp it... that this is not some kind of purposeful exclusionary mentality. Instead, I think they just aren't thinking it through such that they DO believe they would have to buy a new TV or they DO believe they would have to download only 4K video and so on.
I'm with them in "not wanting to throw out a perfectly good TV" and other such mentalities but a 4K
TV doesn't force them to do that. It will work fine with a 1080p or 720p HDTV too. In fact, it should work better than the TV4 on existing TVs just because of the other benefits that comes with any new Apple technology updates. It will probably be faster, the UI will probably be updated, all apps will probably be able to run more efficiently and so on.Then, in a year or three or five when their HDTV conks and they replace it (with 4K because HDTV will long since be pretty much gone from shelves in a few more years), they just hook it up and enjoy the extra (if they want).
Hop over into any other Apple product thread and the bulk of the crowd is whining for advances. I can't wait for the new _________. I hope it has ____________. And on and on. Only in this ONE product from Apple do you find a pretty good sized pool of people that seem to passionately cling to a format Apple finally embraced in 2012 (and it was somewhat late to the party then too).
50" 4K TVs sell at WalMart for under $600. They also have 4K bluRays for sale.
Right. It's like an exclusionary mentality: "we don't want those 4K people in our little group."
I have to believe they don't grasp it... that this is not some kind of purposeful exclusionary mentality. Instead, I think they just aren't thinking it through such that they DO believe they would have to buy a new TV or they DO believe they would have to download only 4K video and so on.
I'm with them in "not wanting to throw out a perfectly good TV" and other such mentalities but a 4K
Then, in a year or three or five when their HDTV conks and they replace it (with 4K because HDTV will long since be pretty much gone from shelves in a few more years), they just hook it up and enjoy the extra (if they want).
Hop over into any other Apple product thread and the bulk of the crowd is whining for advances. I can't wait for the new _________. I hope it has ____________. And on and on. Only in this ONE product from Apple do you find a pretty good sized pool of people that seem to passionately cling to a format Apple finally embraced in 2012 (and it was somewhat late to the party then too).
and like they argue that not everyone buys a new TV, no one says they have to buy a new ATV 5, when the ATV4 works perfectly fine.
It's riddled with bugs. I can't start a movie from Siri - she will open to the right spot, then the video will fail to start. I have to back out and start it manually.
The remote is just a slippery mess. The affirmative click of the old one was much more sure footed. The UI lags like crazy, and combined with the input lag already in the TV, the thing is just a huge pain to navigate.
I got it because it was the cheapest way to get some of the streaming apps I use onto one of the TVs. When I want to watch something that the ATV3 supports, I switch to that one - no contest.
That would be one way. I have a 4K TV and a UHD BluRay player and have bought some movies, but the vast majority of the 4K content I view is from Netflix, Amazon and Youtube. You'd also have to add in who streams content in 4K vs lesser resolutions of the same content.
There is no Lag in the UI, none that is BS, also instead of complaining about the new remote, USE THE OLD ONE!!
[doublepost=1487273282][/doublepost]
Yeah but not sure if Netflix and other have released that info, my guess is HD is still far out in front but 4k making gains in the last year
And to top that off, I just bought two 4K TVs. 60" Samsung for $598 and a 43" Sharp for $378. Both are 4K HDR10 and look amazing and both have built-in apps so no need for AppleTV or any other set-top box. No gravy for the late Apple train.
Mine freezes all the time for seconds at a time and then comes back to life, un-queuing all of the clicks I did while it was hung. Very annoying. I don't use the included remote any more because I got tired of swiping down through long lists of movies in my library (because they won't allow Siri to search through the embedded meta data) only to accidentally swiped slightly sideways and have it move to a different menu, forcing me to start all over again at the top of the list.
The bit you were replying to said, "the vast majority of TVs currently out there would not benefit from a 4K AppleTV". In case it's not clear to you, the key bit of that, with additional words added to make it really abundantly clear, would have been, "...would not benefit from an AppleTV with 4K capability". The topic that was being discussed was, really quite specifically, whether or not 4K support was necessary for the AppleTV. Expanding the scope to say, "but advances in hardware would bring nice things for everyone" is merely attempting to realign the conversation to make you right, it would appear. You could just as easily add, "after all, aren't kittens cute?" That is also true, but is also not relevant to the assertion originally made.Not true. Just about every TV would benefit from a newer hardware
What I largely see is people arguing against the assertion that the AppleTV absolutely must have 4K in order to be viable - clearly that isn't the case, as lots of people are currently enjoying the AppleTV in its current form - clearly the device isn't DoA, as many supporters of 4K would assert. Yes, it'd be great to see 4K and HDR in the next version, but there is a huge potential market for the device as it stands.Yet, they're in every one of these threads passionately putting down the idea of a 4K
I don't get why people bitch about the 4K. These things are inexpensive. Sell the old one, demote it to the kitchen TV, give it to your mom, something.
I agree with that. But both of our AppleTVs started showing age by being slow, needing constant reboots or network errors and I swapped them out with Amazon Fires and haven't had any issues since. Now, after getting a couple TV replacements with built-in apps I no longer need the Amazon Fires.
It is going to be even harder for Apple to sell $150 non-4K AppleTVs since right now there are so many affordable 4K TVs out there and with many of them that already have built-in apps, it gives little reason to purchase Apple's.