What do you think?
2007 1,1
2010 2,1
2012 3,1
2013 3,2
2015 5,3
2017 6,2
2007 1,1
2010 2,1
2012 3,1
2013 3,2
2015 5,3
2017 6,2
We need to put our business hats on. Apple will need to offer a function or feature they can market. Without that its dead in the water. The marketing has to apply to the average user (not just us geeks) that effectively separates the device from what's currently available (or owned).
HDMI 2.1 is awesome however with no content or limited functionality its unlikely they will be able to recoup from the development cost associated with manufacturing vs just continuing to manufacturer the current AppleTV 4k. If they can't convey to the masses why they NEED HDMI 2.1 it would be just like them selling a new AppleTV 4K only difference being a new case color. Some people would buy it but not many because people won't see the value in that.
Time really isn't that relevant with Apple. We've seen Apple update product lines in under 6 months for very valid technical reasons and we've seen them not update products for 4+ years due to technical limitations. Overall the longer they can sell the AppleTV 4k the better it is for them.
Probably a minor spec update with HDMI 2.1 and WiFi 6. Small chance of HDR10+.
I agree with previous posters - I'm not sure how they would market a spec bump on a set-top box unless it served a purpose that the existing unit can not. Their next hardware "revision" may have actually been the smart TV integration.
I do want that spec bump though so I can play higher quality x265 videos w/plex!
Is HDR10+ still alive??? I thaught that Dolby Vision had well and truly won the quality grounds here!
Yup, HDR10+ is dead.Im still waiting for HDR10+ content, ill be grabbing a Dolby Vision Capable TV when i replace my Samsung, Most AV receivers don't have HDR10+ support either, Denon even managed to update my 2015 Receiver with Dolby Vision support... so id say HDR10+ is dead, it has to be
Is HDR10+ still alive??? I thaught that Dolby Vision had well and truly won the quality grounds here!
Yup, HDR10+ is dead.
Aside from Amazon (which co-developed the format with Samsung), none of the streaming services support the format. And since it has no technical advantage over Dolby Vision and it was not developed with HDR10 to succeed it, I just don't see it taking off.
My money is on:
I would love, but wouldn't count on:
- Faster processor (A12 or better)
- Wi-Fi 6
- HDMI 2.1
- Hardware decoding AV1 codec (software support may be added on tvOS 14)
- Redesigned remote control
- Apple designed gaming controller
- Lower price
Dolby Vision is also backward compatible with HDR10. That is, HDR10 playback devices can handle Dolby Vision contents just fine, although obviously at HDR10 spec.HDR10+ isn't going anywhere just yet.
HDR10+ is aligning itself to be the fallback open standard for the natural evolution of HDR with dynamic metadata at the very least. Its open source, royalty free, and backwards compatible with HDR10 at the device level.
Without Dolbys control HDR10+ can be utilized in ways that consumers will eventually expect.
Example, currently the modern Galaxy phones can recording in HDR10+ (beta) and of course play it back on the screen and on HDR10+ TV's. This doesn't mean its good it just means the tech is there (or close).
Dolby Vision is also backward compatible with HDR10. That is, HDR10 playback devices can handle Dolby Vision contents just fine, although obviously at HDR10 spec.
Beyond cheaper loyalty (HDR10+ requires just annual fee, up to $10,000 whereas Dolby Vision requires royalty fee of round $2 per device), HDR10+ isn't superior to Dolby Vision in any way.
Had Amazon and Samsung worked with Consumer Technology Association (created HDR10) to create HDR10 successor, or HDR10+, I would be in total agreement with you. But HDR10+ is a proprietary effort (although open source) meant to allow Samsung to avoid paying Dolby and collecting fees from its competitors.
I think the ship has sailed on HDR10+.
While your enthusiasm for HDR10+ is noted, there's no real reason for it to exist.There isn't really a good reason to not just support both DV and HDR10+ from most manufacturers POV. Its picking up traction slowly but surely. Amazon, Google, Panasonic, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, etc are pretty big companies to have a horse in the race. Meanwhile TV manufacturers have minimal investment and virtually no risk if they implement support.
Probably a minor spec update with HDMI 2.1 and WiFi 6. Small chance of HDR10+.
Apple TV is largely superfluous on many new TVs. Granted, they provide superior user privacy and user experience, but most people aren't as picky.I can imagine some kind of Apple Arcade tie-in as the public-facing feature. An A12X or better chip would enable top end graphics and VRR support would allow dynamic frame rates. What would be interesting is to see whether Apple would launch a hardware subscription service - i.e. £15-20/month for Apple Arcade with free ATV hardware and controller (with 2 year contract) or keep with a fairly expensive one-off payment of £150-£200.
While your enthusiasm for HDR10+ is noted, there's no real reason for it to exist.
HDR10 serves as a fine fallback for open source royalty free contents.
HLG serves as a serviceable compromise for SDR/HDR hybrid contents.
Dolby Vision is a future proof studio master standard embraced by just about essentially everyone except Samsung. While DV royalty for playback device isn't inconsequential, if Hisense and Amazon Fire TV Stick can afford to pay for it, the battle is over.
blah, nothing this announcement cycle ?