Oh, and I'll say that they call the streaming service "Apple Video" akin to the music service.So if the old ATV generation will continue on at a lower entry level price point, that may indicate how they'll name the new device.
Probably just "Apple TV 2," no?
Maybe some. But I live in NYC and via antenna I get several channels in HDTV and better quality than I had via cable.Cord cutters are weird. Or you just like to wait while the stream Is buffering. I will stick to my tried and true cable TV that plays full HD with no buffering, no artifacts, and keeps my bandwidth free for my kids to attempt to watch YouTube videos.
The old Apple TV 3 should go for 20 dollars or less. It's pretty useless these days.
I'm excited for this new Apple tv, after all these years it really needs an update. I've now switched to Chromecast and thinking of buying my family a Roku. Best thing about the old Apple TV is the beamer app for OSx!
Maybe some. But I live in NYC and via antenna I get several channels in HDTV and better quality than I had via cable.
Not really. The next step would be to also enable you to buy "cheaper TV", such as reality TV etc (not that I would want to, but there are many that would). In the end it is inevitable that more content becomes available like that and that will drive down the price.
2,99 is to own the episode, and I'm not interested in that. I don't need to see a particular episode of a show 200 times as I do with music. So, a much lower price per stream would be much more reasonable.
Streams don't really stop to "buffer" anymore - that's kinda 2011 stuff. I never really have to worry about bandwidth.Cord cutters are weird. Or you just like to wait while the stream Is buffering. I will stick to my tried and true cable TV that plays full HD with no buffering, no artifacts, and keeps my bandwidth free for my kids to attempt to watch YouTube videos.
When I bought my firstMy point is, $50 to a $100, isn't such a drastic hike in price. I guess to some people on here that is.
But you don't even know what features Apple will offer."The web-based TV service is expected to deliver a lightweight package of about 25 channels for around $40 per month..."
Is this considered competitive? I pay $33/mo to Comcast for a Basic Extended service, which has more content and features that what Apple will offer!
I use my Apple TV 2 on a daily basis, and it works flawlessly, so I'm wondering how you define "useless."
The old Apple TV 3 should go for 20 dollars or less. It's pretty useless these days.
I'm excited for this new Apple tv, after all these years it really needs an update. I've now switched to Chromecast and thinking of buying my family a Roku. Best thing about the old Apple TV is the beamer app for OSx!
A native Plex client is the thing I'm most excited about. However, since the new ATV will be based on iOS I'm worried that it'll only support the limited set of file formats that iOS supports. This would render it kind of useless for me, since the Samsung Plex app direct plays all my files. Arghhh...![]()
Mohu leaf. I'm also in direct line of sight with the Empire State Building. Love my tablo which I use as a DVR and can stream to pretty much any device and remotely as wellIf you don't mind, might I ask what sort of antenna you are using? I would like to try this method. Thanks.
Thank youMohu leaf. I'm also in direct line of sight with the Empire State Building. Love my tablo which I use as a DVR and can stream to pretty much any device and remotely as well
I know, but I like the elegance of simply storing and downloading content on a NAS, and not having a full-blown computer running at the same time (not to mention the extra costs involved). Furthermore, if I can't even direct play my content to the TV, I might as well just permanently transcode my content to an iOS-compatible format. That's something I'll consider, depending on how things pan out with the ATV.The beauty of Plex is that all the necessary transcoding is performed by the server. Any ATV/iOS app (like their iPad and iPhone apps already) would simply be a client.
Useless for you maybe, but there's a lot of us who actually like it. Don't make stupid generalizations.
Stuttering during playback is 100% dependent upon your connection. There's nothing ATV can do with a connection that cannot maintain minimal sustained data rates.
Almost everyone has data caps these days, whether they know it or not. Unless your cap is super low, I can't see why streaming wouldn't work.
For the same reason the current tv has a chip with one core removed — the A8 offers plenty of performance already, and will likely be cheaper and lower-power than the A9.