TV. I've had every generation of it myself and love it. Pick any single major feature of it and it's worth more than the traditional solution by itself. For example, who besides me has paid several hundred dollars for a dedicated CD changer at some point to have access to (only) a lot of music in one box? Or who has paid several hundred dollars for a DVD changer to have access to a whole DVD collection in one box? And so on. Home movies on demand, podcasts, the family photo collection available on the big screen, etc. It is grrrrrrrrrrrrrreat!TV was still nothing more than an audio-only iPod for the best speakers in a home, it would be worth current asking prices. I get a lot of milage out of it as a modern-day CD changer and really enjoy it for as little as that lone feature. I recall paying 2X or maybe 3X more for Sony CD changers back in the day.TV fundamentally lacks vs. Blu Ray PlayersTV hardware and thus can display superior-quality video. TV hardware seems geared toward a good compromise of streaming quality. BD hardware can assume playback from a disc and thus doesn't need to have much consideration for broadband speeds.TV is limited to Dolby Digital & Dolby Digital Plus. Atmos? DTS? TrueHD? BD players play all of the majors while TV is limited primarily to an audio option developed in 1992 and an extension of it rolled out in 2005.TV can deliver beautiful pictures and Dolby Digital Plus can sound great too. For many, it can be "good enough" on both fronts. But if you want the best, BD players generally win on both of these key variables and 4KBD players are best available if picture & sound is of paramount concern. However, if TV5 arrives as rumored, it may finally be a real challenger to quality-focused consumers.
I gave up on 'disc based' systems in 2010. I definitely wouldn't want a BluRay player. I don't want a home cinema speaker system in my apartment, so for me, the sound quality from ATV is super. I love having multi-platform - ATV, iPhone, iPad ProEverybody is doing a good job of selling the
Personally, I could readily argue if
What
If best quality picture & sound matter enough to someone, they (also) need a BD player. However, given rumors about both 4K+HDR and some sound codec rumors too, maybe Apple is finally going to go fully toe-to-toe with BD players in the next iteration. If I was ready to buy now, I'd stand by and see if the "5" actually arrives in the next few weeks. If so, maybe this question does become one or the other. If I had to buy now, I'd be thinking BOTH unless compromising on picture & audio is OK with me.
- Best quality picture. BD players are more robust than
- Best quality audio. BD players are able to play a diverse set of modern audio codecs while
As is,
Not sure if BD players are more robust, the basic LG, Samsung, SONY & Panasonic look incredibly cheaply made - I can't imagine them playing a disc without skipping over time - my Sony DVD player lasted 2 years before it started skipping discs. No love affair for discs with me
I gave up on 'disc based' systems in 2010. I definitely wouldn't want a BluRay player. I don't want a home cinema speaker system in my apartment, so for me, the sound quality from ATV is super. I love having multi-platform - ATV, iPhone, iPad Pro
TV vs. BD and Smart TV capabilities. Everybody gushed at the greatness of TV while leaving out where it doesn't win. I thought I would fill in 2 key advantages of BD over TV to paint a full picture.TV is not necessarily for everyone either. It's fine that you don't care about maximum quality picture & sound for the benefits that come via TV but not everyone is you. Some people buying video playback hardware DO care about concepts like BEST quality picture and BEST quality sound. TV doesn't win on either of those fronts vs. BD.TV is still hard capped at 1080p and Dolby Digital or DD Plus at best.TV. I did too in the first part of my post. But my post has also offered some considerations for the other side of OPs "vs." question. Best quality picture & sound may matter to OP or may not. My advice was actually to buy BOTH or stand by to see if Apple actually releases a "5" soon and then see if it gets fully toe-to-toe with 4KBD players. Hopefully it will and several of these reasons will evaporate. Or maybe it won't and they will persist for another generation.
Sometimes, but not always. Often the TVs in hotel rooms don't have an HDMI port, or it isn't accessible, or they have blocked switching the inputs.
Sure, but nothing is for everyone. OP asked for a comparison of
BD & surround sound is NOT for everyone (you for example) but that goes both ways:
Sure, BD has the hassles of discs instead of disc-less, but those discs bring higher quality picture & sound in the bigger files stored on those discs. They don't burn a byte of broadband data vs. broadband caps. They won't hiccup because your broadband is constrained or too many people are simultaneously using your wifi. You actually own a physical copy of the disc that you can loan, sell or give to someone else. 4KBD ALREADY brings 4K, HDR & Dolby Vision, Atmos, DTS, etc to anyone with the hardware.
So, several people have passionately argued the merits of
Sure, but nothing is for everyone. OP asked for a comparison of
BD & surround sound is NOT for everyone (you for example) but that goes both ways:
Sure, BD has the hassles of discs instead of disc-less, but those discs bring higher quality picture & sound in the bigger files stored on those discs. They don't burn a byte of broadband data vs. broadband caps. They won't hiccup because your broadband is constrained or too many people are simultaneously using your wifi. You actually own a physical copy of the disc that you can loan, sell or give to someone else. 4KBD ALREADY brings 4K, HDR & Dolby Vision, Atmos, DTS, etc to anyone with the hardware.
So, several people have passionately argued the merits of
This is a strange one. You are aware that iTunes movies have chapters too? But by far the easiest way to navigate through a movie is to "scrub" with the ATV4 remote's touchpad, especially in apps that show a little preview image while scrubbing. Going back to more traditional remotes with just buttons always feels very restrictive to me now.
TV. The objective among us seem to generally find some faults with the remote. The unit itself is made of plastic. One could argue it's cheaply made since it stripped out some fundamental ports that existed in it's predecessor (and were useful to many consumers) and even gimped the USB jack... but RAISED the price. If one can step outside the Apple bubble, it's not hard at all to find similar faults with the TV. And note- i have TVs myself, so there's no hating there... just counter-point to your bias.TV. They've done that over 10 years. I suspect some landfills hold some of those older TVs too. It's not like only non-Apple tech gets thrown away, you know. I've owned every generation of TV but currently only use the latest generation (and ready to replace them day 1 with the "5" as soon as it is available).TVs? Oh yeah, there's none. I suspect that people who pay Apple prices would not skimp on a BD player if they want one. Again, give your fellow consumers some credit. It is not exclusively a "pay up for Apple stuff but cheap out for non-Apple tech" proposition. If we want to pretend ourselves as individuals are representative of all people, I've recently spent several thousand dollars on just AV speakers, more than a thousand on a quality receiver, etc. In fact, the TV is the cheapest piece of AV gear in my own stack by far. If I am representative of all people, nobody buys "cheaply made, plasticky, no thought to design or quality players." But of course, I'm NOT representative of all people... just as YOU are not representative of all people too.For me, ATV picture quality looks superb as does most 1080p that I stream and I am happy with it on the once a week film night that we have
TV video quality looks terrible. I simply offered OP counterpoint to all of the gushing praise about TV, AFTER praising it myself. There is no question that BD offers best quality picture & sound simply because it can. TV is great at many things but it offers compromises off "best." OP asked for a comparison between them and, until I posted, was only getting an extraordinarily biased view of one side. OP didn't ask for only gushing praise for TV. He wanted to know the merits of one vs. the other. There's nothing wrong with laying out where TV isn't best (which doesn't mean it is automatically worst, and needs repeated posts trying to spin it toward being equal, or even better). TV is great at many things, but not best at everything it can do. Here's hoping the "5" steps fully toe-to-toe with Blu ray so that is no longer the case.