Mysterious 'Set Top Box' Shipment Records Hint at Refreshed Apple TV Coming Soon

[NE14T?]

The WiFi on the current gen is 150Mbps btw. On second gen it was 65Mbps. Maybe if the next one does 11ac it'll get another spatial stream and actually get 300Mbps? Would be nice.

How many people here actually have real world 300 Mbps capabilities from their ISP in the first place? And how much $ would such bandwidth cost the average user per month? And let's be honest.. how many people would actually take advantage of it if they did? You'd have to be gobbling down tons of data, streaming HD content and playing several MMORPG's at the same time, to see any real advantage in such a connection.

Or what am I missing?

 

[darkazcura]

How many people here actually have real world 300 Mbps capabilities from their ISP in the first place? And how much $ would such bandwidth cost the average user per month? And let's be honest.. how many people would actually take advantage of it if they did? You'd have to be gobbling down tons of data, streaming HD content and playing several MMORPG's at the same time, to see any real advantage in such a connection.

Or what am I missing?

Maybe it doesn't matter as much for an AppleTV without XBMC or something, but more bandwidth = better local streaming. I think I'll finally be able to stream uncompressed 1080p rips on wireless AC once it matures, and I'm really excited for that. I'm close with wireless N and NFS shares, but yeah, still not good enough to cut the cord..wireless AC in these media boxes is a pretty big deal for local content.

If 4K content starts to become available in the next few years, you'll definitely need wireless AC if you even want to stream compressed content from your computer...let alone uncompressed, which will definitely not be possible with wireless AC in its current state.

Now yeah, barely anyone has access to that kind of speed with their ISPs currently, but it exists, and for the benefit of us all, I hope there continues to be a push for better Internet, which will basically require wireless AC. We got Google Fiber in Kansas City pushing 1 Gbps, and a Sony backed Internet provider pushing 2 Gbps in Japan.

 

[arkmannj]

How many people here actually have real world 300 Mbps capabilities from their ISP in the first place? And how much $ would such bandwidth cost the average user per month? And let's be honest.. how many people would actually take advantage of it if they did? You'd have to be gobbling down tons of data, streaming HD content and playing several MMORPG's at the same time, to see any real advantage in such a connection.

Or what am I missing?

current internet for most people, you are right. but hopefully connection speeds will increase.
however, on internal networks (or atleast mine) we can't get fast enough, internal media streaming, file transfers, airplay as a second screen on mavericks, Remote Desktop connections, security cameras, printers, network attached storage, time machine backups, and easily a dozen + other devices on a home network. It isn't hard to saturate the network.
for this reason I wired a gigabit network in my house, the faster wireless gets the better.

 

[twoodcc]

i really hope the appletv is refreshed. i really like it, and would like an even better one. it will at least have wifi-ac

 

[cocacolakid]

ps.. i hope that "PC Portable" means the haswell rmbp's.. i'm so tired of waiting!

You guys always kill me with the, "I'm so tired of waiting for the _______ chipset refresh Macs."

People have been saying that for the last year for Haswell. Before that they were saying it for a year for Ivy Bridge, and a year before that waiting for Sandy Bridge. And before that the Core2Duo upgrades that were announced a year before release. There's always a better/faster chip coming. At some point you have to either buy what is out or you'll just always be waiting for the next thing.

 

[eecyclone]

Please let this mysterious "set top box" include an update for apple tv that will bring an app store. I've been patiently waiting for as long as the current gen apple tv has been out.

Thank you.

 

[radiohead14]

You guys always kill me with the, "I'm so tired of waiting for the _______ chipset refresh Macs."

People have been saying that for the last year for Haswell. Before that they were saying it for a year for Ivy Bridge, and a year before that waiting for Sandy Bridge. And before that the Core2Duo upgrades that were announced a year before release. There's always a better/faster chip coming. At some point you have to either buy what is out or you'll just always be waiting for the next thing.

um.. yea.. except that we know that the haswell refresh is coming real soon.. plus windows machines have had them for a while now.

yea.. buying an ivy bridge mbp now is smart...

 

[mcarling]

buying an ivy bridge mbp now is smart.

I realize that you were being sarcastic, but at the current highly discounted prices on some models, buying an Ivy Bridge rMBP now is smart.

 

[NewbieCanada]

Maybe it doesn't matter as much for an AppleTV without XBMC or something, but more bandwidth = better local streaming. I think I'll finally be able to stream uncompressed 1080p rips on wireless AC once it matures, and I'm really excited for that. I'm close with wireless N and NFS shares, but yeah, still not good enough to cut the cord..wireless AC in these media boxes is a pretty big deal for local content.

Uncompressed 1080p uses 95 MB per/sec, or 334 GB per/hr. Blu-ray discs are highly compressed. Do you mean uncompressed or just blu-ray rips you haven't recompressed?

 

[opinio]

I hope (but doubt it) it has the ability to allow a USB drive to be plugged in. I hate having to run my mini 24/7 with itunes on.

 

[NewbieCanada]

How many people here actually have real world 300 Mbps capabilities from their ISP in the first place? And how much $ would such bandwidth cost the average user per month? And let's be honest.. how many people would actually take advantage of it if they did? You'd have to be gobbling down tons of data, streaming HD content and playing several MMORPG's at the same time, to see any real advantage in such a connection.

Or what am I missing?

You're missing local networking, not downloading/streaming from the internet.

Where I live I could get 150 Mbps for $85 with a 300 GB download limit or $220 for unlimited. I *actually* subscribe to a 25 Mbps service for much less money. It is very rare that I'm able to actually use my full download speed because of constraints at the other end, so I'm not interested in paying more for what would be only a theoretical increase.

 

[radiohead14]

I realize that you were being sarcastic, but at the current highly discounted prices on some models, buying an Ivy Bridge rMBP now is smart.

for people who have a certain budget.. then yes.. but not for a lot of people here, like me, who's already set on the refresh, has been saving up for it, and prefer the advantages the new model will bring (better battery life, faster ssd speeds, and better gpu - for the 13" which is what i'm after). plus who knows.. maybe the rmbp's will go the same route as the airs in that the base price will include better base specs, making it a better value.. hopefully 256gb ssd as standard.. 16gb ram would be nice, but not expected this year yet.

 

[ElectronGuru]

You missed my point entirely...Yes, the Apple TV would need proprietary apps written for it. But what exactly would stop that from happening? Like I said - People WANT apps on their apple TV's. If people want it, they will pay for it just like they do on other iOS devices. If people will pay or ad revenue can be had, developers will develop. So why isn't there an app store for the apple TV? I never said it needs THE app store and it needs to run current iOS apps...I said it needs AN app store.

This isn't a technical challenge. The iPhone and iPad industries didn't exist. Everything beyond the cell companies was wide open. Anyone writing an app for anything that didn't offend Apple or it's customers, was free and clear.

But what kind of apps do folks want on their appleTV? Content apps. Content providers go back dozens of years, with hundreds of companies and thousands of existing relationships. Even then, there are still content blackouts and other hot conflicts, as companies fight for money and control.

I ignored the appleTV until this year, when I could suddenly watch HBO. What does HBO's parent company do when one of the new apps starts sharing some of its other content outside of years of negotiations? Why pull the plug on the dedicated app, of course. This is the same industry that delayed HD content for a decade in fights over display and transmission standards, they are not going down so easily.

We won't get such easy options until enough of us have already abandoned the existing channels, that they don't have a choice. Until then, Apple must work one relationship at a time, piecing together a new lineup to feed a new device.

 

[darkazcura]

Uncompressed 1080p uses 95 MB per/sec, or 334 GB per/hr. Blu-ray discs are highly compressed. Do you mean uncompressed or just blu-ray rips you haven't recompressed?

Blu-ray rips. I said 1080p uncompressed rips, which clearly means Blu-ray since it's the only 1080p media you can actually rip from.

 

[mcarling]

I ignored the appleTV until this year, when I could suddenly watch HBO. What does HBO's parent company do when one of the new apps starts sharing some of its other content outside of years of negotiations?

Apple have enforced strict rules in its iOS App Store on what apps may do. I'm sure the same would be true in an Apple TV App Store, in very large part for exactly the issue you raise.

This is the same industry that delayed HD content for a decade in fights over display and transmission standards, they are not going down so easily.

We won't get such easy options until enough of us have already abandoned the existing channels, that they don't have a choice. Until then, Apple must work one relationship at a time, piecing together a new lineup to feed a new device.

Very true. Apple's negotiations with the content providers is the critical path. When Apple's installed base is large enough, they will be able to go directly to the studios and make a deal for distribution only in cinemas and via iTunes (no broadcast, cable, or BluRay distribution).

 

[NewbieCanada]

Blu-ray rips. I said 1080p uncompressed rips, which clearly means Blu-ray since it's the only 1080p media you can actually rip from.

I don't generally do uncompressed rips, but last night I used a 20 GB rip of Star Trek (2009) and streamed it using Air Video HD in streaming mode via my iPhone. Played flawlessly on the Apple TV. Sometime over the weekend I'll do an uncompressed rip of one of my discs and give it a try.

 

[NewbieCanada]

Very true. Apple's negotiations with the content providers is the critical path. When Apple's installed base is large enough, they will be able to go directly to the studios and make a deal for distribution only in cinemas and via iTunes (no broadcast, cable, or BluRay distribution).

Will never, ever, ever happen. No one could ever amass a large enough base for that. Apple might be able to negotiate a one-off deal or two for exclusivity for a period of a few months on a handful of titles, but no distributor is going to close off all other avenues of revenue on all their titles worldwide.

They could, of course, commission exclusive content, just like HBO and Netflix do, but it's not going to happen with content that plays first in cinemas. And even that HBO content also gets released on DVD/Blu-ray eventually.

 

[mcarling]

Some titles (not commissioned by Apple) are already released on iTunes first -- even before the cinema debut. As the iTunes installed base increases, Apple will only have more clout with which to negotiate deals.

In the music world, iTunes revenues already exceed CD revenues.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/25/technology/itunes-music-decline/index.html
Apple are already in a position to negotiate exclusive distribution of music if they want to. Someday the same might be true of movies.

 

[brewno]

All iOS products have VPN. They need to implement VPN on the next AppleTV.

 

[mcarling]

All iOS products have VPN. They need to implement VPN on the next AppleTV.

That's a software issue, not a hardware issue.

 

[Bishope1999]

Good upgrades would be for Apple TV to support 24fps, lossless audio, and a higher bitrate video to improve the image quality.... Considering the price of Apple TV and compare it to the price of a Blu-ray player and also considering the much higher quality of Blu-ray movies and the extra features it has, when you pay a similar price for an Itunes movie. I don't see the appeal of Apple TV for those people wanting to enjoy their HDTV's to their full potential.

I guess internet speeds and data usage will continue to be the biggest issue for quality of streaming movies. Just imaging seeing a few movies a week that average anywhere from 20GB to 40GB. So much data will be used that carriers will begin throttling services anyways.

 

[darkazcura]

I don't generally do uncompressed rips, but last night I used a 20 GB rip of Star Trek (2009) and streamed it using Air Video HD in streaming mode via my iPhone. Played flawlessly on the Apple TV. Sometime over the weekend I'll do an uncompressed rip of one of my discs and give it a try.

Honestly AirVideo is amazing. You can barely tell the difference if you have the bit rate cranked up. I plan on getting a projector one day and that's the main reason I stick with uncompressed rips. Maybe AirVideo will surprise me even more when I get that projector..but if it doesn't, at least I will have the uncompressed rips ready to go..

 

[Ieo]

This isn't a technical challenge. The iPhone and iPad industries didn't exist. Everything beyond the cell companies was wide open. Anyone writing an app for anything that didn't offend Apple or it's customers, was free and clear.

But what kind of apps do folks want on their appleTV? Content apps. Content providers go back dozens of years, with hundreds of companies and thousands of existing relationships. Even then, there are still content blackouts and other hot conflicts, as companies fight for money and control.

I ignored the appleTV until this year, when I could suddenly watch HBO. What does HBO's parent company do when one of the new apps starts sharing some of its other content outside of years of negotiations? Why pull the plug on the dedicated app, of course. This is the same industry that delayed HD content for a decade in fights over display and transmission standards, they are not going down so easily.

We won't get such easy options until enough of us have already abandoned the existing channels, that they don't have a choice. Until then, Apple must work one relationship at a time, piecing together a new lineup to feed a new device.

There is so much more out there than just network content. Nobody around here seems to be able to think outside the box...There is sooooo much quality content out there on the web, and most of it we have to watch sitting at our desks on a computer monitor. Just look at the existing app store - you can probably find hundreds of apps that deliver web content that would be suitable for the living room. Then, there are people who HAVE (legal) content that came from outside of apple's ecosystem (digital VHS/DVD backups, home movies, etc) that we would like to stream to our TV. There are apps available to other iOS devices that can do that (Plex), But if you want it on an apple TV you need to convert it to something iTunes likes, and that's messy and time consuming.

With so much content available, why should we have to wait for the network dinosaurs to get their acts together? The way to spur them into action is to show them if they don't keep up with the times, eventually we won't need them. Moving forward and facilitating web content in the living room as much as possible is the way to do that.


Honestly...This is what it looks like from my seat:

Me- There's a lot of content out there on the web. Apple should make it available, it's a win-win. Customers get what they want and apple gets 30% of the take

Everyone else - Can't do an app store. iOS apps are touch based. And Networks aren't on board.

Me- I never said anything about networks; There is more stuff out there than just network content. And it's definitely within the realm of human capability to make an app just for the Apple TV.

Everyone else - But the networks won't have it. Networks. Safari won't be snappy....networks....HBO....

Me- Facepalm

 

[Bishope1999]

I don't generally do uncompressed rips, but last night I used a 20 GB rip of Star Trek (2009) and streamed it using Air Video HD in streaming mode via my iPhone. Played flawlessly on the Apple TV. Sometime over the weekend I'll do an uncompressed rip of one of my discs and give it a try.

Well the actual size of Star Trek is around 40 GB, so that version you played is highly compressed and stayed well with in the bitrate output of Apple TV. If you would try an actual uncompressed playback of that movie on Apple TV, you may have more issues.

 

[whsbuss]

There is so much more out there than just network content. Nobody around here seems to be able to think outside the box...There is sooooo much quality content out there on the web, and most of it we have to watch sitting at our desks on a computer monitor. Just look at the existing app store - you can probably find hundreds of apps that deliver web content that would be suitable for the living room. Then, there are people who HAVE (legal) content that came from outside of apple's ecosystem (digital VHS/DVD backups, home movies, etc) that we would like to stream to our TV. There are apps available to other iOS devices that can do that (Plex), But if you want it on an apple TV you need to convert it to something iTunes likes, and that's messy and time consuming.

With so much content available, why should we have to wait for the network dinosaurs to get their acts together? The way to spur them into action is to show them if they don't keep up with the times, eventually we won't need them. Moving forward and facilitating web content in the living room as much as possible is the way to do that.


Honestly...This is what it looks like from my seat:

Me- There's a lot of content out there on the web. Apple should make it available, it's a win-win. Customers get what they want and apple gets 30% of the take

Everyone else - Can't do an app store. iOS apps are touch based. And Networks aren't on board.

Me- I never said anything about networks; There is more stuff out there than just network content. And it's definitely within the realm of human capability to make an app just for the Apple TV.

Everyone else - But the networks won't have it. Networks. Safari won't be snappy....networks....HBO....

Me- Facepalm

Let me say that I totally agree with you. The lay of the land is changing and cable/networks keep their heads in the sand. The consumer will dictate what the near future of TV looks like. More and more people are cutting the "cable" cord and going with alacart programming via roku, chrome cast, ATV, etc. Sooner or later when the networks and their distributors realize customers are canceling service, they will get on board or get consumed by a bigger fish.