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.
New Apple TV Anytime Soon?
- Thread starter TallManNY
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The box can stay the same, but I'd love a redesigned remote sooner rather than later.
I'm perfectly fine with the remote. Perhaps try the app or just get the previous remote and use that.
Oh, I'm fine with the touchpad. I just hate the symmetry. I'm always pointing it in the wrong direction. Sticking a rubber band on it solves the problem--it's just ugly.
4k is good but not the wow factor of going from SD to HD. Also if im not mistaken the current Apple Tv is capable of 4k output. The real wow change would be adding HDR or Dolby vision to future releases. Thats something that one can see a real difference.
Bestbuy has 4th gen 32GB apple TV on sale for $99 as of sunday which tells me they are dumping inventory in anticipation of a new unit
Best Buy doesn't know anything. They have sales on Apple products occasionally, but this is the first Apple TV 4 sale iirc.
Best Buy doesn't know anything about Apple's future plans. They are simply having a sale.
The remote just sucks - the touchpad is completely pointless and vague, and simply too small, while the whole thing is too slippery and I always have to find where my kids have dropped it and then study it intently to find which way is up and accidentally cause the TV to turn on.
It badly needs a D-pad and programmable auxiliary button.
It badly needs a D-pad and programmable auxiliary button.
I have 3 ATV 4s in my house, and bought a 5-pack of blue neoprene cases on eBay for, if I recall, about $4. Well I would prefer not needing a case, they do make the remote easier to hold, operate, and locate (particularly in bed or on my black leather couch).
I had initially looked on Amazon and most of the cases were about $10-$20/ea at the time, and I was not about to spend $30-$60. But for a few bucks, they were well worth it.
4K Apple TV won't happen until studios allow 4K in iTunes.
A quick search reveals as of last month there were less than 100 4K titles on Netflix (that's movies and TV shows combined), and less than half that on Amazon.
I wouldn't expect Apple to even breath the word "4K" until there is solid proof of actual demand for 4K content.
A quick search reveals as of last month there were less than 100 4K titles on Netflix (that's movies and TV shows combined), and less than half that on Amazon.
I wouldn't expect Apple to even breath the word "4K" until there is solid proof of actual demand for 4K content.
Comcast needs to be ready for a massive 4K streaming bandwidth let alone allow some customers to watch it without going over their cap...
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Makes no sense. The hardware must lead. Wave a magic wand and make every single video in the iTunes store have a 4K option for
TV today and how much money can all of the Studios combined make for all that effort?Zero dollars. They can't sell any software made for hardware that nobody has.
On the other hand, pump 4K
TVs into homes- whether there's any 4K iTunes content or not- and eventually the numbers tempt some Studio into seeing if they can make a buck with some 4K releases. If they do, they'll roll out more. And if that appears to work for them, the other Studios will pile on.In the meantime, a 4K
TV will play 1080p, 720p and SD content already in the iTunes store to it's fullest, just like the launch of a 1080p TV could play 720p and SD content until the store loaded up with 1080p content.Hardware must lead. You don't have iPhone apps exclusive for iOS11 or iPhone 8 loaded up in that app store. Why not? Not a buck can be made on software for a technology nobody has yet. It's always been this way. It made no sense to load up store shelves with Blu Ray discs before anyone had a Blu Ray player. It made no sense to load them with DVDs before there were any DVD players. VHS tapes before VHS players. OS X software before there was OS X Macs. Intel-platform software for Macs before there were Intel Macs. 1080p videos for
TV before there were 1080p TVs. Etc.Best scenario: much like apps for
TV4 before anyone could buy one, Apple convinces a few Studios to roll out some 4K simultaneously with the launch of a 4KTV5. That's also how it worked with 1080p and the launch of the "3." Then let the profit motive and competitive drives motivate other Studios to get 4K content in there too.Loading up the store before anyone can buy any of it has zero chance of anyone making a nickel on all that work. Hardware must lead. And unlike Studio "software," Apple has 100% control of hardware development. They can roll out a 4K, 8K or 16K
TV whenever they might feel like developing them. Then, leave it to the "software" providers to "catch up" to what the hardware can handle.All other Apple tech rolls out with new hardware features encouraging the "software" companies to take advantage of them. It's how it's always been. But for some reason we believe- or spin- this ONE bit of hardware differently. For what? I don't know. Maybe we're trying to redirect fault away from Apple to the Studios for preventing Apple from making a 4K
TV (like the Studios have any say over what Apple decides to make hardware-wise)? Or maybe we just don't recall how hardware always leads the way to new software capabilities because that's the only way? Or maybe we mislead ourselves into thinking that a 4KTV forces us all to ONLY consume 4K content and thus we must buy a new TV, we must deal with huge files, etc (when we should know that a 1080pTV forced no such changes on anyone)? Or maybe we think this somewhat logical-sounding excuse buys time for Apple to get around to rolling out a 4K STB as if we work for Apple Marketing and it's our job? Etc. Again, I don't know why we keep slinging around this excuse... but it's one of several that basically makes no sense if one just thinks it through.
Not immediately, but they need a true 4K device by next Christmas. Larger storage will be required to buffer that much data. iTunes needs to start carrying 4K, they are behind the curve, and the studios need to at least get 7.1 audio files to iTunes pronto. 5.1 is way behind the power curve at this stage. They shouldn't make us pay for it either. I'm fine paying for 4K, but not an audio file that should already be in place.
Not really. For example, Infuse and MrMC can play Blu-ray rips today that have much higher bitrates than e.g. Netflix 4K. The main hardware changes required will be HDMI 4K output (preferably HDMI 2.0) and H.265 decode support in hardware (if not already available) and software. Then there's the unresolved matter of competing HDR standards.
My guess is Apple will take their time with this. I doubt that there is a lot of market demand for this too outside of enthusiast circles ...
I simplified things a bit. What I meant was that releasing an Apple TV 4K will mean Apple also has to upgrade iTunes to carry 4K content. iTunes is the largest "music & movie store" in the world, so would be a very, very big undertaking. As I mentioned above, despite all the 4K hype, Amazon and Netflix both have very little 4K content.
At this point, from Apple's perspective there's no real evidence to prove that 4K content will do any better in sales than 3D in the home (which was largely a commercial flop.). Plus there's that the whole bandwidth issue...
[doublepost=1483114174][/doublepost]
Not all, but a lot of titles have 7.1 audio in tvOS Movies Store right now. (ATV 4 only. ATV 3 doesn't support 7.1)
//
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
There's no big upgrade process to make the iTunes Store work with 4K. It's just another video option, just like adding 1080p when TV was still limited to 720p. There's no major overhaul, etc. And iTunes was "the largest music & movie" store when they went 1080p with TV3. It was not a "very, very big undertaking." iTunes (the program) itself can already store 4K video files just like they are any other video file. There's just not a "just works" way to flow those 4K files from iTunes to a 4K TV because this one link in the chain has a hardware cap clinging to 1080p.
Amazon and Netflix have some 4K... as does YouTube... as does perhaps millions of Apple people who choose to shoot 4K with their iDevices, etc. At one point Amazon & Netflix had no 1080p but that wasn't a reason to hold back that hardware evolutionary train either.
At this point there's no real evidence that iPhone 8 will do any better in sales than current iPhones... or future Macs will do better than current ones... or future iPads will do better than current ones... so, per that logic, perhaps Apple should not develop any advances into ANY hardware until such evidence is abundantly evident??? Why do we make such arguments against advancing only this ONE Apple product when they fly in the face of pretty much everything else that Apple makes? In everything else, we covet advances- can't wait for OLED or wireless charging or wireless earbuds, etc. Only here- with this one thing- do we spin the opposite and cling so hard to the past... even when pretty much all competition is already embracing 4K (and Apple embraces it themselves in pretty much everything else they make too).
As to the "bandwidth issue" the very same issue was slung against embracing 1080p before Apple rolled that out. Of course, we ignore that for those that actually have real issues with bandwidth, they'll be nothing stopping them from downloading whichever version of the video they download now... and thus using the exact same bandwidth they use now... just as anyone who may have had real bandwidth challenges downloading a 1080p file could still download the 720p or SD file that worked for them too. Even today- years after Apple rolled out a 1080p-capableTV- if one found themselves in a place where bandwidth was really pinched but wanted to watch something from the iTunes store anyway, they can still choose the 720p or SD option and it will play to it's fullest on the better 1080p-capable hardware. No problem. One can even choose to default download the 1080p version or a lessor-demanding version. Do any of us think a 4K variation would be any different? An example of exactly how it will be handled has already been revealed to us.
In short: A 4KTV doesn't force everyone to only download 4K video... nor throw out non-4K TVs, etc. It just adds the ability to play 4K for those who do want it and/or have the bandwidth, already have a 4K TV, etc. Everyone else- including those who detest the concept of 4K- would be completely unaffected. They'd just have hardware capable of doing more than what they want it to do... just like they have in pretty much everything else that Apple makes.
There's a whole bunch of recycled arguments to spin against a 4KTV, all used to spin against a 1080pTV when Apple still clung to 720p. Of course, AFTER Apple embraced 1080p, none of those people were ripping into Apple per those same arguments. Instead, all that just evaporated... as it will when Apple rolls out a 4KTV.
TV was still limited to 720p. There's no major overhaul, etc. And iTunes was "the largest music & movie" store when they went 1080p with TV3. It was not a "very, very big undertaking." iTunes (the program) itself can already store 4K video files just like they are any other video file. There's just not a "just works" way to flow those 4K files from iTunes to a 4K TV because this one link in the chain has a hardware cap clinging to 1080p.Amazon and Netflix have some 4K... as does YouTube... as does perhaps millions of Apple people who choose to shoot 4K with their iDevices, etc. At one point Amazon & Netflix had no 1080p but that wasn't a reason to hold back that hardware evolutionary train either.
At this point there's no real evidence that iPhone 8 will do any better in sales than current iPhones... or future Macs will do better than current ones... or future iPads will do better than current ones... so, per that logic, perhaps Apple should not develop any advances into ANY hardware until such evidence is abundantly evident??? Why do we make such arguments against advancing only this ONE Apple product when they fly in the face of pretty much everything else that Apple makes? In everything else, we covet advances- can't wait for OLED or wireless charging or wireless earbuds, etc. Only here- with this one thing- do we spin the opposite and cling so hard to the past... even when pretty much all competition is already embracing 4K (and Apple embraces it themselves in pretty much everything else they make too).
As to the "bandwidth issue" the very same issue was slung against embracing 1080p before Apple rolled that out. Of course, we ignore that for those that actually have real issues with bandwidth, they'll be nothing stopping them from downloading whichever version of the video they download now... and thus using the exact same bandwidth they use now... just as anyone who may have had real bandwidth challenges downloading a 1080p file could still download the 720p or SD file that worked for them too. Even today- years after Apple rolled out a 1080p-capable
TV- if one found themselves in a place where bandwidth was really pinched but wanted to watch something from the iTunes store anyway, they can still choose the 720p or SD option and it will play to it's fullest on the better 1080p-capable hardware. No problem. One can even choose to default download the 1080p version or a lessor-demanding version. Do any of us think a 4K variation would be any different? An example of exactly how it will be handled has already been revealed to us.In short: A 4K
TV doesn't force everyone to only download 4K video... nor throw out non-4K TVs, etc. It just adds the ability to play 4K for those who do want it and/or have the bandwidth, already have a 4K TV, etc. Everyone else- including those who detest the concept of 4K- would be completely unaffected. They'd just have hardware capable of doing more than what they want it to do... just like they have in pretty much everything else that Apple makes.There's a whole bunch of recycled arguments to spin against a 4K
TV, all used to spin against a 1080pTV when Apple still clung to 720p. Of course, AFTER Apple embraced 1080p, none of those people were ripping into Apple per those same arguments. Instead, all that just evaporated... as it will when Apple rolls out a 4KTV.
Last edited:
Well, I purchased a Chromecast Ultra yesterday, so I assume that Apple will announce a new Apple TV with 4K HDR today. I took one for the team!
Can you still buy a 1080p tv? judging by stores they are quickly becoming a thing of the past. Besides Apple is there any other major streamer...at all, that doesn't do 4K already? Roku has 15 channels with 4K content. Vudu has around 80 movies plus tv, Ultraflix appears to have much more than that. Spin however you like, Apple is behind, and this isn't new news imo.
We have over 500 titles, maybe 30% have 7.1. They should have been supporting 7.1 when ATV3 launched. Typical Apple nonsense.
[doublepost=1483126940][/doublepost]
There's no big upgrade process to make the iTunes Store work with 4K. It's just another video option, just like adding 1080p when
But Amazon and Netflix have some 4K... as does YouTube... as does perhaps millions of Apple people who choose to shoot 4K with their iDevices, etc. At one point Amazon & Netflix had no 1080p but that wasn't a reason to hold back that hardware evolutionary train either.
At this point there's no real evidence that iPhone 8 will do any better in sales than current iPhones... or future Macs will do better than current ones... or future iPads will do better than current ones... so, per that logic, perhaps Apple should not develop any advances into ANY hardware until such evidence is abundantly evident??? Why do we make such arguments against advancing only this ONE Apple product when they fly in the face of pretty much everything else that Apple makes? In everything else, we covet advances- can't wait for OLED or wireless charging or wireless earbuds, etc. Only here- with this one thing- do we spin the opposite and cling so hard to the past... even when pretty much all competition is already embracing 4K (and Apple embraces it themselves in pretty much everything else they make too).
As to the "bandwidth issue" the very same issue was slung against embracing 1080p before Apple rolled that out. Of course, we ignore that for those that actually have real issues with bandwidth, they'll be nothing stopping them from downloading whichever version of the video they download now... and thus using the exact same bandwidth they use now... just as anyone who may have had real bandwidth challenges downloading a 1080p file could still download the 720p or SD file that worked for them too. Even today- years after Apple rolled out a 1080p-capable
In short: A 4K
There's a whole bunch of recycled arguments to spin against a 4K
No big deal except storage on their end.
[doublepost=1483126975][/doublepost]
Yeah. But it's slim pickings.
Weird when a thread of mine from the summer suddenly gets revived.
I gave in and bought second ATV 4. Having the Apps was worth it to me. Gave ATV 3 that got replaced to GF.
I doubt I will have a 4K TV anytime soon because in my living room I use a projector there (and a 720p one at that). The other ATV in the bedroom is only used occasionally and a 1080p TV seems fine. But I'd still say Apple has no business selling the current hardware for more than two years. They should upgrade the CPU and support 4K out.
I gave in and bought second ATV 4. Having the Apps was worth it to me. Gave ATV 3 that got replaced to GF.
I doubt I will have a 4K TV anytime soon because in my living room I use a projector there (and a 720p one at that). The other ATV in the bedroom is only used occasionally and a 1080p TV seems fine. But I'd still say Apple has no business selling the current hardware for more than two years. They should upgrade the CPU and support 4K out.