Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!
  • Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

BODYBUILDERPAUL

macrumors 68000
Feb 9, 2009
1,773
1,435
Barcelona
Yes and it's exciting!
HDMI 2.1 for that flawless switching of frame rates & SDR, HDR and Dolby Vision, WiFi 6 and 120 fps playback / Ui possibilities :)

120 fps will become very interesting. Gemini Man is filmed in 120 fs and shown at selected cinemas in its full glory.
Now imagine if this film was available in iTunes Extras at the 120 fps rate.

Exciting times. AND I must congratulate Apple with their Apple TV+ service offering both 4K Dolby Vision AND Dolby Atmos for their titles. What a great starting point!
 
Comment

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,630
1,910
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.
 
Comment

BODYBUILDERPAUL

macrumors 68000
Feb 9, 2009
1,773
1,435
Barcelona
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.

I'm not convinced that the masses buy into Apple TV. It's a true quality product. Here in the UK, the masses tend to be conservative with crappy Sky TV boxes OR Amazon stick or simply their TV smart apps. They want everything hardware wise for free or cheap - many are truly ignorant and know nothing about their data security - pretty clear when so many use Windows computers or Android phones. I'm convinced that these people - and there's many of them are simply not Apple TV customers nd will never be Apple TV + customers.
From what I can see with ATV+ is that Apple aren't going on the Amazon or Disney or Netflix path, they are setting their own standard and my gosh, it's actually 'intelligent' diverse and quite libel TV - quite the opposite from the Murdoch far right Sky TV here in the UK for example.
It's not going to be mass market and it's clear that for now, Apple knows that. But maybe, it's going to be on demand TV for the next generation - the ones who whilst staying at university had iPhones and dreamt of owning a MacBook Pro for their travels.

As a non conventional TV viewer, the Apple TV was always perfect for me - it's an extension of my MacBook and iPhone that I simply love - my only two gadgets!!!!!! - that I travel 9 months of the year with and run a business from as well as using for photos, videos, vlogs, music production in Logic Pro X and Audacity and 4K 60 fps video creation in Final Cut Pro X. The Apple TV is the perfect compliment to the iPhone, MacBoo and iTunes Store and now, Apple Arcade. Personally, I feel that we'll see a Apple TV Pro offered with A13X chip and storage options of 64GB, 128 and maybe 256GB for the Arcade users.
I don't want it to appeal to the masses - they are not into that - they want cheap Firesticks or 'free' Sky TV boxes with their £50 a month TV subscription of dribble filled with badly produced TV ads! That's the 'masses' market here in the UK for TV. It's old, it's traditional and it's pretty dire as in last century.
Apple doesn't fit into that category. They have their own style and it grabs people by the heart, impulse and passion. Cheap or cheaper really does not fit into that ethos instead offering the ultimate user experience with ease of use and beautiful design is their path. BUT many people are not interested in that - that's why they buy Android, Windows basic stuff etc. You can't please everyone. You've just got to follow your goal and path and that's something that Apple has done incredibly well from day 1 and still does 100% in 2020.

On a side line, I feel that HDMI 2.1 is perfect for the seamless auto frame rate switching which is so essential with internet streaming and its huge variety of frame rates. Maybe people don't need to know about it, but it's essential that we have it!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: George Dawes
Comment

grouch

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 20, 2011
83
21
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!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BODYBUILDERPAUL
Comment

BODYBUILDERPAUL

macrumors 68000
Feb 9, 2009
1,773
1,435
Barcelona
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!

Don't worry there will ALWAYS be the Apple TV. It's the highest quality window for iTunes/Apple TV+/AirPlay/Photos/iCloud/HomeSharing etc etc. It compliments EVERYTHING in the Apple portfolio!

Just wait 18 months until current Smart TVs software is not updated and is laggy as hell and wait for the naive moaners!

With Apple TV+ in 4k Dolby vision and Atmos the need for a top quality streaming media centre box is even more important!
 
  • Like
Reactions: orbital~debris
Comment

George Dawes

macrumors 65816
Jul 17, 2014
1,429
1,242
=VH=
I’d like to see graphics comparable to the best iOS games

The arcade games I've played remind me of a SNES , I want a PS4

With a bit of tweaking I’m sure Apple can do this
 
  • Like
Reactions: orbital~debris
Comment

brynsmith23

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2007
149
87
Australia/NZ
Is HDR10+ still alive??? I thaught that Dolby Vision had well and truly won the quality grounds here!

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
 
  • Like
Reactions: BODYBUILDERPAUL
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
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
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:
  • Faster processor (A12 or better)
  • Wi-Fi 6
  • HDMI 2.1
  • Hardware decoding AV1 codec (software support may be added on tvOS 14)
I would love, but wouldn't count on:
  • Redesigned remote control
  • Apple designed gaming controller
  • Lower price
 
Last edited:
Comment

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,630
1,910
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:
  • Faster processor (A12 or better)
  • Wi-Fi 6
  • HDMI 2.1
  • Hardware decoding AV1 codec (software support may be added on tvOS 14)
I would love, but wouldn't count on:
  • Redesigned remote control
  • Apple designed gaming controller
  • Lower price

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).

Eventually all smartphones will need to be able to record and playback in HDR using a dynamic metadata. People will also want to buy external displays/TV's that support this playback. Therefore TV OEMs will want to support the standard to be competitive.

With HDR10+ being backwards compatible at the decoder makes compatibility across all HDR device that support HDR10 (all of them right?) a no brainer.

So unless some other open source HDR that supports dynamic metadata comes out very very soon I think HDR10+ will at least be a support mode of most TV a couple years from now.
 
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
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+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
Comment

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,630
1,910
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+.

I quote a Netflix source since they work from Dolby Vision masters for all their streams....

"Are you preparing separate encodes for DoVi, HDR10 and Rec709 or can you create a single output that includes two or more?

Dolby tools natively enable deriving Rec. 709 and HDR-10 from the DoVi source. This allows us to produce all of our encodes from the Dolby Vision source. These profiles include the Rec. 709 profiles: CE1 & CE2 (legacy VC1), CE3 (H264), CE4 (10-bit HEVC, and VP9), and our mobile profiles AVC-HiProfile and VP9-M (8-bit), in addition to the CE4 HDR profiles: Dolby Vision and HDR10 (HEVC), and VP9."

"Are there any unique controls for DoVi or HDR10 that you have to adjust to produce optimal output? Or is it simply a yes/no switch or something similar?

Many Dolby Vision masters are in P3 colorspace. For HDR10, we have to convert to rec.2020 color space with some processing and a color adjustment. If you are interested in more details, we published this paper that loosely describes how we optimize the quality of the HDR10 encodes derived from the DoVi masters."

HDR10 stream always accompanies DV whether it be streamed or on a disc. But that is far from backwards compatible compared to any HDR10+ video playing on any standard HDR10 hardware, which is why I specified "on device".

HDR10+ fees are for admin, logo (trademark use), and the patent claims/stand still (depending on your product). $10k fee is nothing compared to royalties on all your units sold.

I'm not sure about that ship sailing just yet either.

Google Play announced it was going to be supporting the format in there store. Android already has native support for it (on devices that can support HDR).

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.
 
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
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.
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.
 
  • Love
Reactions: BODYBUILDERPAUL
Comment

kiranmk2

macrumors 6502a
Oct 4, 2008
962
589
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.
 
Comment

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
5,055
4,201
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.
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.

So you are right. Apple TV should pivot as a casual gaming console that happens to be the best streaming device. I am not sure about $15-20/month pricing though.
  • A12X processor
  • 128 GB storage
  • HDMI 2.1
  • AV1 codec for 4K HDR YouTube
  • tvOS redesigned around Apple Arcade experience
  • New Apple designed gaming controller
  • New redesigned remote control without Siri microphone
  • Always on Siri microphone on Apple TV (like Amazon Fire TV Cube)
  • Qi wireless charging for Apple gaming controller and remote
  • Retails at $199 (same price as Xbox One S Digital Edition)
  • Qualifies for Apple Card Monthly Installments -- $8.29/month for 24 months
  • To lessen the blow of $199 retail price, 1-year complementary Apple Arcade and Apple TV+ subscriptions, $100 value (extends those with free Apple TV+ by another year)
 
Comment

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,630
1,910
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.

Don't confuse what I'm saying with enthusiasm. I have no dog in this fight, if anything my dog is Dolby Vision since everything I own can play HDR10 and DV while nothing I own can play HDR10+.

I'm not denying your statements either, especially with Samsung being the main hold out for Dolby Vision support (Chinese brands as well). And I'm definitely not saying HDR10+ will ever replace DV as an industry standard since there needs to be cinema standards.

What I'm saying is that is that it's naive to overlook a format that is the answer to non Hollywood content creators (ex. YouTube) question. Much like how HLG and HDR10 can be output now in Premiere and FCPX something with dynamic metadata will need to be output in the future. The fact its backed by the largest electronic manufacturer on the planet (Samsung) that puts the most amount of displays in front of the most amount of people (vs any other single manufacturer) supported by a couple of the largest content providers on the planet (Google, Amazon) certainly helps its cause. Apple has changed the markets direction a lot more with A LOT less and HDR10+ doesn't need to change its direction since it an co-exist with Dolby Vision.

Playback device support is somewhat inconsequential, simply because if a device is capable of dolby vision its capable of HDR10+ via a firmware update. Post sale firmware updates have minimal associated cost involved which we've already seen with UHD BD players when HDR10+ became part of the supported formats for UHD Blu-ray disc standard specs.

I could be mistaken but it sounds like you are suggesting Dolby Vision will be the ONLY method a display can show light to your eyes when it comes to dynamic metadata. Dolby couldn't pull that off with more sophisticated audio capture technology even at a Hollywood level against a non open standard like DTS. They might keep the lions share of the market for Hollywood content but the "video" market is too large for them to solely control.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.