Apple TV tvOS Simulator Shown Running in 4K Resolution

[mmm1345]

How can you tell ?

I mean, do you have a 55 inch 4K next to a 55 inch 1080P?

I have seen two high quality large TV sets, 4K and 1080P in a store next to each other, and the there was no Night and day difference. Unless I got very close. At normal viewing angles/distance, the difference was minor for me. Money better spend on OLED.

Now take a monitor, which is in your face, 4K comes into its own.

What do you mean how can I tell? That's a pretty silly question.

You are assuming because YOU can't tell the difference, no one else can and basing your argument on the fact that YOU can't see the difference. MY Eyes can clearly see the difference. I don't want a monitor in my face. Did you say you need an 80 inch TV to see the difference? Now you are saying wow, on a 4K Computer monitor it's so much better? Are you trolling?

Just because yours CAN'T doesn't mean it's not there. And I have an OLED and an LCD. 4K Content even makes 1080p Content look superior because 4K TVs will upscale 1080p.

 

[FasterQuieter]

Experts have found that for you to see a difference between 1080p and 4k, you need a giant 80" TV and sit as close as 6.5 feet.

Short: Nobody needs 4k, you can't see it. It's a marketing gimmick.

HDR on the other hand, makes a real difference.

The improvements you get from 4K aren't limited to better resolution. All the artifacts and banding are 4 times smaller, so the overall picture appears better. With games the same goes for the anti-aliasing etc. It is silly to argue that we don't "need" 4K because we sit too far from our TVs. When I watch 4K Netflix content on my 60" Samsung it looks incredible. Easily distinguishable from regular HD content.

 

[mmm1345]

I remember when the luddites were pounding the table that 1080p media was a gimmick; that upscaling a DVD to 1080i was to the eyes the same thing. You know what -- I can't even look at a DVD now and wonder how there was a time I thought DVD PQ was so amazing that I could never view a VHS tape again.

Nobody needs 4k, maybe. Nobody needed 1080p either. I mean it took years for even 720p and 16:9 to take hold. Actually it took the government revoking the analog frequency licenses and rendering analog TV's more-or-less useless for people to start buying those funny looking rectangle TVs.

Gimmick or not 4K it's fast becoming a standard. 4K sets are not much of a premium anymore and in some sizes it's all that is available. So, yes, people want to watch media in the set's native resolution, and yes, Apple needs a box capable of that if it wants to be in the streaming game.

But the real question is not will Apple push out a 4K ATV this year. That is a foregone conclusion if they want to remain credible in the streaming space, especially being the most expensive box you can buy. The question is will Apple (Tim Cook) be nervy enough to charge a premium for it? Will he jack up the already exorbitant ATV price even more like iPad Air 2 to iPP 9.7?

The savvy move to me would be to kill the competition and set the 32GB 4K ATV at $99. But I wonder if Tim Cook can really see the future for the single $ bills covering his eyes. The ATV is the gateway to the profit center, not the profit center. Simple give away the razor stick and to sell refills concept.

People were screaming to anyone that would listen that HD itself was a gimmick and we don't need it. Blu-rays sucked, no one can see the difference with DVDs, that CDs weren't better than Albums. Every generation of new technology has idiots who can't afford something screaming about how it sucks, therefore NO ONE needs it. The only exception to this rule was DVD over VHS and that's probably just because you didn't have to rewind tapes, it was smaller, cheaper, etc. As if the world needs to bend to their will. It's ridiculous.

 

[Foggydog]

I remember when the luddites were pounding the table that 1080p media was a gimmick; that upscaling a DVD to 1080i was to the eyes the same thing. You know what -- I can't even look at a DVD now and wonder how there was a time I thought DVD PQ was so amazing that I could never view a VHS tape again.

Nobody needs 4k, maybe. Nobody needed 1080p either. I mean it took years for even 720p and 16:9 to take hold. Actually it took the government revoking the analog frequency licenses and rendering analog TV's more-or-less useless for people to start buying those funny looking rectangle TVs.

Gimmick or not 4K it's fast becoming a standard. 4K sets are not much of a premium anymore and in some sizes it's all that is available. So, yes, people want to watch media in the set's native resolution, and yes, Apple needs a box capable of that if it wants to be in the streaming game.

But the real question is not will Apple push out a 4K ATV this year. That is a foregone conclusion if they want to remain credible in the streaming space, especially being the most expensive box you can buy. The question is will Apple (Tim Cook) be nervy enough to charge a premium for it? Will he jack up the already exorbitant ATV price even more like iPad Air 2 to iPP 9.7?

The savvy move to me would be to kill the competition and set the 32GB 4K ATV at $99. But I wonder if Tim Cook can really see the future for the single $ bills covering his eyes. The ATV is the gateway to the profit center, not the profit center. Simple give away the razor stick and to sell refills concept.

Isn't that what Amazon is doing? Selling the initial hardware basically cheap, then you're in their ecosystem for life basically. It's a very smart concept.

 

[PowerGala]

Experts have found that for you to see a difference between 1080p and 4k, you need a giant 80" TV and sit as close as 6.5 feet.

Short: Nobody needs 4k, you can't see it. It's a marketing gimmick.

HDR on the other hand, makes a real difference.

Well, if the next Apple TV is going to have 4K, then it's also going to have HDR. Roku makes a 4K / HDR streaming box for $90, so it's entirely doable for Apple.

There's also other benefits to a new box, like Apple's latest SoC, more memory, possibly a better battery for the remote, the latest HDMI standard, etc. Even if users don't use 4K and HDR right away, they would still be getting a better and faster device.

 

[McTool]

It bothers me that people cannot figure out that sometimes today's technologies were not even available a few years ago or take a while to be ready for prime-time.
The Apple I remember considered the aTV a hobby, which of course was a joke.

Combine the aTV with the Mac mini, put a home pod on top of it or integrate into the same shell, (all same footprint) and let's get a user upgradeable SSD in there and we have a super product, nobody has.

Show us some "courage" and consider it an important product with regular upgrade cycles.

Wouldn’t it be more awesome if they housed it all (mac mini, TV & Homepod) in the form of a soundbar? The Home Pod is to big to place it under a tv.

 

[mmm1345]

...

Thank you. I've been schooled I will sell my 4K UHD Oled and replace it with a Tube monitor because you and the experts told me that I can't tell the difference. My lying eyes have deceived me.

 

[X--X]

Just because yours CAN'T doesn't mean it's not there. [... ]4K Content even makes 1080p Content look superior because 4K TVs will upscale 1080p.

4K content often comes from 2K source footage, and almost always has artificial sharpening effects added — technically a degradation of the original, but a process which adds perceived sharpness. “The sharpening effect would look the same if applied to an HD image instead of a 4k image,” - cinematographer Steve Yedlin (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Looper, Carrie).

This is done so that the 4K TV looks better than a Full HD TV in a showroom, when in fact, there is little difference. It’s a showroom trick.

https://theasc.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution

There's also other benefits to a new box, like Apple's latest SoC, more memory, possibly a better battery for the remote, the latest HDMI standard, etc. Even if users don't use 4K and HDR right away, they would still be getting a better and faster device.

I would agree with that.

 

[mmm1345]

Well, if the next Apple TV is going to have 4K, then it's also going to have HDR. Roku makes a 4K / HDR streaming box for $90, so it's entirely doable for Apple.

There's also other benefits to a new box, like Apple's latest SoC, more memory, possibly a better battery for the remote, the latest HDMI standard, etc. Even if users don't use 4K and HDR right away, they would still be getting a better and faster device.

Downscalled 4K content still looks fantastic in 1080p.

 

[jmh600cbr]

The Apple I remember releases a product when all the pieces are in place (HVEC in hardware, content in software) rather than releasing technology for technology's sake.

sounds like you don't remember much at all. though i think this is true that's not apple. Steve released things way way way ahead of their time that took years to catch up to.

 

[oneMadRssn]

It bothers me that this is a big deal. The apple I remember woild have released the ATV 3 in 4k. Multiple years ahead not barely scathing behind.

The iPod wasn't the first mp3 player. It came years after mp3 players came out.
The iPhone wasn't the first smartphone. It many years after smartphones came out.
The iPad wasn't the first tablet. It came nearly a decade after tablets came out.

Apple isn't about about being first or years ahead of the competition. It never has been. Apple makes things better than the competition and releases it when everything else is in place to support it.

They could have released an mp3 player earlier, but they waited until they had the 1.8" hard drives.
They could have released a smartphone and tablet earlier, but they waited until they had the touchscreen technology just right.

I suspect it's the same with 4k on AppleTV.

 

[mmm1345]

I'm interested in the gaming part, does it have to be those new 4K gaming or regular games also benefit?

Side Note:

What if the difference in quality also has to do with the TVs getting improved technologies from the 1080P ones beyond just 4K. It's an added variable we may not know about.

This is absolutely true. The main reason I bought a new 4K Oled was because it was top of the line and, generally, 4K TVs (even mid to low range ones) have better processing, upscaling, contrast levels, color, 10-bit processing, wide color gamut, etc than 1080p TVs. The main reason I bought it was because it would make the blu-rays and dvds that I have now look better and it absolutely does. All my standard, non 4K content looks so much better than on my 7 yr old Vizio. But of course based on a lot of posts, I'm sure marketing is telling me to say this and not my eyes.

 

[Icaras]

Experts have found that for you to see a difference between 1080p and 4k, you need a giant 80" TV and sit as close as 6.5 feet.

Short: Nobody needs 4k, you can't see it. It's a marketing gimmick.

HDR on the other hand, makes a real difference.

Glad I’m not listening to you.

Just bought the new LG C7 in preparation for Apple TV 4K!!!

 

[X--X]

Just bought the new LG C7 in preparation for Apple TV 4K!!!

Downscalled 4K content still looks fantastic in 1080p.

Pretty much all movies already available in HD come from 2k (1080p) master files.

Movies were either edited and color graded in 2k or (if older) scanned from a 35mm finished copy.

Some of the new movies coming out now have 4k masters, but that is always explicitly stated (Mastered in 4K).

All others can ONLY be rescanned in 4k if there is a 35mm finished (edited) FILM master available. If the movie was edited and color graded in 2k (many, many are) there will never be a native 4k version. Only fake 4k.

 

[X--X]

Here some info: https://theasc.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution

 

[mmm1345]

Pretty much all movies already available in HD come from 2k (1080p) master files.

Movies were either edited and color graded in 2k or (if older) scanned from a 35mm finished copy.

Some of the new movies coming out now have 4k masters, but that is always explicitly stated (Mastered in 4K).

It will take many many years for all the movies available in HD to be remastered/rescanned.

And ONLY if there is a 35mm FILM master avilabale. If the movie was edited and color graded in 2k (many, many are) there will never be a native 4k version. Only fake 4k.

I DON'T CARE about digital intermediary vs. 4k scans. I CAN see the difference. What part of this don't you understand??? Do you think if you argue your stupid point enough, I'm going to magically say, "Y'know you are right. Thank you for telling me my eyes are wrong, and clearly marketing convinced my eyes?" Well here you, "You are right, I'm wrong. I totally fell for the hype, I really can't see the difference, because you told me I can't."

 

[macduke]

Anyone else more excited for HDR than for 4K?

 

[Verita]

You're joking.. Right?

Of course not. Don't engage the deluded. Let them have their 720p.

 

[Jsameds]

Here some info: https://theasc.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution

Yes, we know, since this is the 7th time you've posted it.

Have you actually done a comparison yourself rather than just read about it?

 

[DaveOP]

Pretty much all movies already available in HD come from 2k (1080p) master files.

Movies were either edited and color graded in 2k or (if older) scanned from a 35mm finished copy.

Some of the new movies coming out now have 4k masters, but that is always explicitly stated (Mastered in 4K).

All others can ONLY be rescanned in 4k if there is a 35mm finished (edited) FILM master available. If the movie was edited and color graded in 2k (many, many are) there will never be a native 4k version. Only fake 4k.

So, how about all the 4k Youtube content, shot on 4k cameras? How about all the Netflix/Amazon originals, presumably shot on 4k cameras? They look much better on my new TV than my old 1080p set, so there has to be something to this whole resolution thing.

 

[X--X]

Yes, we know

Well, I have to respond if someone is addressing me.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

It bothers me that this is a big deal. The apple I remember woild have released the ATV 3 in 4k. Multiple years ahead not barely scathing behind.

Unfortunately, in the post Steve jobs era, Apple has become the follower rather than the leader!

 

[britboyj]

Is the chipset in the current Apple TV capable of outputting 4K with a software update? This would be a huge consumer goodwill "win" for Apple that doesn't impact that many TV owners yet. It's kind of "un-Apple" for Apple nowadays, but hey, a guy can dream.

I know Microsoft once upon a time updated the Xbox 360 to output 1080p once there were 1080p TV sets commercially available (since the 360 predated 1080p TV sets in the US by about six months).

You guys should educate yourselfs, before "lol-ing" too much.

1080p HD vs 4k movie and TV content = can't see difference with your home television. Period. (If you're human)

[...] when you’re watching TV in a real-world situation there’s a ceiling to the amount of resolution the human eye can perceive. That ceiling was surpassed when we moved from SD to HD.

A fair and controlled comparison between HD and 4k shows almost no difference for normal TV viewing conditions, and in fact “4k” content often comes from 2k source footage, and almost always has artificial sharpening added to it in mastering — that’s fake sharpening that is (technically speaking) a degradation, but adds perceptual sharpness. The sharpening would look the same if applied to an HD image instead of a 4k image.


MORE HERE: https://theasc.com/articles/a-clear-look-at-the-issue-of-resolution

DEMO VIDEO: http://www.yedlin.net/DisplayPrepDemo/

This is the same BS people spouted when we went from 720p to 1080p, and I remember a time when we went from VHS to DVD at SD. Did you even read that first article? It has NOTHING to do with VIEWING RESOLUTION and everything to do with effective capture resolution.

And yes, many, many humans can see a difference between 1080p60 and 4K60 content. You're just one of the many people justifying to themselves that you don't need a new TV to get the best viewing experience, same as happened with the switch to 1080p, VHS to DVD, and so on.

 

[mmm1345]

You think there's a way to "win" an inherently subjective argument. If you said "I can't see the difference between 4K and 1080p, therefore I don't like 4k and don't care about a 4K Apple TV" then that is a fair, sensible stance.

Instead you are being rude and obnoxious when you start saying NOBODY can see the difference, it sucks, no one needs it and here's all the "scientific" reasons why, to back up a ridiculously self centered statement and unfortunately you aren't the only one in this thread making such a self centered argument.

 

[dabirdwell]

Question is will we finally see 24p frame rate? I think that is quite important as that’s the native frame rate for film, probably more so that 4K.

One very specific reason I've held onto my 1080 plasma, waiting for MicroLED or OLED. Still no beating the framerate options or the black levels and contrast.