Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Apple TV Obsolete - No 4K

felt. said:
Waiting for 16K, 4K is clearly just a passing fad.
Click to expand...

Ha,,,, don't forget 8K which has been at the last two CES shows and well 4K has been out since 2011/2012 (first year I went), now granted I think there was only one or two vendors at the time. But that number has increased to the point everyone had a 4K tv. Same thing with 3D tv's. They were very popular over the last few years.

4K is not important to me. I do not have anything that can display it, blu-ray, tv, receiver only supports 1.4a hdmi, 4k rips, or any other media. I do have netflix but they only have a few shows that were shot in 4K. Marco Polo I think was the first or pretty close to being one of the firsts.

I will wait and see if 4K really makes an impact and can penetrate the market along with adding the necessary content. Only time will tell, but for me, the time to upgrade all of my equipment is not now.
 
I still have difficulty seeing any difference between 720p and 1080p. 86" screen.

Poor bit-rate, on the other hand, I do find really noticeable.
 
danny_w said:
Specifically what improvements? Sorry but I'm not seeing much different in a meaningful way other than voice search.
Click to expand...
Well the voice search is a good example; I was talking about the search engine itself too, specifically the ability to zoom straight to a show and have multiple options for source material. The obstacles in getting to where you need to go are vastly improved straight off the bat. I would personally like to see a startup shortcut page where you could continue where you left off on wake up with film game or app, but I do think the software may develop in a more timely fashion this time around - no longer a hobby and all that. The 60fps is also an improvement; the show pages and menu system are somewhat improved; there's more storage available; plex may get on it; apps!; 2gb ram; ac wifi; I mean read the specs... there are improvements, albeit of a standard that could have been released a year ago. Obviously something held the release back, possibly the new streaming bundle negotiations, and I strongly suspect Apple have also held back a slightly more up to date design in the pipeline for later. As always, if you want the features now, pay for them and sell it just before the next release.
 
smiddlehurst said:
Can't help but think those moaning about a lack of 4K are missing the point somewhat. Yes, there are a few 4k options out there but right now the operative word is "few". It's still VERY much early adopter territory and that is a problem for a mass market product like the Apple TV. More specifically, it's a problem when there's no 4K option in iTunes...

Fundamentally Apple will almost certainly not launch a 4K Apple TV until they can get a reasonable amount of content at 4K in their own media service. That'll likely come next year or the year after as studios roll out Ultra HD masters for the new UHD Blu Ray format but until then there's virtually nothing. Frankly I think it's probably the better move too, how do you sell a 4K device without the content? The keynote may be a tad awkward if they have to say: "the new Apple TV supports 4K so... uh... well here's House of Cards! And Daredevil! And... umm... no that's on Amazon Prime and they're not playing well with others... hmm... oh, The Smurfs 2!". No, it'll be "the new Apple TV supports Ultra HD and, as of today, we have over 500 films and TV shows available in superb Ultra HD quality through iTunes with more coming every week."
Click to expand...
Their competition is already selling 4k boxes. All they would have to say is that the 4k is to be able to watch your iPhone 4k videos. They don't have to even mention the lack of 4k movies on iTunes. Right now they are implying that their best selling product can push out 4k video, but their brand new AppleTV can't play those videos in their native resolution. Every 4k box is backward compatible, so people using 1080p TVs can still watch content on it. The people I know that have 4k would rather have a box that has it, even if content is limited.

All that being said, I am getting one anyway. The AppleTV 3 is feeling its age and needs an update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan
2010mini said:
Wrong. CBS like every other network was mandated by the FCC to broadcast in digital HD. It had nothing to do with HD TV market saturation. All this latest 4K craze is purely being pushed by TV manufactures... Remember 3D TVs??? The next "must have" TVs will be HDR TVs. this one might the one as Netflix and other content owners can easily update their library of content to HDR. And it uses less bandwidth than 4K.
Click to expand...

HDR does not use less bandwidth than 4K. You don't know what you're talking about... HDR is 4K. There's no such thing as HDR in 1080p HD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuddyRich
The whole 4k issue has been beaten to death.



1- there is hardly any content.

2- The licensing fees for h.265 have only recently been announced and are high. Negociations are ongoing and there are free alternatives. Basically the 4K streaming standard is up in the air. Noone knows where things will end up.



As far as Rogers goes perhaps they can get their acts together and start broadcasting their content in HD before they start bragging about 4K. Try looking at a TMN movie on Rogers and then the same movie on Bell Fibe. I wouldn't use them as an example of anything.



The important aspect of the ATV4 is the App Store, not the lack of 4K which is a non- issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deelron, D.T. and HoiPiet
2010mini said:
Wrong. CBS like every other network was mandated by the FCC to broadcast in digital HD. It had nothing to do with HD TV market saturation. All this latest 4K craze is purely being pushed by TV manufactures... Remember 3D TVs??? The next "must have" TVs will be HDR TVs. this one might the one as Netflix and other content owners can easily update their library of content to HDR. And it uses less bandwidth than 4K.
Click to expand...

lunaoso said:
HDR stands for high dynamic range. Has nothing to do with resolution.
Click to expand...

HDR in this context is part of the 4K standard. There is no 1080p HDR. 1080p uses Rec709 colour space, which is not the expanded colour gamut that HDR Rec.2020 uses. Though that standard hasn't been finalized yet.

There will be 4K blurays this christmas... and there will be plenty of content. Film, which most back catalog movies until fairly recent, were shot on has a resolution north of 4K, perhaps even 8K. Most recent blurays were based off of 4 or 8K masters that were made from film stock.

What they need is a streaming standard. H265 is more efficient than H264 or VC1 (or MPEG2 for OTA) but licensing is throny. There is the free VP9 which is about equal to H265 but Apple would never support a google standard.

If I needed a box right now I would probably get a Shield because for my theatre it passes DTS-HD and Dolby TruHD and ATMOS. Not to mention it supports decoding of MPEG2 and VC1 (in addition to H264) and does 24p (actually 23.97). Im a Kodi users, Ive ripped my bluray collection and play off my LAN. However Ive got my HTPC for that.

For my upstairs TV, its the ATV3 and PlexConnect. May look at the ATV4 for it, but its really not needed. Its only used for Netflix, Plex, MLBTV, Gamecenter, PBS and itunes rentals. Which the ATV3 does fine. Apple by far has the best support for apps, even on the ATV3...
 
dojoman said:
Yes, but there are only HDR 4K content available. It uses the same bandwidth as 4K no less. Going forward you will never see HDR in 1080p.
Click to expand...
Netflix's upcoming adaptive streaming system will be able to deliver HDR in 1080p resolution. It's useful for customers with lower bandwidth.
 
4K is is more hype than it is an advancement in picture quality. When HD was introduced it represented the most significant leap in picture quality.

The biggest benefit you will get from a 4K tv is resolution.

It's the same thing with cell phone screens. Samsung cellphones do have a way higher resolution than Apple cellphones but images on both look outstanding. Samsung cellphone screens are better though as they do have deeper blacks and higher range of colors.

But as far as the higher resolution and infinitely more pixels on Samsung cell phones. Visually there is not that much more improvement over a phone like the iPhone 6s Plus. There is but it's not a huge difference.
 
Rigby said:
Netflix's upcoming adaptive streaming system will be able to deliver HDR in 1080p resolution. It's useful for customers with lower bandwidth.
Click to expand...

That's interesting I didn't know that. I thought there's minimum HDR requirement is 4K resolution due to color space requirement. I guess there's no hard specs for now.
 
BuddyRich said:
HDR in this context is part of the 4K standard. There is no 1080p HDR. 1080p uses Rec709 colour space, which is not the expanded colour gamut that HDR Rec.2020 uses. Though that standard hasn't been finalized yet.

There will be 4K blurays this christmas... and there will be plenty of content.
Click to expand...

What is the name of the 4K standard?

Is there reporting that rec.2020 will be adopted?
 
dojoman said:
That's interesting I didn't know that. I thought there's minimum HDR requirement is 4K resolution due to color space requirement. I guess there's no hard specs for now.
Click to expand...
The confusion probably comes from the fact that the ongoing HDR standardization activities are partly happening in bodies like the UHD Alliance and as part of the BDA's work on UHD Blu-ray. However, technically HDR does not require any specific resolution. The necessary specifications (for things like metadata, signalling protocols, media profiles etc.) are resolution independent. The standardization is not finalized yet, but the CEA recently issued a definition of HDR which again does not require any specific resolution.
 
ke-iron said:
Time and time again tests have proved 4K is only beneficial if you're viewing on a very large tv and close proximity. Most people in most decent sized living rooms sit more than 8 feet away from their tv so the quality improvement you would get from 4K is very diminished at that distance. I'm sure you can see the difference up close, most people can.

I've explain in other posts when people upgrade to a 4K tv from their previous 1080p tv and they see how much better it shows. They attribute the quality to the tv being 4K but they are wrong. It shows better because the tv has better image processing, contrast, color gamut plus more than their previous tv. There are newer 1080p oled tv's from last year and this year that shows better than some 4K tv's from this year.

That's a better picture at a lower resolution. And it's like I said, because of the image processing, contrast etc. 4K does not mean a better image. Just like 20 megapixel image doesn't mean a better image than a 12 megapixel image. There are blu-rays in 1080p right now that will show a better picture than if it were streamed in 4K. It has been proven over and over again by professional companies who does testing.

I'm not saying 4K isn't beneficial but it isn't something to complain about if the Apple TV doesn't support it. Before there was 4K a couple years ago, did you rave that 1080p want good enough and you wanted something better, without even knowing about 4K yet?
Click to expand...

Currently have a 65" DLP 1080P I view from 12' away, and it was a good one when I got it. Still, 1080P has limitations.
I am sitting not 5' from a co-worker who just bought a high end Samsung 65" and is disgruntled about still enduring screen door effect.

Some people can see more colors than most due to the rods also reading color information. I forget what the condition is called, and it is more prevalent in women than men, but different people have different vision. I know folks who couldn't tell SD from 1080P. Personally, I try never to let them drive, but they do exist and they do pass there driving and vision tests.

MY mileage has varied. I want a good 4k tv with good 4k content.
 
4k, hmmm i see the arguments and while it would be nice - it's not a deal winner or breaker for me.
Most people don't have the BB speed to support it at 25Mbps per stream.
 
AFEPPL said:
4k, hmmm i see the arguments and while it would be nice - it's not a deal winner or breaker for me.
Most people don't have the BB speed to support it at 25Mbps per stream.
Click to expand...
Most people don't have a monitor that supports 4k, either, but they added 4k recording to the iPhone 6s. It seems inconsistent to have 4k recording, 4k/5k iMacs, iMovie 4k updates, and this product, which is the window to the Apple ecosystem in our living rooms unable to play 4k. It isn't a deal breaker for me either because it is the only game in town for Apple's ecosystem, but I am not a fan of the fact they are holding out on us.

It makes me wonder if a 4k Apple ultraHDTV, with built in AppleTV technology, is in the works? ;)
 
kilcher said:
I personally don't care since I don't own a 4k TV and don't plan on buying one any time soon.

I do think it makes Apple look bad to have the 6S capable of recording in 4k while not giving people the capability of playing that back on the new Apple TV.

But that's Apple's way, give you just enough with each upgrade so that you're left wanting (and buying) more.
Click to expand...

That is apple's way of forcing people to buy iPad pro or iMac 4K or 5k to view their 4K content. These are much more expensive devices. It doesn't bother me though as I have a 5k iMac to view my 4K content on...
 
The new apple tv is not Obsolete as there is hardly any 4k streaming content out there and there is even less HDR content. It its better apple wait a year and make a apple tv with 4k and HDR as even the roku 4 does not support HDR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
I'll do the same as I've done with all my Apple TVs... I'll buy this one and when an upgrade comes out, I'll rotate it to an older TV that isn't 4K. This is assuming that I get a 4K before ATV5!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deelron
I'm aware 4K exists. I'm also aware that just about nothing is broadcast in 4K. By the time content is readily available in that format, I bet apple will have released an update. I'll buy a new $150 device and move this Apple TV to a different tv. No big deal. It's not like the thing costs a grand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back