Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Because nobody has a 4K TV set in their living room.

Apple isn't interested in selling to pros and geeks, they're after the "average consumer" because they outnumber the geeks by thousands-to-one. And the average consumer thinks the current HD TVs are good enough. That's why Ultra-HD never saw the light of day. That's why 3D TV sets failed. That's why plasma screen TVs failed.

I get 4/5K on a computer screen. You can see more of what you're displaying (spreadsheets, graphics, etc.). But a 4K set top box on a TV that doesn't support 4K resolution, to show off content that isn't broadcast in 4K—what's the point?
4K hasn't been massively adopted because there is not enough content out there yet. TV sets prices are going down. Once plenty of sources are out there it will be massively adopted, and I guess it will be sooner than HD. If the iPhone gets a 4K camera, having a 4K TV with a 4K Apple TV makes sense.
Apple may offer a special streaming service in alliance with a key movie/TV studio and we may see some acceleration in adoption.
 
Apple's problem isn't with engineers, it's the managers. I've heard many complaints about not sharing information properly between teams, managers choosing to prioritize stuff based on what marketing teams want and so on.
Marketing teams do make the calls at Apple but that's what distinguishes Apple from others and has made them so successful. perhaps the difference is that when Jobs was around, he would step in and veto a boneheaded marketing decision. I don't believe Cook or anyone else at the helm is stepping in to stop marketing at this point. Fortunately, they have a great marketing team but as a company, they are kind of on cruise control right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Banquo
I'm looking forward to this. I don't think it will do 4K because of the relatively lack of 4K TVs out there, the lack of 4K content, and the absolute cow the internet providers would have if Apple sold 20 million of these in the U.S. and every one of them tried to stream a 4K Walking Dead episode on Sunday night.
You got the lack of 4K content correct but you are very wrong about the lack of 4K TV's on the market. Go to Best Buy and you'll see at LEAST 40% of their inventory are 4K sets. Now I'm a Plasma guy so I wouldn't be buying those awful 4K LCD sets but there's no denying that TV manufacturers are making them massively. And while 4K content is in fact very minimal, camera manufacturers such as Sony and GoPro have 4K cameras that are selling very well and consumers want to make 4K home movies to archive and watch on their new 4K TV's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jnpy!$4g3cwk
Marketing teams do make the calls at Apple but that's what distinguishes Apple from others and has made them so successful. perhaps the difference is that when Jobs was around, he would step in and veto a boneheaded marketing decision. I don't believe Cook or anyone else at the helm is stepping in to stop marketing at this point. Fortunately, they have a great marketing team but as a company, they are kind of on cruise control right now.

The problem is that marketing is NOT supposed to make the calls in how to run things. That's not their job. The CEO and the big wigs are the ones that should be directing things and letting marketing take care in how to promote their products.

The CEO needs to grow a pair of balls and tell marketing where the line is drawn and understand which options are best available to promote the company and products while maintaining the public image.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Banquo
Well since Apple is targeted at the 1%'ers, $199.... :eek:

Hope I'm wrong...


Better off with a Wii (used $79), Xbox 360 or PS3 (new core units for $149 on sale).

don't compare it with a console, because apple tv will get more tv services then other consoles... it's more than a gaming console.. (airplay, entire app store, ...)
 
My guess is that it will be just like the Amazon Fire TV where search will only work in Apples walled garden and will ignore any other sources

It depends on what ends up in the walled garden. If Apple can add commercial programming and provide a search mechanism that encompasses it and all the "channels" that are currently on the Apple TV, I think it would do well.
 
I'd guess that the portion of the population that has ever seen a 4K display is pretty small, maybe a percent or two. More importantly, 4K resolution is just one part of several standards that are changing and aren't final that will have to be dealt with. Hopefully the new unit is upgradeable.
 
Definitely. This is pretty important to me, and I am sure a large percentage of people. Adding unique remotes (such as the bluetooth remote of the Fire TV) brings us back to the days when each device required separate controllers. I have standardized on Harmony remotes for years and have perfectly programmed remotes for each of my TVs/devices. All other remotes are in a drawer.

I love my Harmony remote too, and would be really upset if it lost the ability to work. It is an "old style" IR-only remote, so I'm already living with it not being able to operate our Fire Stick.

That said, the latest Harmony remotes do operate Fire Stick and FireTV boxes over Amazon's Bluetooth-based connection (ex, see https://support.myharmony.com/en/harmony-experience-with-amazon-fire-tv ). If Apple allows them to, I don't see any reason why the same Hub wouldn't be able to control an AppleTV, albeit with some software and firmware updates required on the Hub/Remote side. The click-button "simple remote" probably won't be able to do the trick, but certainly the smartphone app should. And, once the Hub works with the AppleTV, I'd definitely see Harmony putting out a higher-end clicky remote with touchscreen to control the AppleTV just as the Apple remote did.

Now, though, the motion stuff is all fairly unique, so I'm not sure if Logitech would even want to go there (it depends on if the motion sensitivity is used only for games and the like, where Logitech does not want to replace game controllers, or for basic system navigation, which is directly in the Harmony's wheelhouse).

In any case, I don't think it is wise for us as consumers to require control systems from the 1970s to limit what devices in 2015 are able to do. We do need to move on. I just hope that Apple has learned the remote-hell lessons from the 1970s and 1980s and will at least cooperate with others in allowing universal control.
 
The current Apple TV is already gimped

How so? It does what it is supposed to do - it plays all my content. From a software standpoint it's gimped because of the obnoxiously flaky software disconnect between iTunes and Apple TV (For instance you rent something in iTunes, but it won't play on Apple TV - yet purchasing content works, or the fact that the stupid thing doesn't save your Wish List across both platforms, things like that). But that's a SOFTWARE issue. The hardware works perfectly fine for what it does.
 
If I had a TV I would get one for sure.
Yeah, but why would you buy a TV as long as Apple isn't making one? Since 2009 I use an 27" iMac as a temporary TV replacement. I would love to replace it with something bigger and easier that can also download and replay Matroska files with subtitles illegaly.
 
There are legitimately some people here who think that if Apple TV supported gaming, even casual throwaway gaming, it's game over for consoles.

Laughable really.

It like folks who think Apple can just take over the massive TV industry just because they are Apple.
 
Because nobody has a 4K TV set in their living room.

But a 4K set top box on a TV that doesn't support 4K resolution, to show off content that isn't broadcast in 4K—what's the point?

Very weird - in the last 6 months at least, every single person I know of has bought a 4K TV when replacing their current HD one - 40" 4K 3D TVs are less than £500 now. Why would anyone *not* buy one when getting a new one? Maybe it's different in the US?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klyster
Very weird - in the last 6 months at least, every single person I know of has bought a 4K TV when replacing their current HD one - 40" 4K 3D TVs are less than £500 now. Why would anyone *not* buy one when getting a new one? Maybe it's different in the US?

As someone from the States, I think a neighbor was about to buy a TV, they would consider a 4K one. The TV price you listed is for a 40". That is probably a lot smaller than what is in most of my neighbors homes.

Considering here in the US the average square footage of a home is 3 times the size of the average home in the UK, 40" TV us way too small.

Compare the prices of a 65" 1080p, and a 65" 4K TV. That plus the lack of 4K content, I don't think it is that unbelievable that many people in the US might be buying the cheaper 1080p as their next TV.

I do not think that 4K will go the same way as 3D TV though. It will catch on, but as soon as it becomes cheaper and more content available.
 
You both have it the wrong way around. Apple's style is to seize control over the whole ecosystem. The apple remote, they'll say, will be the new universal remote, and it won't need buttons because you can tell it what to do. Even better, with Home Kit, it will be much more universal than your Harmony remote ever could've dreamed.

Voice control works fine for some, and is a good substitute for a working keyboard, but it is the last thing I want as the primary interface for a remote control. Physical buttons for key functions (play/pause, volume control, maybe fast forward and rewind) and a touchscreen for the rest makes for an ideal and highly flexible remote.

That said, if Apple goes full buttonless, then there is no reason for it to be anything more than an app on everyone's iPhone (like the current Remote app, but polished up significantly). I can't see Apple putting IR in a redesigned remote, but maybe they will have the AppleTV itself emit IR signals to other devices. Or, if they don't, Logitech Harmony will.
 
Very weird - in the last 6 months at least, every single person I know of has bought a 4K TV when replacing their current HD one - 40" 4K 3D TVs are less than £500 now. Why would anyone *not* buy one when getting a new one? Maybe it's different in the US?

Sure. Duh.
Of course someone would buy a 4K tv IF they were getting a new one. Because tvs last 10+ years.
Wtf does that have to do with the FACT that there is a huge current lack of content & no real delivery systems??
Certainly people are not getting rid of perfectly good 1080 systems to clamor to this en masse.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.