They have VLC. Microsoft has their own streaming app as does Google Chrome (Chromecast anyone?). There is absolutely no reason why Apple would say no to Kodi.
I'm glad you're the legal expert that you magically somehow
know this already. The mere fact that Kodi carries a hack version of Airplay could disqualify it alone.
I'm not saying that 720p is amazing. But your "test" case or your "sampling" is just that, extremely limited. Penetration of 4K tv's right now is extremely limited.
What does
that have to do with
leading with new technology rather than following everyone else long after they've already released their 4K products???
Again, Apple plays by the 90% rule. Prove me wrong by your INCREDIBLE WIDE SPANNING SAMPLING of YOUR FRIENDS. (Wow! A sample of 10! SO HUGE!)
You appear to have attitude about this subject that has nothing to do with whom or who I do or do not know. I can only assume it's because you want to support Apple's position no matter what (well you assume what their position will be based on some "90%" rule or something that never existed under Steve Jobs' leadership.
Prove me wrong then, where are the #s that 4K tv penetration has hit even 5% in the US or 5% worldwide.
See above. My arguments have
nothing to do with market penetration. How much market penetration did the smart phone market have before the iPhone? Given the
modern example that the iPhone started and not some cheesy crap phone that existed before that time that had a mega-slow "browser" on it, I'd say 0% market penetration. THAT is what made Apple special. THAT is what made Apple what it is today. Jobs may have saved Apple with OS X and the iPod, but he made Apple the GIANT it is today with the iPhone by LEADING the market with NEW technology rather than waiting for someone else to do it first and then "follow" long after that point when the market felt "safe" (Samsung + Android). Would Android even exist today as such without Apple CREATING the new market? I doubt it. At some point, someone would have, but
when is anyone's guess. Apple would not be the juggernaut it is today without the iPhone, that much is CERTAIN.
But what you want to tell me is that Apple should play the role of Samsung and wait for someone else to get their 4K TV media player out and wait for a healthy market of 4K televisions before bothering to add it long after others have lead the way. Apple has been doing jack squat with AppleTV for a LONG time now and it's already lost its position as a leader in this sort of thing and had to play catch-up with 1080p and it's market share shows it. Not everything has to be an instant profit maker, after all. The Mac Pro wasn't a huge part of Apple's overall revenue, but it gave it PROFESSIONAL cachet the same way the Corvette gives Chevrolet a reputation that isn't just "junk boring cars".
As I've already said and you continue to IGNORE, the A8 chip used in the new AppleTV can
already play 4K video! (http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/21/exclusive-the-iphone-6s-a8-chip-can-play-4k-video/). So your entire premise that Apple should 'wait' on larger markets and future technology is rendered null and void by the fact that the new AppleTV already HAS 4K capability in terms of its hardware. It's just a matter of Apple letting that hardware FUNCTION. Even if Apple isn't ready to sell or rent 4K movies, they can at least let the home user watch Netflix in 4K, if not let home users play their own 4K videos (yes there are 4K digital cameras out there at prices many consumers can afford, even ones that are professional mirror-less SLR types) for well under $2000 and the GoPro HERO4 4K video camera is selling for a mere $500 (
http://4k.com/camera/).
It costs Apple literally NOTHING in terms of hardware to allow 4K video on the new AppleTV. But knowing their recent history since the death of Mr. Jobs, they will not enable it simply so they can sell you another device again in a few years, not realizing they are killing their own product in the process. I'm still using my 1st Gen AppleTVs because they can easily run XBMC/Kodi and with a slight mod (Broadcom chip), they can do 1080p in hardware. I've gotten a LOT of use out of them. But who wants to spend $175 for the new AppleTV KNOWING that it's already OBSOLETE on DAY 1 for the future and worse yet, that it COULD run 4K but Apple will never enable it purely for profiteering reasons and the fact that users who can run 4K Netflix will want to know why iTunes doesn't offer 4K movies NOW. Those are poor reasons to deny a 4K mode, but given the near-sighted people running Apple these days, it won't surprise me. Neither do people like you who simply agree with everything Apple does no matter how bad those decisions are.
Since I apparently live in a 3rd world country (ahem, the United States), show me how HUGE 4K TVs are selling then. Show me news reports that they are selling like hotcakes. Show me the money.
You don't seem to get it and I'm betting that you never will.
Amazing the arrogance on some on here. ABSOLUTELY amazing.
Yes, I agree 100%. Your arrogance is absolutely amazing. I provide detailed arguments to support my positions and you just practically scream on and on about market share and why should Apple bother because of market share and there's not enough market share to bother and hey, there's market share to consider. That's not the Apple I knew and loved under Steve Jobs. THAT Apple was an innovator not a "me too" follower. No one
ever ruled the world by being a follower.
Apple has always always plays for the 90%. Keep up.
It's a joke dude. But again, guarantee at full 1080 (heck 720), an iOS processor cannot do at full res. Go on. Prove me wrong.
I already did, but I'll post it again in case it's too much bother to look for it
(http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/21/exclusive-the-iphone-6s-a8-chip-can-play-4k-video/). But I can't turn follower types (especially an emotionally charged fanatical follower type) into a logically thinking and well-reasoned leader that takes chances on new products and new technologies. Steve Jobs didn't wait for Samsung to invent the Galaxy line of phones first. He was a leader and an innovator. He took a chance on the original AppleTV before there was a Roku or an Amazon Fire. He didn't hesitate to lead with new products or make the best product available when financially feasible. Tim Cook lacks those leadership skills, IMO. He counts on people like Johnny Ive to come up with ideas and Johnny Ive had trouble even figuring out how to make a watch that others have already made (and it's not selling that great from what I've read).
Who is that person to speak for everyone as well too? Get off YOUR high horse.
I'm not speaking for everyone else. YOU ARE. The fact that you can't even tell the difference tells me what you know about life in general.
There are plenty of people out there that have said they have no interest in the new AppleTV unless it has 4K and that's because they want a product that can handle all their video needs, including the new technology coming out right now (4K Blu-Ray is just becoming available). You can either be with the future or live in the past. You would have said to not put out a DVD player when they first came out because VCRs are good enough for everyone and >90% of the people in the world use VCRs and so what's the point of having a DVD player (or laserdisc when it was the high-end format).
Should Apple be about low-end products or a high-end products? It seems to me you want them to cater to the least-common denominator and nothing else.
