You should read what he wrote again...you clearly don't get sarcasm.
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
Production of Faster Apple TV 5 Rumored to Begin in Early 2016
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You should read what he wrote again...you clearly don't get sarcasm.
Could this be the Apple TV Pro?
Following on from creating a 'pro' version of the iPad for professionally watching videos on, Apple will be creating an Apple TV Pro with a stylus for the Apple TV Remote so that 'pro' users can scroll up, down, left and right through menus with magical precision.
Following on from creating a 'pro' version of the iPad for professionally watching videos on, Apple will be creating an Apple TV Pro with a stylus for the Apple TV Remote so that 'pro' users can scroll up, down, left and right through menus with magical precision.
Odd. I'm not seeing any of those issues. I have a wired gigabit network using consumer grade gear from tplink. I stream off a Synology DS212j NAS with the iTunes server package enabled. Works fine. No buffering or stuttering. I found this appletv app called one video that will play just about any format, and is very NAS friendly. I've been able to dump just about every video I can find in all kinds of formats onto a shared folder on my NAS and play it with one video on the atv. Flawless streaming. Very very happy with it.
Improved speed in order to handle 4k - other than that, no.
It needs a working remote app to enter passwords, improved text entry ( it's worse than the old one) and a working Siri (disabled in most countries) - but for just full HD, it's fast enough.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
And of course you are right. Apple already supports 4K in just about everything else. It doesn't make sense for their most important product being able to shoot 4K and not have an Apple "just works" way to play that iPhone 4K on a 4K TV. As is, iPhone shoots 4K, Apple products like iMovie and FCPX can edit and render a perfected 4K video Quicktime file, iTunes will store that file just like it stores any other video file. All someone with a 4K TV needs is a 4K
TV to fill the gap between iTunes and their TV. It should be obvious that a next TV will have the horses to play 4K. IMO, Apple should have made THIS one do it so they could be ahead of most of the CE market. But rumors like this lend some hope that maybe they'll get to market not too far behind most of the other players.Since usually such posts are attacked by the anti-4K crowd, I'll remind everyone that an
TV that could play 4K doesn't force anyone to buy anything new. Anyone happy with a 1080p or 720p HDTV they already have could still watch 1080p or 720p exactly as they do now. Hardware capable of a little more can easily play back lighter software.The "but the bandwidth" crowd wouldn't be forced to download only 4K video; just as they do now, they could choose either the 1080p, 720p or SD file option in iTunes.
The "seating distance" crowd would not need to change their seating distance because nothing at all would have to change for them.
The "but games will have more judder" crowd is only right if the game developers choose to target the full 4K rather than target 1080p or 720p if their games are too demanding to avoid judder when rendered for full 4K resolution (if the developers target the right resolution for the demands of their game; a 4K TV will just upscale their 1080p or 720p target... just like 4K TVs upscale a 1080p or 720p movie now).
And the "until there's lots of 4K content for
TV in the iTunes store..." crowd needs to think about what they are saying. Not $1 could be made if EVERYTHING in the iTunes store was available today in 4K for TV until there are 4K TVs able to play such content. The hardware must come first... or come simultaneously. It makes no sense for the software to be available for hardware that nobody can yet own.While I just bought the "4" I look forward to the "5" even if it would launch 15 days after my purchase date (so I couldn't return the "4"). But my own launch guess is next Fall at the earliest, with- or right after- iPads inherit the ability to shoot 4K video.
Last edited:
HDMI 2 interface, and more power. 4k uses 4 times the pixels of full HD.
The thing is ****...
There are no apps here in the UK, I cannot watch anything but Youtube and Netfix
There are no games because Apple requires all games to be playable with the remote
App size limit is too small
Searching for content sucks, there is not enough curation, no filters or anything.
Typing on the thing takes forever because of how they've laid out the keyboard.
There are no apps here in the UK, I cannot watch anything but Youtube and Netfix
There are no games because Apple requires all games to be playable with the remote
App size limit is too small
Searching for content sucks, there is not enough curation, no filters or anything.
Typing on the thing takes forever because of how they've laid out the keyboard.
Last edited:
My ATV4 is orders of magnitude greater than the ATV2 I've now rotated to another room.
I can't imagine why it would need to be faster, except for the the obvious missing 4K support.
"It's a little more difficult to call it a hobby these days," Cook told shareholders.
But I paid regular money for it. And its outdated already.
Regardless of performance, people should stay away from this new Apple TV until they fix the Bluetooth to allow keyboards to connect to it. They claim that only Bluetooth 4 can connect but there are no 4's on the market at the moment.
Shooting video in 4K has benefits beyond the ability to display the results in 4K. When you shoot in 4K, you have the ability to zoom in and crop parts of the video up to 4X while still retaining at least 1080p resolution. The final video should be reduced to 1080p since most people don't own 4K TVs, those that do don't have large enough screens to view from normal distances while appreciating the extra resolution, and few people have the bandwidth or storage space to share and store tons of 4K video content.
So to summarize: it makes perfect sense for Apple to offer a 4K video camera in the iPhone while not offering 4K support on their Apple TV.
It looks like Apple got the message that not having 4K already is unnacceptable to a lot of high-end folk who chose to take their business elsewhere and so suddenly they're gearing up to push 4K+ as fast as possible, even if that means screwing over every single person that just bought this thing thinking it actually had a shelf life.
I stayed away from the new Apple TV and I had Apple TV since it first came out! I read the first reviews of bugs, poor organization (including the store) and an utter lack of "Remote" support (unforgivable, IMO given it's been a staple for so long in ATV including Gen1) and given the high cost, I said screw it and bought two FireTV sticks instead. They haven't been perfect (occasionally crashes with Kodi, but then that could be Kodi's fault; it crashed often enough in the past as XBMC on AppleTV) and Kodi doesn't do video ID tagging, so I had to do some fixes (not everything in my library was named to its satisfaction), but ultimately, the interface is night and day better than AppleTV for viewing your OWN library. I had some misgivings about finding music and the lack of a search engine, but there was an add-on search engine that works great and Kodi has an iOS App available that works a hell of a lot like Apple's own "Remote" (for you know, the older Apple TVs that supported it) and that pretty much made it a non-issue. Plus it works with everything that Apple does not work with (e.g. DTS, AVI, MKV, 3D Video, FLAC, etc. and on some boxes HD Audio as well, that Android doesn't currently allow without modification, it seems). The photo viewer is night and day better (it can handle sub-directories for one thing and you can zoom and rotate images at a button push).
I have heard some Kodi developers are forking a "lite" version for AppleTV (they don't believe the full version would ever be allowed on the App Store) so it may eventually show up. How much works, though is another question entirely. I gather Infuse 4 just released for AppleTV 4; that might help it a LOT over Apple default interface/options, but the Pro version (that handles DD/DTS, etc.) will cost you a few bucks extra.
I stayed away from the new Apple TV and I had Apple TV since it first came out! I read the first reviews of bugs, poor organization (including the store) and an utter lack of "Remote" support (unforgivable, IMO given it's been a staple for so long in ATV including Gen1) and given the high cost, I said screw it and bought two FireTV sticks instead. They haven't been perfect (occasionally crashes with Kodi, but then that could be Kodi's fault; it crashed often enough in the past as XBMC on AppleTV) and Kodi doesn't do video ID tagging, so I had to do some fixes (not everything in my library was named to its satisfaction), but ultimately, the interface is night and day better than AppleTV for viewing your OWN library. I had some misgivings about finding music and the lack of a search engine, but there was an add-on search engine that works great and Kodi has an iOS App available that works a hell of a lot like Apple's own "Remote" (for you know, the older Apple TVs that supported it) and that pretty much made it a non-issue. Plus it works with everything that Apple does not work with (e.g. DTS, AVI, MKV, 3D Video, FLAC, etc. and on some boxes HD Audio as well, that Android doesn't currently allow without modification, it seems). The photo viewer is night and day better (it can handle sub-directories for one thing and you can zoom and rotate images at a button push).
I have heard some Kodi developers are forking a "lite" version for AppleTV (they don't believe the full version would ever be allowed on the App Store) so it may eventually show up. How much works, though is another question entirely. I gather Infuse 4 just released for AppleTV 4; that might help it a LOT over Apple default interface/options, but the Pro version (that handles DD/DTS, etc.) will cost you a few bucks extra.
I would imagine Apple do market surveys and those surveys are probably saying that 4K is a desired feature. I will not buy an Apple TV until such time as it does have 4K, as I have a 4K TV and want to use it to its full capability. It is for the same reason that I have not updated my coal fired Panasonic Blu-Ray. I am waiting for either the Panny or Samsung 4K B-R player.
I see plenty of games that don't require the remote.
The app size limit only applies to initial download. The apps can download additional content while in use.
Very little if any typing is required after you've completed your initial setup.
I tried a Fire TV this year. Went back to my appletv. I want to stream itunes. Netflix and Prime never have anything I want to watch.
“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”
– Henry Ford
I don't agree with your statement about needing an 80inch screen. I have a Sony 4K TV that is a lot smaller than that. In fact, it is 59in in size. I also use a 27in 4K Monitor connected to my MBP for photo editing.
There is a whole world outside the USA you know. Don't apply your local conditions to the rest of the world. Apple is a global company and builds products for the whole world nut just the USA.
My ISP has a 250Gb limit between 08:00-23:59. Outside of the it is unlimited. I get 76Mbits from them. Plenty fast enugh to stream should I want to.
I do agree with you about the lack of content.
DigiTimes? Haha no thanks.
I would consider that the exception not the norm.
Then why did you buy it?
I would consider that the exception not the norm.
Then why did you buy it?
The remote is not horrible. And the functionality it provides in conjunction with the ATV itself is amazing compared to previous generations. But it could use some tweaking. The design needs to be more asymmetrical, so you know when you pick it up in the dark which end is the bottom, and can then operate it without looking at it.
Also, while this isn't a huge deal I have noticed that when the remote is sitting on my nightstand and I reach over to push the Siri button to issue a command it doesn't hear me well enough to work. Why? Because the microphone is on the bottom. So you have to pick up the remote to use Siri.
First of all your ISP is the exception, not the rule. Secondly, you can only see the difference between your 4K television and a 1080P if you're standing about 3 feet from it. You can say otherwise, but it's simply not true. As far as a 4K monitor, see my statement above. You would definitely be able to see the benefit of a 4K monitor using it in most desktop computer scenarios, because you're near the monitor. But a desktop computer monitor is not someone using an Apple TV in their living room 10-12 feet away.