Apple TV Sees Major Sales Growth in 2015 But Still Ranks as Fourth Most Popular Streaming Media Player

[Juicy Box]

ATV still lacks the reliability like cromecast. Streaming any web content from mac has lags and sync issues between audio and video. tried connecting using ethernet and all with no luck. Chromecast is much better at this.

I agree, except that I would exclude the ATV3.

I have had some issues streaming video from my Mac to the ATV4, ranging from slightly annoying choppy video to completely unwatchable content.

I have no issues streaming from my Mac to the ATV3.
[doublepost=1463585661][/doublepost]

The UI makes perfect sense. You simply swipe left/right across the trackpad which supports accelerated scrolling... It allows you to go from A to P with one swipe. Hold the button down on any letter and you get variations including a backspace button for easy editing. You can also use dictation to enter search queries.

Anyone who'd rather click down, click down, click down, click right, click right, etc. shouldn't comment on what constitutes a good UI. That UI was just exhausting and it's clear that you've never used ATV4 for any extended period of time, let alone own one.

I own/use an ATV4, and I don't like the search. I prefer the boxed type over the long swipes. The swipes take longer and I accidentally select the wrong thing leading to me having to delete a character.

There are some apps with the older search style on the ATV4, not all of them are the long swipes.

 

[cmichaelb]

The UI makes perfect sense. You simply swipe left/right across the trackpad which supports accelerated scrolling... It allows you to go from A to P with one swipe. Hold the button down on any letter and you get variations including a backspace button for easy editing. You can also use dictation to enter search queries.

Anyone who'd rather click down, click down, click down, click right, click right, etc. shouldn't comment on what constitutes a good UI. That UI was just exhausting and it's clear that you've never used ATV4 for any extended period of time, let alone own one.

The remote is better for SOME things. When I'm scrolling through a list of items stored on my mac, in iTunes, it's way too easy to slightly swipe down at an angel and jump categories and lose your place in the list of items. Other than that, it is much improved!

 

[Karma*Police]

I agree, except that I would exclude the ATV3.

I have had some issues streaming video from my Mac to the ATV4, ranging from slightly annoying choppy video to completely unwatchable content.

I have no issues streaming from my Mac to the ATV3.
[doublepost=1463585661][/doublepost]

I own/use an ATV4, and I don't like the search. I prefer the boxed type over the long swipes. The swipes take longer and I accidentally select the wrong thing leading to me having to delete a character.

There are some apps with the older search style on the ATV4, not all of them are the long swipes.

It definitely doesn't take longer once you get used to it. You can also tap on your remote (left, right, top, bottom) like a d-pad to move one letter at a time once you get close to your target.

The most infuriating thing about the grid for me was that once I reached the end, I had to tap or hold the button down to get to the other end... Not fast or convenient at all.

 

[MH01]

The UI makes perfect sense. You simply swipe left/right across the trackpad which supports accelerated scrolling... It allows you to go from A to P with one swipe. Hold the button down on any letter and you get variations including a backspace button for easy editing. You can also use dictation to enter search queries.

Anyone who'd rather click down, click down, click down, click right, click right, etc. shouldn't comment on what constitutes a good UI. That UI was just exhausting and it's clear that you've never used ATV4 for any extended period of time, let alone own one.

Good UI design should be intuitive. Having to use dictation means the UI design is failing.

I bought mine on release day. And use it daily. You know what they say about people who assume....

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You're acting as if Apple has zero plans to offer a 4k Apple TV. They are going to on a future model. Part of holding it back is likely to get people like you who care so much to buy it again with 4K support. Plus I'm sure they will have some type of 4K content announcement that goes alongside the 4K hardware support. It's coming. But they are waiting for more content and to get people to buy Apple TV again. How long did we wait for a back camera for the iPad? Then a front facing camera? Front facing camera for iPhone? Retina for the iPad? etc. Apple always withholds features to get people to upgrade.

What is the topic of this thread again? Hint: it's not 4K vs. anti-4K sentiments. Perhaps this "holding back" strategy in THIS product contributes to 4th place?

Consumers want what they want. Consumers that adhere to Apple's long-term call to "think different" may do just that, even if it means what they want is not exactly what Apple is selling right now. Perhaps I am wrong but I perceive "think different" to not be "think different*" where the asterisk means "aligning with exactly what Apple has decided to have for sale right now." If that's so, does doing what Apple has long-term preached make them wrong for wanting "more"? Are they wrong to want "more" that is already implemented in just about everyone else's similar box?

You'd sure think so around here... where what Apple has for sale right now is the one and only right product for all consumers everywhere. Want a feature NOT available in what Apple has for sale? You're wrong to have personal wants that do not comply. What you want is "silly", a "gimmick", "99% don't want...", "until the whole internet is upgraded to be able to handle...", "the chart", "until every single video in the iTunes store can offer..." and on and on. Plus the twisting spins of implying that a 4K TV requires everyone to replace their 1080p TV (it does not), or only download big 4K versions of video files (it would not), or make any change to what they view as "perfectly fine" or "good enough" now (it would not).

What it would do is let another segment of consumers get what they want out of an Apple box too. But that segment is stupid to want it when Apple doesn't endorse it yet... even if Apple does endorse it in just about everything else they sell.

Think different... or don't, but those who can actually think different doesn't expect the other group to be forced into any change. However, the other group sure seems to desperately want to quash those different thoughts if they don't align with what Apple has for sale right now. One group just wants to join the party. The other group wants to exclude them unless they want it exactly as Apple serves it up.

 

[Juicy Box]

The most infuriating thing about the grid for me was that once I reached the end, I had to tap or hold the button down to get to the other end... Not fast or convenient at all.

Everyone likes what the like, and I never knock people for that.
I think more so, people like having options, so if you like the grid, or long swiping, you are covered.

It definitely doesn't take longer once you get used to it.

As for the grid style, I can type a word almost as fast as I can spell it out loud. For me, doing the long swiping, it takes twice as long at least.

Some people can text on a phone crazy fast, I can't. But, I can type on the computer pretty fast, and many people can't do that. So, I guess it depends on the person.

 

[magicman32]

Consumers want what they want. Consumers that adhere to Apple's long-term call to "think different" may do just that, even if it means what they want is not exactly what Apple is selling right now. Perhaps I am wrong but I perceive "think different" to not be "think different*" where the asterisk means "aligning with exactly what Apple has decided to have for sale right now." If that's so, does doing what Apple has long-term preached make them wrong for wanting "more"? Are they wrong to want "more" that is already implemented in just about everyone else's similar box?

You'd sure think so around here... where what Apple has for sale right now is the one and only right product for all consumers everywhere. Want a feature NOT available in what Apple has for sale? You're wrong to have personal wants that do not comply. What you want is "silly", a "gimmick", "99% don't want...", "until the whole internet is upgraded to be able to handle...", "the chart", "until every single video in the iTunes store can offer..." and on and on. Plus the twisting spins of implying that a 4K TV requires everyone to replace their 1080p TV (it does not), or only download big 4K versions of video files (it would not), or make any change to what they view as "perfectly fine" or "good enough" now (it would not).

I'm covinced some people have access to the "rose-colored glasses" version of this forum. Because while selective amnesia is nice to convey the argument someone wants, this forum has as much Apple bashing as any Android forum I've been on.

Whatever one must to to skew the narrative to for their argument I guess...

 

[mi7chy]

When I bought my last streaming device, I looked at Chromecast. Lock of IR input made stop considering it. I use Harmony remotes for all my TVs. I don't want to sit around with a remote for every device, and my phone.

IR remote is a dinosaur like VHS and there's no point in spending money on such limited relics. With Chromecast I can use existing phone or buy ~$25 Moto G prepaid phone as smart remote, IP phone, run apps, etc. It's also much more advanced as I can command my media server to stream to any or multiple playback devices in the house.

 

[Juicy Box]

IR remote is a dinosaur like VHS and there's no point in spending money on such limited relics. With Chromecast I can use existing phone or buy ~$25 Moto G prepaid phone as smart remote, IP phone, run apps, etc. It's also much more advanced as I can command my media server to stream to any or multiple playback devices in the house.

But, most phones don't have physical buttons. Also, I don't think IR is going anywhere anytime soon. It is a proven tech that has little downside other than needing to point it.

 

[mi7chy]

But, most phones don't have physical buttons. Also, I don't think IR is going anywhere anytime soon. It is a proven tech that has little downside other than needing to point it.

Why would anyone need physical buttons when there are touch gestures? IR also has limited range and requires line of sight which is a non-issue with WIFI. Stand-alone IR remote is dead like the stand-alone GPS. It's a sub feature that has converged into smart phone.

 

[applesith]

What is the topic of this thread again? Hint: it's not 4K vs. anti-4K sentiments. Perhaps this "holding back" strategy in THIS product contributes to 4th place?

Consumers want what they want. Consumers that adhere to Apple's long-term call to "think different" may do just that, even if it means what they want is not exactly what Apple is selling right now. Perhaps I am wrong but I perceive "think different" to not be "think different*" where the asterisk means "aligning with exactly what Apple has decided to have for sale right now." If that's so, does doing what Apple has long-term preached make them wrong for wanting "more"? Are they wrong to want "more" that is already implemented in just about everyone else's similar box?

You'd sure think so around here... where what Apple has for sale right now is the one and only right product for all consumers everywhere. Want a feature NOT available in what Apple has for sale? You're wrong to have personal wants that do not comply. What you want is "silly", a "gimmick", "99% don't want...", "until the whole internet is upgraded to be able to handle...", "the chart", "until every single video in the iTunes store can offer..." and on and on. Plus the twisting spins of implying that a 4K TV requires everyone to replace their 1080p TV (it does not), or only download big 4K versions of video files (it would not), or make any change to what they view as "perfectly fine" or "good enough" now (it would not).

What it would do is let another segment of consumers get what they want out of an Apple box too. But that segment is stupid to want it when Apple doesn't endorse it yet... even if Apple does endorse it in just about everything else they sell.

Think different... or don't, but those who can actually think different doesn't expect the other group to be forced into any change. However, the other group sure seems to desperately want to quash those different thoughts if they don't align with what Apple has for sale right now. One group just wants to join the party. The other group wants to exclude them unless they want it exactly as Apple serves it up.

Considering how few 4K TVs are sold, I don't think the lack of 4K on Apple TV is why it's behind the competition. I'd imagine price is one of the biggest factors. Marketing too- More people are shopping on Amazon.com and they get hammered with marketing for Fire products.

 

[Juicy Box]

Why would anyone need physical buttons when there are touch gestures? IR also has limited range and requires line of sight which is a non-issue with WIFI. Stand-alone IR remote is dead like the stand-alone GPS. It's a sub feature that has converged into smart phone.

I don't like touch gestures. I like buttons. Similarly, I don't like to type on my iPad or iPhone, and I prefer a keyboard for sending texts, emails etc.

The TVs have IR remotes, which I also use for my ATVs. I am able to turn the TV and the ATV on with it, use the volume, pause/play, rewind, FF. I don't need to unlock it, charge it. I can use it without looking at it.

There are many things that makes a IR remote useful. I am not saying using a phone as a remote is bad, but I am saying it isn't for me and many other people.

Why do you have an issue with that?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Considering how few 4K TVs are sold, I don't think the lack of 4K on Apple TV is why it's behind the competition. I'd imagine price is one of the biggest factors. Marketing too- More people are shopping on Amazon.com and they get hammered with marketing for Fire products.

How many is "few"?

How "few" are selling in the last 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

How "few" will be selling in the next 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

I agree- and already wrote- that the lack of 4K is NOT the only reason for 4th place. But I continue to believe that it is A or ONE reason that some are not buying it.

As to Amazon out-marketing Apple, that's much more Apple's fault. It's not like Apple is exactly lacking a marketing budget or marketing talent to market anything they want. I'm certain they could out-market Amazon with this product if they wanted to do so.

 

[applesith]

How many is "few"?

How "few" are selling in the last 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

How "few" will be selling in the next 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

I agree- and already wrote- that the lack of 4K is NOT the only reason for 4th place. But I continue to believe that it is A or ONE reason that some are not buying it.

As to Amazon out-marketing Apple, that's much more Apple's fault. It's not like Apple is exactly lacking a marketing budget or marketing talent to market anything they want. I'm certain they could out-market Amazon with this product if they wanted to do so.

In 2014, only 1% of all U.S homes had a 4K TV, so far in 2015, that percentage is seeing very fast growth and other studies have predicted a fivefold increase in 4K television sales for the current years end, from just under 1 million units sold to about 5 or 6 million by the end of 2015.

Source: http://4k.com/news/4k-tv-sales-to-surpass-100-million-units-by-2018-5948/

Growing but still low % of 4k TVs in households in the US.

I agree Apple could out-market Amazon, but they aren't. Apple TV is expensive compared to competitors and competitors are marketing better. Apple is 4th as a result.

 

[Juicy Box]

Considering how few 4K TVs are sold, I don't think the lack of 4K on Apple TV is why it's behind the competition. I'd imagine price is one of the biggest factors. Marketing too- More people are shopping on Amazon.com and they get hammered with marketing for Fire products.

How many is "few"?

How "few" are selling in the last 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

How "few" will be selling in the next 6 months vs. comparable 1080p TVs?

I agree- and already wrote- that the lack of 4K is NOT the only reason for 4th place. But I continue to believe that it is A or ONE reason that some are not buying it.

As to Amazon out-marketing Apple, that's much more Apple's fault. It's not like Apple is exactly lacking a marketing budget or marketing talent to market anything they want. I'm certain they could out-market Amazon with this product if they wanted to do so.

I think you are both right about the lack of 4K on the ATV4. It was not a huge factor for people not buying one, but it could be a factor for some.

Source: http://4k.com/news/4k-tv-sales-to-surpass-100-million-units-by-2018-5948/

Growing but still low % of 4k TVs in households in the US.

This article from a research and analytics group is the source of the article you linked, it shows that in the US, only about 10% of households will own a 4K TV by 2018. It is now a little old, but a good read.

The summary gives the important stuff, but the full report is linked.

So, not too many people have 4K TVs, but their next TV will most likely be a 4K TV.

What is interesting, is that 8K will be out and priced about where 4K TVs are now when 4K TVs are projected to only be in 50% of US households.

I might just wait for 8K.

 

[ChrisCW11]

Apple sold something, arguably, worth upgrading their 3 year old product last year. People tend to forget that Apple's market is largely upgrading existing customers, Apple has very little new market growth. It's very telling that 50% sales growth didn't budge their market ranking, especially considering Apple started this all before Amazon, Google or Roku had something. This was a market Apple had to lose, and they lost it.

I think Apple is being too timid with this product, Apple TV needs a lot more "revolution" if it's going to change the ranks. The claim that Apple moved TV out of the 70's was ridiculous as continue their backroom deals to try and secure themselves as the front end of antiquated content distribution and subscription models. Accessing a live channel as an app is not revolutionary especially if you need a $80/mth subscription behind the app first.

 

[froggiemlm]

Pretty unhappy with ATV4. I buy/download movies because my internet speeds are so bad. So most of the Siri features don't work, because Apple expects you to be streaming the tv sow/movie to use those features. It takes 7 or 8 hours to download a movie to my hard drive. I have NEVER been able to stream an HD show successfully. I give up after 1/2 hour when I have only "watched" 10 minutes because of buffering. The old ATV ( and software ) worked well with downloaded and locally stored movies. Now even my old ATV wants to stream movies rather than play downloaded ones, because of updates. Not saying I absolutely cannot play shows stored on my hard drive, just that ir isn't as easy and reliable as before.

And before you say that Roku or Amazon would have the same streaming problems- I know. That's why I never bought them.

how is that apple fault and not your IP?

 

[JackANSI]

The average person probably doesn't know what 4K is. The average person probably cannot afford a 4K TV until just recently. 4K is not average yet.
[doublepost=1463583501][/doublepost]

Lightening- Apple is pushing wireless for the rMacBook. You can sync your phone over wifi and they push the idea of iCloud. They NEVER positioned rMacBook to be something you plug into regularly.

It's not a poor argument. See my post above from a few minutes ago. Apple always witholds hardware features to put in another model to get people to buy again. Apple has NEVER had interest in making a future proof device or one that would last many years into the future. Apple relies on people to buy new. Apple TV is a cheap device at $150 and people can buy another one in 12-18 months. It's not a laptop or a full tv.

It doesn't matter if people know what 4K is... They are buying. If you ignore OLED, it's the only segment that had YoY growth from 2014 to 2015 (somewhere around 170% if memory serves, where the rest of the market receded 4%)

Fact: You are still wrong. Sorry.

No 4K was a stupid move when you can get it for less $$ with Roku and others.

I think the $69 ATV3 might have just as much to do with any Apple increase as ATV4 did... but Apple doesn't say.. so... just educated opinion there. As is this: anyone who bought an ATV4 is what I call a sucker.

I also think you don't even grasp my argument. I'll put it simply using your own: If you wait till a certain feature has reached "average" to get in, you're too late. Others have already cashed in on a majority of people buying.

 

[Karma*Police]

Good UI design should be intuitive. Having to use dictation means the UI design is failing.

I bought mine on release day. And use it daily. You know what they say about people who assume....

Using dictation just means that you can enter queries a lot faster... The smaller the device, the more important voice input becomes. It's either that or adding a qwerty keyboard to the remote like the failed Google TV. Adding dictation has nothing to do with a failed UI design.

Also, people mistake intuitive with what they're accustomed to. The soft keyboard on smartphones that everyone views as being intuitive and normal today was seen as being un-intuitive and an abomination just a few years ago.

Considering ATV4 is the closest experience to a modern smartphone, I'd say it's the most intuitive and fluid experience of them all.

 

[BuffaloTF]

A lot of crying over 4K. I have one, and I'll probably pick up a 2nd this year with HDR...

It is disappointing, but not to the extent it's being stated... does anyone *seriously* have a 4K tv that isn't internet connected itself with built-in access to Netflix, Prime, Vudu and Youtube for 4K video? Mine is almost 2 years old... and I get these things. I have 2 Roku's in the house as well, and they're awesome in their simplicity... but they're not as good as the ATV with its fluidity and speed (caveat: have not tried the Roku 4). I'll just retire mine to a different TV when the time comes and a 4K version replaces it.

 

[2010mini]

Of course 4K makes sense in the Apple products where Apple has already embraced it and no sense in this ONE Apple product where Apple has not yet embraced it.

And when Apple rolls out the 5 "now with 4K", your anti-4K opinion should persist, which means you should be in those threads just as passionately bashing Apple for embracing the "silly" "gimmick" that doesn't belong in a "consumer" product. But we all know that won't happen. Instead, Apple will "make sense" to embrace it just as soon as they roll out a "5" that has it.

Amazing how what Apple has for sale at any given moment is the one and only perfect incarnation of such things for all people, and all other feature wants are "silly", "gimmick", etc. not suited for anyone. There is no "think different" unless that happens to align with what Apple has for sale right now. And then, as soon as Apple embraces the "silly" in a new version, all the "anti" sentiment is forgotten and that new incarnation now with the "silly" "gimmick" is the one and only perfect one for everyone (no exclusions). All hail the Apple.

Hobe, my tune will not change if Apple brings out ATV5 with 4K.

 

[BuffaloTF]

Just curious, do you know if streaming 4K video would stutter over 802.11ac? I know awhile back, streaming a DVD over 802.11n would stutter but I'm curious about the bandwidth requirements.

4K video does not stutter for me, at all. And my TV is only N. Just be sure you're on 5 ghz and not 2.4. Name the networks 2 different names so you're in full control over which band you're on.

 

[JackANSI]

Of course 4K makes sense in the Apple products where Apple has already embraced it and no sense in this ONE Apple product where Apple has not yet embraced it.

And when Apple rolls out the 5 "now with 4K", your anti-4K opinion should persist, which means you should be in those threads just as passionately bashing Apple for embracing the "silly" "gimmick" that doesn't belong in a "consumer" product. But we all know that won't happen. Instead, Apple will "make sense" to embrace it just as soon as they roll out a "5" that has it.

Amazing how what Apple has for sale at any given moment is the one and only perfect incarnation of such things for all people, and all other feature wants are "silly", "gimmick", etc. not suited for anyone. There is no "think different" unless that happens to align with what Apple has for sale right now. And then, as soon as Apple embraces the "silly" in a new version, all the "anti" sentiment is forgotten and that new incarnation now with the "silly" "gimmick" is the one and only perfect one for everyone (no exclusions). All hail the Apple.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[applesith]

It doesn't matter if people know what 4K is... They are buying. If you ignore OLED, it's the only segment that had YoY growth from 2014 to 2015 (somewhere around 170% if memory serves, where the rest of the market receded 4%)

Fact: You are still wrong. Sorry.

No 4K was a stupid move when you can get it for less $$ with Roku and others.

I think the $69 ATV3 might have just as much to do with any Apple increase as ATV4 did... but Apple doesn't say.. so... just opinion there. As is this: anyone who bought an ATV4 is what I call a sucker.

I also think you don't even grasp my argument. I'll put it simply using your own: If you wait till a certain feature has reached "average" to get in, you're too late. Others have already cashed in on a majority of people buying.

170% of a small number is still a small number. Sorry learn math.

"In 2014, only 1% of all U.S homes had a 4K TV, so far in 2015, that percentage is seeing very fast growth and other studies have predicted a fivefold increase in 4K television sales for the current years end, from just under 1 million units sold to about 5 or 6 million by the end of 2015."

Source: http://4k.com/news/4k-tv-sales-to-surpass-100-million-units-by-2018-5948/

Buying a box to plug into your TV is not a long-term commitment like a TV or a computer. My point, in response to you and others, is that 4K is not a major decision in buying a box for you today. Boxes are cheap and people will upgrade. Apple has regularly withheld features for future models. 4k demand is growing and Apple will add 4K support to a future model. Are they losing some sales today? Sure, but they will capture more in the future. Your argument of pretty much "buy a 4k device now or forever never have 4k" is dramatic and short thinking.

I'm done arguing with you. Enjoy your 4K Roku and your plethora of 4K content.

 

[BuffaloTF]

Not sure why requiring a phone should be a deal breaker for the Chromecast. You need a remote for the Apple TV, ROKU and Amazon device. Consider the phone a remote. Everyone has a phone and you only need it to start streaming like any remote. It plays no part in the streaming process you can switch if off once you start the stream.

You just answered your own question. A phone is not a remote, it's as simple as that. Additionally, having to use your phone as a remote and simultaneously leave the app open or in the background running, is obnoxious. Maybe I want to start a show for people in my house, then run out and pick up a pizza... my phone is coming with me. As soon as it's gone, the video is too.

In short. It's a terrible solution...