TV gets hand-me-downs or dual cores with only one working core (or one disabled). It would be a first for it to get cutting-edge.
TV cores have plenty of horsepower for games. Just because the TV screen is way bigger than an iDevice screen doesn't necessarily mean it has far more pixels to manipulate. If the horses are enough to play back higher-bitrate 1080p, it can certainly work the pixels for gaming. Besides, the way the thing works, it seems it could hand any intensive gaming rendering off to the computer to which it is attached and just stream back the result (of what should be on the screen at the moment).
TV is usually last in line, meaning expect iPhones and iPads to have such hardware before it eventually lands in
TV. Personally, I don't expect an 4K
TV until iDevices that can shoot 4K have been out for several months. In general, I think Apple sees
TV as almost an afterthought: "oh yeah, now that our iDevices can shoot at 4K, we need to update the little box so that video can be seen at 4K on 4K TVs."i agree with Hobe
they're not going to waste the media buzz of a new processor on the aTV. at the expense of the iphone which is their big money maker.
Apple tested a die shrink on the AppleTV 3b. Its not totally abnormal.Historically,TV gets hand-me-downs or dual cores with only one working core (or one disabled). It would be a first for it to get cutting-edge.
TV anything better than the current generation of iDevices at the time. I don't think the
TV is that important to Apple. As I said before, it's more like an afterthought... advanced only when some advance in iDevices somewhat begs for it to be upgraded (like the transition to 1080p long after iDevices could shoot 1080p). I just don't see them rolling out a 4K version BEFORE iDevices can shoot 4K but I'd certainly love an updated version myself.Historically,TV gets hand-me-downs or dual cores with only one working core (or one disabled). It would be a first for it to get cutting-edge.
Plus, existingTV cores have plenty of horsepower for games. Just because the TV screen is way bigger than an iDevice screen doesn't necessarily mean it has far more pixels to manipulate. If the horses are enough to play back higher-bitrate 1080p, it can certainly work the pixels for gaming. Besides, the way the thing works, it seems it could hand any intensive gaming rendering off to the computer to which it is attached and just stream back the result (of what should be on the screen at the moment).
The h.265 and 4K part is where new hardware would be required. But even there,TV is usually last in line, meaning expect iPhones and iPads to have such hardware before it eventually lands in
TV. Personally, I don't expect an 4K
TV until iDevices that can shoot 4K have been out for several months. In general, I think Apple sees
TV as almost an afterthought: "oh yeah, now that our iDevices can shoot at 4K, we need to update the little box so that video can be seen at 4K on 4K TVs."
fully? or just Face Time?
TV for h.265 alone (and I mean full video playing and recording). I suspect we'll need to see 4K + h.265 before the next one comes along unless Apple runs out of A5 chips. But I'll be hopeful with everyone else.Not likely. Apple TV won't have a refresh for a while. Think iPod classic.
With 4K Blu-ray coming out by the end of 2015, I'm pretty sure the next ATV will have H.265 and 4K support. They'll need HDCP 2.2 for 4K which they probably wouldn't have been able to include if they released a new model earlier this year. Amazon has some stuff in 4K now to go along with Netflix so I don't think apple will want to be left out in the long run.Not sure if we'll get a newTV for h.265 alone (and I mean full video playing and recording). I suspect we'll need to see 4K + h.265 before the next one comes along unless Apple runs out of A5 chips. But I'll be hopeful with everyone else.
Historically,TV gets hand-me-downs or dual cores with only one working core (or one disabled). It would be a first for it to get cutting-edge.
Plus, existingTV cores have plenty of horsepower for games. Just because the TV screen is way bigger than an iDevice screen doesn't necessarily mean it has far more pixels to manipulate. If the horses are enough to play back higher-bitrate 1080p, it can certainly work the pixels for gaming. Besides, the way the thing works, it seems it could hand any intensive gaming rendering off to the computer to which it is attached and just stream back the result (of what should be on the screen at the moment).
The h.265 and 4K part is where new hardware would be required. But even there,TV is usually last in line, meaning expect iPhones and iPads to have such hardware before it eventually lands in
TV. Personally, I don't expect an 4K
TV until iDevices that can shoot 4K have been out for several months. In general, I think Apple sees
TV as almost an afterthought: "oh yeah, now that our iDevices can shoot at 4K, we need to update the little box so that video can be seen at 4K on 4K TVs."
I feel like I can get the ATV3 to stumble on h264 decoding relatively easy depending on encoding presets and source. Point is I don't think it has a lot of horsepower.
The Apple TV has documented specifications. I have never run into trouble if I respected those limits. Indeed, I have exceeded those limits and still been successful, albeit some functions like skip get a bit unpredictable.
As to Hulu crashing, is that not Hulu's problem?
A.
I wouldn't think so. Aren't apps made by Apple to content provider specs?
Back in the day, apps like Maps on iOS were made by Apple, using Google's APIs. This does not seem to be the case with Apple TV, see:
http://9to5mac.com/2013/12/11/bloomberg-apple-tv-app-development/
A.