Apple's Rumored Amazon Echo Competitor Could Be a Next-Generation Apple TV

[Uofmtiger]

It does seem frivolous until you walk into a room and interact with one. Then all frivolity goes out the window. (I actually don't have one, as I've been waiting to see if Apple does something in the space.)

I just got an Amazon Echo Dot. It was ~$90 and while it isn't a necessity, it is awesome to have around. At one time, not so long ago, smartphones were considered frivolous. For me, anything that saves minutes every single day ends up being very useful.

As a side note, I wanted the AppleTV to support 4k. Their phones and the new iPad can record 4k, so people should be able to watch them on the AppleTV. They should be consistent across the line up. That being said, it wasn't a deal killer for me.

 

[gaximus]

Like some other poster said:

I doubt Apple is using the remote.

How can you not realize this thing is half baked?

Here it is: function follows form.

Whats crazy is not a lot would have to change tofu it, you could just add a nub on one of the keys, like on keyboard to find the home row. I know the siri button feels a bit different, but not enough when you need to pause or change the volume quickly.

 

[davemchine]

While you're probably right from a consumer perspective, I still dream of Mac Mini being that hub...

Steve Jobs said the computer was the hub. The ATV is simply a media playback device for that hub as well as for streaming content. If Apple added all the features people are talking about I think you would be right, we would end up with a headless Mac mini. Adding a microphone to the ATV makes no sense as it is typically off in a corner of a room and not in a central location. It makes far more sense for Apple to make a Bluetooth microphone and let the ATV be the brains.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I've recorded one 4K video with my 6s. Maybe someday I'll be able to see it, like in 2 or 3 years when I upgrade to a 4K TV. My current HDTVs are only 2-3 years old. I like to keep my TVs at least 5 or 6 years, if not longer. Most people are years away from having the ability to view 4K.

Maybe. But if your 1 movie was a home movie- perhaps someone's birthday or other family memory- you can't come back from the future to re-record it in 4K when "most people" have 4K TV sets. Better to capture any such memories at the highest possible quality now than wishing Apple would deliver the iTimeMachine so you could go back and reshoot them at 4K in the future.

4K shoots easily downscale to 1080p or 720p while looking as good as 1080p or 720p can deliver to our eyes. It doesn't work as well the other way.
[doublepost=1464360015][/doublepost]

I don't get why it needs to be a part of Apple TV. I don't get why they'd even consider a standalone device like Echo. Just make all their devices always listening like the 6S.

The ultimate would be to make the Watch more powerful/self-sufficient and I wouldn't need a bunch of these standalone devices all over the house... Siri would always be on my wrist.

Make it smart enough to respond to the closest Bluetooth/AirPlay speaker and I'd be set... and Apple would sell a lot of beats pill speakers. I'll stick with JBLs though.

Again, we have to think beyond ourselves. Many homes have more than 1 person living there. Any "ultimate solution" that depends on a mobile device that leaves the house with their owner FAILS the other people left behind when the owner is out. This... and remotes... and game controllers... etc can't be THE solution if they are also mobile devices that will leave homes... except only for those who are single, living alone. Since Apple doesn't appear to make products only for those single people, there must be OTHER non-mobile, default solutions to better fit homes of more than one person.

Of course, that doesn't mean that mobile devices can't ALSO be a second solution to such issues... just not the primary or ONLY solution.

 

[BeefCake 15]

Apple is no superman. Although Ive may be

Superman is not thin enough for Ive

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

4K is the elimination of the 3.5 jack for the Apple TV . Who gives a rats ass other than a few dorks.

4K will be a must-have soon some day, but 4K sets are not flying off the shelves and of the minority of consumers who do have one, how many own an Apple TV? And what services are they planning on using? Streaming services are spotty on 4K and TV programming is nill.
No one is clammoring for 4K or could give a rats as about the 3.5 jack. People are bugging.

Since I'm concerned about adapters hanging out of future iPhones, juggling the ability to use one set of headphones with Apple iPhones and even Apple Macs AND interested in an all-Apple solution to iPhone shoots 4K-> iMovie/FCPX/iPad Pro editing -> iMac 5K rendering -> Quicktime container storing 4K -> iTunes indexing 4K files -> Apple TV -> 4KTV, I guess I'm one of those "dorks."

Leave your basement and go visit your local Best Buy or equivalent and see what's flying off of shelves right now. Count how many bigger screen 1080p TVs there are on the shelves vs. 4K TVs. Sit there in front of some sharp 4K TV on display and watch what flies off of shelves. Or look at the calendar- this is no longer 2013.

Along with being a "dork", I'm apparently also a "no one" as I am clamoring for 4K and I would trade many rats *sses (but more importantly dollars) to keep the universally and most thoroughly ubiquitous 3.5mm jack rather than having to add a rats tail to all future iPhones (adapters hanging out of the bottom) and/or lug along dual sets of headphones so that I can use them with even iDevices and Macs (not to mention everything else).

Feel as you wish. But you are not everyone. Us "dorks" and "no ones" do exist and desire what we want too. While you might be one of those "Apple is always right in all things" guys, it's the very same Apple that encouraged all of us to "think different." Can we do that? Or do we have to think only the same... maybe only aligned with your views of all such things?
[doublepost=1464361771][/doublepost]

Apple didn't release a 1080P Apple TV until their entire movie library supported it

That's not true. There was not ONE 1080p video for Apple TV in the store before a 1080p TV existed on which to play it.

And there's still plenty of video in the iTunes store that does not yet have 1080p video options. Waiting until everything is available at 4K means we will NEVER get a 4KTV. The hardware must always lead. And even then, some stuff will probably never be 4K... just as some stuff is still not available at 1080p. Isn't there some video in the store that is still only SD?

Else, since there is NO iOS apps depending on iOS10 advances and/or iPhone 7 hardware, perhaps Apple should not bother advancing either of those until ALL iOS apps are upgraded to support both. See how the same idea makes no sense when applied to anything else Apple makes? Same here.

Hardware advancements always lead. Best we get with software is a simultaneous launch of new hardware and some new software to exploit that hardware. Then, as the hardware flows into homes, the temptations for all other players to "catch up" on software upgrades delivers much of the rest of the catalog. Recall that when the "4" launched, there were a few software games to demo but certainly not an iTunes store full of games for TV at the time. Then it launched and the software continues to "catch up" with THAT capability of the "4"... and will keep right on coming. Same here.

Launch a 4K TV and it will still play 1080p and lower to their maximum playback qualities. Get a few 4K videos in the store (much like those first TV4 games) and let demand drive motivation to supply (just like those first TV4 games). There is ZERO chance of it working the other way.
[doublepost=1464361940][/doublepost]

Also, watching TV with apps really sucks. For each app you have to "confirm" that you have a cable subscription which even when you do is super annoying. Please Apple, Please!... Make it fun and easy to watch shows and stuff through the Apple TV. I don't care what you have to do...buy Charter, buy Netflix, bribe greedy CEOs...just throw us consumers a bone please!

But, but, but watching TV by hopping app to app instead of some kind of consolidated on-screen guide that shows everything available in one place is "the future." Apple said so. Comply.
[doublepost=1464362301][/doublepost]

The thing is, it really doesn't matter whether it's a Mac, iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, Apple TV... any of these devices can and will be connected/integrated for control of Home, Car, etc. One billion devices in active service.

This is the thing everyone is missing on the whole Echo thing. Amazon and Google do not have all these speaker- and microphone-equipped, internet-connected devices deployed, while Apple does. Apple isn't playing catch-up, Amazon is. Amazon has to sell a box to expand its penetration, Apple just has to deploy software updates/improvements.

(I'd include Android devices in this, but considering how hard it is to get the latest software deployed to anything but the latest generation of hardware, Google is still at a disadvantage.)

OK, so WHEN does Apple deploy that software? Macs were being spun as the everything "hub" way back when? Early 2000's? Late 1990s? While what you say is true, the key to realizing it is the software actually showing up before everybody embraces an Echo and similar... and that software being "just works" instead of feeling like pre-beta, alpha versions.

If you are just trying to defend some perception that Apple > Amazon or Google, etc. OK. Apple is better. But Apple should actually DO something to secure that title, rather than have us spinning such concepts in their defense. I'm very interested in Apple making such a move. Hopefully they do it in this decade and dazzle us again.
[doublepost=1464362475][/doublepost]

There are a ton of people out there that have family elsewhere that want to FaceTime. When a baby is born, being in the living room is a perfect place to video chat.

They need to design a wide angle camera that can fit a whole room with little distortion, and make it easy to zoom with the remote.

I don't get how every laptop, tablet and phone has a camera but not tvs. I have a Mac mini setup with a camera but it's a process to get it all going for FaceTime.

Some TVs do have a FaceTime-like camera and/or an accessory option for adding such a camera. The problem here is that FaceTime is "walled garden" so most such cameras work with Skype and similar. To make them work with FaceTime, Apple needs to do what it appeared to say when it rolled out FaceTime... make it an open standard or perhaps dirt cheap to license to motivate various players to make their Skype cameras also work with FaceTime. So far, Apple doesn't seem interested in that.
[doublepost=1464362769][/doublepost]

Ah yes, the classic response of, "I don't have it, therefore I don't need it."

You left out a key bit of crucial extra...

I don't have it, therefore I don't need it... so you don't neither​

Maybe tack on a "99% don't need" made-up statistic too.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

And some will keep saying that Apple is still innovative. ROTFL!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Actually, my receiver recently crapped the bed and I had to pull out my old one just to get basic surround sound, so when I get a new one it probably will be 4K capable since I'm hoping it will last for a good many years.

WHAT! Buy hardware to be compatible with evolving standards you might use a couple of years from now??? Unheard of. You should only buy hardware compatible with what Apple has for sale right now. And, in this case, you should ignore that about everything else Apple makes supports/touts/etc 4K.

Definitely DO NOT BUY for future uses. Only buy for now uses with "now" defined as what Apple offers for sale right now. Then, when Apple embraces 4K in this one remaining product, just replace such hardware to align with what Apple has newly embraced at that time. 4K is only stupid now. It will be "shut up and take my money" then. We consumers wishing it had 4K now are stupid for wanting such a thing. But Apple won't be stupid for embracing it when they roll it out. Funny how that works.

Besides, there's zero receivers with Lightning jacks for headphones. And given the proprietary nature of Lightning and Apple's insatiable hunger for lucrative licensing profits, no receiver will probably EVER have a Lightning jack for headphones. 3.5mm? Yes. USB3C? Probably. Lightning? Never. Translation: don't buy any receiver ever again.

[doublepost=1464363594][/doublepost]

4K is years away from being as available as 1080p is right now.

And 1080p was years away from being as available at 720p or SD was when Apple went ahead and rolled out the "3". What's your point?

Hardware must lead. Software makes no sense to be built out first and en masse. I couldn't replace all record albums with CDs before there were CD players for sale. I couldn't replace VHS tapes with DVDs before there were DVD players for sale. I couldn't replace DVDs with much Blu Ray discs before there were Blu Ray players for sale. I couldn't replace 720p TV movies with 1080p TV movies until there was an TV3 for sale. This is NO different... but we sure try to spin it that way. Apple doesn't need us working so hard to help sell the TV as is now. It will sell with or without us spinning such stuff to each other.

 

[Number-Six]

Seems simple enough...
Turn on ATV4.
Scroll to My Music.
Me: "Play Johnny Cash."
Siri finds a selections of movies with Johnny Cash in them.
Me: "Play Solitary Man."
Siri takes me to the movie Solitary Man with Michael Douglas.

I have Hue lights.
Me: "Hey Siri, set lights to red."
Siri: "Sorry, I wasn't able to find any lights."
Me: "Set lights to scarlet."
Siri: "Closest I could find was Ferrari Red." (Lights turn red)
Me: "Set lights to Ferrari Red."
Siri: "Sorry, I wasn't able to find any lights."

Good luck with more Siri home integration.

I completely gave up on Siri and Hue lights, I just bought the physical dimmer and am going to leave it at that. Although it would bother me a lot more if I had color lights instead of just white ones

 

[John Mcgregor]

WHAT! Buy hardware to be compatible with evolving standards you might use a couple of years from now??? Unheard of. You should only buy hardware compatible with what Apple has for sale right now. And, in this case, you should ignore that about everything else Apple makes supports/touts/etc 4K.

Definitely DO NOT BUY for future uses. Only buy for now uses with "now" defined as what Apple offers for sale right now. Then, when Apple embraces 4K in this one remaining product, just replace such hardware to align with what Apple has newly embraced at that time. 4K is only stupid now. It will be "shut up and take my money" then. We consumers wishing it had 4K now are stupid for wanting such a thing. But Apple won't be stupid for embracing it when they roll it out. Funny how that works.
[doublepost=1464363594][/doublepost]

And 1080p was years away from being as available at 720p or SD was when Apple went ahead and rolled out the "3". What's your point?

Hardware must lead. Software makes no sense to be built out first and en masse. I couldn't replace all record albums with CDs before there were CD players for sale. I couldn't replace VHS tapes with DVDs before there were DVD players for sale. I couldn't replace DVDs with much Blu Ray discs bore there were Blu Ray players for sale. I couldn't replace 720p TV movies with 1080p TV movies until there was an TV3 for sale. This is NO different... but we sure try to spin it that way. Apple doesn't need us working so hard to help sell the TV as is now. It will sell with or without us spinning such stuff to each other.

Jump from 720 to 1080 is slight. Buying a 4K set now is a waste of money.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

A 4KTV would not force anyone to buy anything (replacement TV, AV equipment, or only 4K videos in the iTunes store)... just as the launch of a 1080pTV didn't force anyone to by a 1080p TV, AV equipment, or only 1080p videos in the iTunes store.

I don't know why "we" (generally smart people) seem so confused about that. Waste of money? Fine. Don't buy one (yet... or never if you like). A 4KTV will still feed your existing HDTV the highest quality video it can display. For others though who may have already "wasted their money", they could get what THEY want too.

 

[John Mcgregor]

A 4KTV would not force anyone to buy anything (replacement TV, AV equipment, or only 4K videos in the iTunes store)... just as the launch of a 1080pTV didn't force anyone to by a 1080p TV, AV equipment, or only 1080p videos in the iTunes store.

I don't know why "we" (generally smart people) seem so confused about that. Waste of money? Fine. Don't buy one (yet... or never if you like). A 4KTV will still feed your existing HDTV the highest quality video it can display. For others though who may have already "wasted their money", they could get what THEY want too.

no point in having 4k box with almost no content to watch and then if there is some content to watch one might be interested you need 4k tv. today it is a dumb move.

 

[Carl Sagan]

Whoop, glad I didn't jump on this year's model. aTV3 has been good enough.

I bought it (my first Apple TV) for my spare room, treating it as a test to see whether it's worth getting in the front room so will just buy the new one if its good enough.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

no point in having 4k box with almost no content to watch and then if there is some content to watch one might be interested you need 4k tv. today it is a dumb move.

More of the same old, tired spin. There is a fair amount of 4K to watch and that is growing. Along with commercial sources like Netflix, Youtube and similar, every iPhone 6 and newer shipped with the capability for their owners to capture home movies in 4K. Pictures will be sharper at 4K. Etc. The same "little content" argument was used to argue against 1080p just a few years ago.

And, if there is some 4K to watch, there will also be versions of that content at 1080p, 720p and maybe even SD. So those who don't want to buy a 4K TV can watch 4K downscaled to what they own now... or just download the version that is best fit for the TV they already own... exactly as it works in the iTunes store right now.

"Dumb move"? For you maybe. But a good number of apparent "dummies" have already made that move. And Apple themselves have embraced 4K in about everything ELSE they sell. Are they dumb for doing so? And when Apple rolls out the 5 "now with 4K" will you be back to call them dumb for embracing it then?

Again, a 4KTV would not force anything on anyone. Those happy with the status quo can just keep right on running with that status quo. A few years ago, people like you were arguing "720p is good enough" and saying all the same stuff against 1080p. Then, Apple launched the "3", and all those people seemed to just vanish... or their passionate anti-1080p sentiment just evaporated. I expect the same here.

Now, do you want to try the "until the whole Internet is upgraded" one or show us "the chart" or one of the many other bits of anti-4K spin that was exactly the same stuff spun in the anti-1080p days?

 

[John Mcgregor]

No more of the same old, tired spin. There is a fair amount of 4K to watch and that is growing. It was the same with 1080p and the same kind of spin was being slung ahead of a 1080p TV.

And, if there is some 4K to watch, there will also be versions of that content at 1080p, 720p and maybe even SD. So those who don't want to buy a 4K TV can watch 4K downscaled to what they own now... or just download the version that is best fit for the TV they already own... exactly as it works in the iTunes store right now.

"Dumb move"? For you maybe. But a good numbers of apparent "dummies" have already made that move. And Apple themselves have embraced 4K in about everything ELSE they sell. Are they dumb for doing so? And when Apple rolls out the 5 "now with 4K" will you be back to call them dumb for embracing it then?

Again, a 4KTV would not force anything on anyone. Those happy with the status quo can just keep right on running with that status quo. A few years ago, people like you were arguing "720p is good enough" and saying all the same stuff against 1080p. Then, Apple launched the "3", and then all those people seemed to just vanish... or their passionate anti-1080p sentiment just evaporated. I expect the same here.

Now, do you want to try the "until the whole Internet is upgraded" one or show us "the chart" or one of the many other bits of anti-4K spin that was exactly the same stuff spun in the anti-1080p days?

you're whining too much.

 

[knemonic]

Since I'm concerned about adapters hanging out of future iPhones, juggling the ability to use one set of headphones with Apple iPhones and even Apple Macs AND interested in an all-Apple solution to iPhone shoots 4K-> iMovie/FCPX/iPad Pro editing -> iMac 5K rendering -> Quicktime container storing 4K -> iTunes indexing 4K files -> Apple TV -> 4KTV, I guess I'm one of those "dorks."

Leave your basement and go visit your local Best Buy or equivalent and see what's flying off of shelves right now. Count how many bigger screen 1080p TVs there are on the shelves vs. 4K TVs. Sit there in front of some sharp 4K TV on display and watch what flies off of shelves. Or look at the calendar- this is no longer 2013.

Along with being a "dork", I'm apparently also a "no one" as I am clamoring for 4K and I would trade many rats *sses (but more importantly dollars) to keep the universally and most thoroughly ubiquitous 3.5mm jack rather than having to add a rats tail to all future iPhones (adapters hanging out of the bottom) and/or lug along dual sets of headphones so that I can use them with even iDevices and Macs (not to mention everything else).

Feel as you wish. But you are not everyone. Us "dorks" and "no ones" do exist and desire what we want too. While you might be one of those "Apple is always right in all things" guys, it's the very same Apple that encouraged all of us to "think different." Can we do that? Or do we have to think only the same... maybe only aligned with your views of all such things?
[doublepost=1464361771][/doublepost]

That's not true. There was not ONE 1080p video for Apple TV in the store before a 1080p TV existed on which to play it.

And there's still plenty of video in the iTunes store that does not yet have 1080p video options. Waiting until everything is available at 4K means we will NEVER get a 4KTV. The hardware must always lead. And even then, some stuff will probably never be 4K... just as some stuff is still not available at 1080p. Isn't there some video in the store that is still only SD?

Else, since there is NO iOS apps depending on iOS10 advances and/or iPhone 7 hardware, perhaps Apple should not bother advancing either of those until ALL iOS apps are upgraded to support both. See how the same idea makes no sense when applied to anything else Apple makes? Same here.

Hardware advancements always lead. Best we get with software is a simultaneous launch of new hardware and some new software to exploit that hardware. Then, as the hardware flows into homes, the temptations for all other players to "catch up" on software upgrades delivers much of the rest of the catalog. Recall that when the "4" launched, there were a few software games to demo but certainly not an iTunes store full of games for TV at the time. Then it launched and the software continues to "catch up" with THAT capability of the "4"... and will keep right on coming. Same here.

Launch a 4K TV and it will still play 1080p and lower to their maximum playback qualities. Get a few 4K videos in the store (much like those first TV4 games) and let demand drive motivation to supply (just like those first TV4 games). There is ZERO chance of it working the other way.
[doublepost=1464361940][/doublepost]

But, but, but watching TV by hopping app to app instead of some kind of consolidated on-screen guide that shows everything available in one place is "the future." Apple said so. Comply.
[doublepost=1464362301][/doublepost]

OK, so WHEN does Apple deploy that software? Macs were being spun as the everything "hub" way back when? Early 2000's? Late 1990s? While what you say is true, the key to realizing it is the software actually showing up before everybody embraces an Echo and similar... and that software being "just works" instead of feeling like pre-beta, alpha versions.

If you are just trying to defend some perception that Apple > Amazon or Google, etc. OK. Apple is better. But Apple should actually DO something to secure that title, rather than have us spinning such concepts in their defense. I'm very interested in Apple making such a move. Hopefully they do it in this decade and dazzle us again.
[doublepost=1464362475][/doublepost]

Some TVs do have a FaceTime-like camera and/or an accessory option for adding such a camera. The problem here is that FaceTime is "walled garden" so most such cameras work with Skype and similar. To make them work with FaceTime, Apple needs to do what it appeared to say when it rolled out FaceTime... make it an open standard or perhaps dirt cheap to license to motivate various players to make their Skype cameras also work with FaceTime. So far, Apple doesn't seem interested in that.
[doublepost=1464362769][/doublepost]

You left out a key bit of crucial extra...

I don't have it, therefore I don't need it... so you don't neither​

Maybe tack on a "99% don't need" made-up statistic too.

I disagree, Apple can add an option to their Apple tv's to be able to use FaceTime, and not open it up to other phones. there really hasn't been an issue with the iPhone being the only access to FaceTime cause the phone itself can be used with other softwares, like Skype.

If Apple made a camera for the atv 4th, the atv would come with FaceTime already installed, but anyone could download an app to use the camera on say skype, etc, so that gives you your open standard without opening FaceTime up, which I'm fine with.

The truth is there really isn't an excuse to not make a camera add on for the atv, unless Apple thinks it just won't sell, which is the only thing I can think is the reason.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

you're whining too much.

And you're spinning too much.. or maybe just towing the company line. As Apple says, "Think different."

[doublepost=1464367889][/doublepost]

I disagree, Apple can add an option to their Apple tv's to be able to use FaceTime, and not open it up to other phones. there really hasn't been an issue with the iPhone being the only access to FaceTime cause the phone itself can be used with other softwares, like Skype.

If Apple made a camera for the atv 4th, the atv would come with FaceTime already installed, but anyone could download an app to use the camera on say skype, etc, so that gives you your open standard without opening FaceTime up, which I'm fine with.

The truth is there really isn't an excuse to not make a camera add on for the atv, unless Apple thinks it just won't sell, which is the only thing I can think is the reason.

Of course Apple can add such an option. But when will they? How long has FaceTime been out? There's been TVs available that entire time. What's holding up that option? I read your wish like you wanted that ability NOW... or maybe yesterday. Will Apple add that option NOW? tomorrow? A year from now?

Sure they don't have to make FaceTime an open standard but then all of the TVs sold that already have such a camera won't work with FaceTime as you desired. They do generally work with Skype. What's the difference?

Otherwise I agree. But the difference is that some want such features now... not the potential for Apple to roll out such features someday... if they feel like it. Do you want to video visit with your family now... or just the potential to do that someday if only Apple gets around to delivering that option?

 

[John Mcgregor]

And you're spinning too much.. or maybe just towing the company line. As Apple says, "Think different."

[doublepost=1464367889][/doublepost]

Of course Apple can add such an option. But when will they? How long has FaceTime been out? There's been TVs available that entire time. What's holding up that option? I read your wish like you wanted that ability NOW... or maybe yesterday. Will Apple add that option NOW? tomorrow? A year from now?

Sure they don't have to make FaceTime an open standard but then all of the TVs sold that already have such a camera won't work with FaceTime as you desired. They do generally work with Skype. What's the difference?

Otherwise I agree. But the difference is that some want such features now... not the potential for Apple to roll out such features someday... if they feel like it. Do you want to video visit with your family now... or just the potential to do that someday if only Apple gets around to delivering that option?

I'm not spinning anything. I'm just providing you with info on what;s happening in real world.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Unless your "real world" is different then mine (Mine is called "Earth" in a country called "America"), I encourage you to go explore our "real world" and reassess your views. They fit better in about 2013. It's 2016 where I am now.

Frankly, it comes down to this: if you are absolutely right, you get what you want and the "dummies" wanting 4K can't get what they want from an Apple product. If the "dummies" are right, you still get what you want (as it wouldn't affect the anti-4K crowd in any way) and the "dummies" get to buy into Apple offerings too. There's nothing wrong with feeling about 4K as you do, but nothing wrong with those who feel differently than you do. We're all consumers here... all with our own wants & wishes. Whether were "dummies" or "non-dummies" (like you), we want what we want. If one group can get what they want in a way that both groups get what they want, that seems like the best option to me... better than excluding one group so that only the other can have it their way.

 

[bbbb4b]

Try TiVo - everyone of its current products is better than all the other "streamers"! And, it stores for playback, no streaming or bandwidth use at time of use - just like a VCR!

I guess you didn't see my post above. Post #191

 

[John Mcgregor]

Unless your "real world" is different then mine (Mine is called "Earth" in a country called "America"), I encourage you to go explore our "real world" and reassess your views. They fit better in about 2013. It's 2016 where I am now.

Frankly, it comes down to this: if you are absolutely right, you get what you want and the "dummies" wanting 4K can't get what they want from an Apple product. If the "dummies" are right, you still get what you want (as it wouldn't affect the anti-4K crowd in any way) and the "dummies" get to buy into Apple offerings too. There's nothing wrong with feeling about 4K as you do, but nothing wrong with those who feel differently than you do. We're all consumers here... all with our own wants & wishes. Whether were "dummies" or "non-dummies" (like you), we want what we want. If one group can get what they want in a way that both groups get what they want, that seems like the best option to me... better than excluding one group so that only the other can have it their way.

You seriously need to reevaluate your life.

 

[idunn]

"They want Apple TV to be just the hub of everything," the source told VentureBeat. [per MacRumors]


I do not.

Some other device, fine, if someone wants that.

Personally, I just want a decent Apple TV. First and foremost one that does a good job presenting movies and TV programs purchased from iTunes. Period. Start with that. Get that right, then add extras.

That Apple TV 4 offers only a white background that cannot easily be changed to a customer's preference speaks volumes and everything one need know about where Apple's head currently is.

 

[Carl Sagan]

More of the same old, tired spin. There is a fair amount of 4K to watch and that is growing. Along with commercial sources like Netflix, Youtube and similar, every iPhone 6 and newer shipped with the capability for their owners to capture home movies in 4K. Pictures will be sharper at 4K. Etc. The same "little content" argument was used to argue against 1080p just a few years ago.

And, if there is some 4K to watch, there will also be versions of that content at 1080p, 720p and maybe even SD. So those who don't want to buy a 4K TV can watch 4K downscaled to what they own now... or just download the version that is best fit for the TV they already own... exactly as it works in the iTunes store right now.

"Dumb move"? For you maybe. But a good number of apparent "dummies" have already made that move. And Apple themselves have embraced 4K in about everything ELSE they sell. Are they dumb for doing so? And when Apple rolls out the 5 "now with 4K" will you be back to call them dumb for embracing it then?

Again, a 4KTV would not force anything on anyone. Those happy with the status quo can just keep right on running with that status quo. A few years ago, people like you were arguing "720p is good enough" and saying all the same stuff against 1080p. Then, Apple launched the "3", and all those people seemed to just vanish... or their passionate anti-1080p sentiment just evaporated. I expect the same here.

Now, do you want to try the "until the whole Internet is upgraded" one or show us "the chart" or one of the many other bits of anti-4K spin that was exactly the same stuff spun in the anti-1080p days?

It's not spin there's hardly any 4K content, I don't know anyone in the UK that watches it it at all and only one person I know has bothered to get a 4K tv...

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It's not spin there's hardly any 4K content, I don't know anyone in the UK that watches it it at all and only one person I know has bothered to get a 4K tv...

These surveys of just our own little circle of friends are not representative of the world. I know many people here- in America- with 4K TVs and all of them watch what is available- even if they have to shoot some it themselves with their iPhones- and hunger for much more. So my "survey" implies almost everyone has 4K and is watching lots of 4K and your implies almost no one has 4K and there's nothing to watch. Which is right?

Answer: neither. Right is somewhere in the middle. Right now, I believe your survey is probably more representative than mine (not to your extreme though) but the shift is on (here in America anyway). Our retailers increasingly don't display many 1080p sets- heavy on the 4K presentations... and sales. American retailers don't do that if it hurts their sales. If- as your survey implies- zero-to-only-one person shopping the store in a given day purchased a 4K set and all the rest wanted to buy 1080p sets, they'd be presenting more 1080p sets. They want the $$$$ much more than they want to prop up some "marketing gimmick."

So, Apple can drag in about last if they like but when we buy a 4K TV, we want to buy 4K video feeders to hook to that. As much as we like Apple, that's NOT Apple right now. Of course it could be- it's not like Apple couldn't have made the "4" roll out with 4K (in the very same presentation they touted other Apple hardware with 4K); they just chose to sell one more iteration of 1080p, knowing that the faithful+ would buy anyway.

Meanwhile, companies one can barely view as Apple competitors even 5 years ago stepped right in and started gobbling up such business. A week or two ago there was a thread suggesting Apple was in 4th place in this niche. Perhaps one reason why is dragging along behind instead of pushing ahead. In 2007, Apple was almost alone in this niche, I don't recall if Roku even existed, Amazon was still mostly a modern-day Sears Catalog business and Google was still mostly about Search. In 2016, Apple is 4th in this niche. Why? Not just the lack of 4K but it's probably also in the list that answers that question.

Lastly, despite my posts, I own the "4." And I've owned every iteration before it... multiple models for multiple TVs. It think Apple makes the best overall box. I simply wish they would lead instead of follow on topics like this... moves that would have zero effect on those happy with the "status quo" or even the "720p is good enough" crowd... so everybody could get what they want... from... Apple.

 

[bbyrdhouse]

We are 'Apple' everything at our house but I am finding less and less reason for my next purchase (of whatever , excluding a laptop) to be Apple. Their product line from top to bottom seems stale.