Mirroring doesn't work well for games. Also, streaming/mirroring is one extra step for the consumer and Apple likes to keep things simple.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mysterious 'Set Top Box' Shipment Records Hint at Refreshed Apple TV Coming Soon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mirroring doesn't work well for games. Also, streaming/mirroring is one extra step for the consumer and Apple likes to keep things simple.
You're kidding, right? Or when you say "a lot of us" you must mean a small but not insignificant minority... which is still debatable.
----------
I sincerely hope that your predictions are accurate, but none of the AppleTV OS Betas have shown any sign of iOS7-ication...
How about AppleTV and AppleTV plus?
AppleTV for basic fuction and only cost 99$ or less.
AppleTV plus give more powerful CPU, more storage and can be use as basic computer or casual game console.
With more powerful Wifi, it can mirror iPhone to big display with minimal lag.(so not limit use only for stream)
With built in range camera it can be motion control base gaming platform to fight with Kinect. (remember they are fighting for living room area)
Some customer should love all in one gadget instead of pile up all gadgets that can use for only one function in their living room.
AppleTV for basic fuction and only cost 99$ or less.
AppleTV plus give more powerful CPU, more storage and can be use as basic computer or casual game console.
With more powerful Wifi, it can mirror iPhone to big display with minimal lag.(so not limit use only for stream)
With built in range camera it can be motion control base gaming platform to fight with Kinect. (remember they are fighting for living room area)
Some customer should love all in one gadget instead of pile up all gadgets that can use for only one function in their living room.
Oh yes...I definitely want to see both. But given the choice, I would generally rather have native apps (for the way I use my AppleTVs and devices). I can see how others would much prefer the opposite based on their use cases.
Thanks for your great answer. I'm not sure the experience is much better. There would certainly be some advantages, but adding in apps and an SDK means you need a bigger HDD in the ATV, which therefore boosts the price point. At 99$ it is very attractive right now.
Point taken, but the remote with the Apple TV is atrocious, so you will need another controller anyway to run your apps.
Agreed, but Apple is quite big on trying to encourage people to buy more of their products, so how is this a bad thing from their perspective?
You would always have to have a remote handy, whether it is a cheap metal thing, or an iPad/iPhone doesn't seem to make a big difference to me. Before people sit down to watch TV or play games, they usually bring their remotes to the couch with them.
Agreed. And I think this is your best point, but given how easy it is with the iOS and OS X devices now, I do wonder if it is worth the increased costs, both for Apple to maintain this, and for customers given the need for bigger HDDs. Also, I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to have a conversation about the merits of this proposal, so thanks for participating with me.
----------
I like this idea. In fact, it would work well with an earlier suggested idea. Merge the Airports with Apple TVs. Have the Apple TV Express, with a dual core processor, one for the standard ATV functions + 1 for the network management, and have an Apple TV Extreme, merging the Time Capsule and the Apple TV with SDK.
Last edited:
By the way...I've programmed my Harmony remotes to control my AppleTVs, and they work 100% perfectly. I have 3 AppleTVs and 3 Harmony remotes in 3 different rooms, and they completely replace my AppleTV remotes (as well as all other remotes).
That being said, the simplicity of the remote is a huge advantage. Remember, the market for these "set top boxes" in general is GIGANTIC. Every household with a TV/Internet connection is a potential client. Further, multiple TVs per household means multiple units per household.
Simplicity of hookup and use is an imperative. It was not too long ago that people would fuss that "I can't even get the clock to stop blinking on my VCR". Those people still exist! ;-)
100Mbt is still more then enough until we get 4k video
netflix hd stream is 4Mbit to 7Mbit
youtube max 8Mbit
Vimeo max 20Mbit
bluray max 48Mbit
No it doesn't. Don't want or need a computer, smartphone, or tablet to control what I watch on my TV. Much easier to have that functionality built into the box. And then it doesn't matter if I walk away from the TV with my phone or tablet or need to use it to pick and choose what I want to watch or control the device.
Chromecast is a cool thing but it should have some basic functionality without a connected device. If anything, it's overpriced for what it is, a dumb terminal.
I should have clarified that I meant real-world...not theoretical. And not "Apple 1080 HD" but something of higher quality like Bluray.
Nobody has made a box...ANY box...with 100Mbit ethernet since 2005. My 7 year old junky Dell has gigabit.
I was floored when I found out my latest gen ATV only had 100Mbit ethernet while it had much faster wifi.
It would be nice if Apple included 32GB+ of memory/storage/buffering space so I can instantly start a large percentage of my iTunes-based movies/shows rather than wait every time I choose a new movie.
Sorry, pedant alert, but where did those volume estimates come from?
The 11 August shipment weighed 7,044 kg.
The 18 August shipment weighed 16,628 kg.
The 25 August shipment also weighed 16,628 kg.
(Source: Panjiva)
Total weight of shipments was 40,300 kg. An Apple TV weighs 270 g.
This means the total amount would be closer to 150,000 devices in total.
The 11 August shipment weighed 7,044 kg.
The 18 August shipment weighed 16,628 kg.
The 25 August shipment also weighed 16,628 kg.
(Source: Panjiva)
Total weight of shipments was 40,300 kg. An Apple TV weighs 270 g.
This means the total amount would be closer to 150,000 devices in total.
I dumped cable(FiOS actually) two years ago. I live in the 'burbs of DC, so with an antenna in the attic, I can get 50 digital channels(10-15 are actually of any note).
The main TV(family room) hooked up to a PS3 for netflix, and PS3 media center streaming the content of my iTunes library or whatever I have on my NAS backup HD. I also have a Channel Master HD-DVR setup to record all the shows I want from the antenna.
The second TV(living room) has a local Antenna that hardly picks up anything, but has a Wii hooked up to it with netflix.
I would LOVE to get an Apple TV for the living room set, but so far the Apple TV has not met my expectations with respect to capabilities. It coudl be sooooo much more. I'm looking for some more content options(more non-cable required content channels, app store, etc...). I could be convinced to get a rev'd Apple TV if the hardware was sufficient to handle a later software update to enable the above. I don't trust Apple when it comes to updating older hardware. Look at the iPod touch 4 they were selling a couple months ago as their lead offering. It's not coming along for the ride, and I feel an A5 Apple TV will not as well. So an A6 minimum is what I'll be looking for. Hopefully 16 Gig storage and 1 Gig of RAM. But that is probably just wishful thinking.
Maybe CoreFire and the like will have betetr luck with this one. I would have bought several AppleTV's if I could have installed those on them.
Admittantly and AppleTV App store would help with this, If Apple would allow other media apps like XBMC, Plex, etc...
With these of course, lets have the return of some real internal storage.
Admittantly and AppleTV App store would help with this, If Apple would allow other media apps like XBMC, Plex, etc...
With these of course, lets have the return of some real internal storage.
The Apple TV weighs 272g, but the problem you failed to consider in your calculations is there is a box it comes in, with a remote, power cable, and some paper.
Stupid me, Apple lists the Apple TV as 270 g but Amazon lists the boxed weight as 907 g (which includes packaging). That 907 g sounds a bit high to me but with that weight we'd be talking about just over 44,000 units.
@JohnDoe98, I just realised that. Now to find authoritative source for the actual weight including packaging as the Amazon figure sounds pretty high (probably includes Amazon's own packaging too).
Not that any of this really matters, obviously. I'm sure Apple will be counting exactly how many have been delivered.
Right?! Pc portable could only mean MBA or rMBP right?
What do others think? Is it possible we could get that haswell rMPB next week?
It's a piece of hardware that doesn't do anything without other piece of hardware supplying it with instructions, is what he was getting at.
Apple has it backwards with Apple TV
They need to quit making so many damn hardware upgrades and focus on their extremely limited os. Who the hell wants/needs two disney channels?! need to open to apps, etc...
They need to quit making so many damn hardware upgrades and focus on their extremely limited os. Who the hell wants/needs two disney channels?! need to open to apps, etc...
I would say there would be some adjustments made due to packaging materials, and the weight of the Apple TV alone is 272g so you have to factor in the remote and other in-box documentation.
Is that enough to cut the estimate from 150,000 units down to 90,000? I'd say no, but it would definitely trim off a chunk.
HDMI 2.0 was just released so maybe its got that and some cool new HDMI CEC features so you dont even have to program your TV remote to operate it.
I don't know if this has changed with AC routers, but at least it used to be the case with some routers that if a device only supporting say G when connecting to an N-router, the router would only broadcast using G, resulting in lowered speeds for all devices connected to the network. Although I'm not sure whether modern routers using multiple antennas get arounds this.