Tim has enough money to buy Kalaidescape. He doesn't need an ATV. ATV is a joke compared to high end streaming systems.
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.
Things I hate about the new AppleTV
- Thread starter JWSpaceMan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Tim has enough money to buy Kalaidescape. He doesn't need an ATV. ATV is a joke compared to high end streaming systems.
Do you even know what Kalaidescape is? Here's some education:
http://www.kaleidescape.com/
If you have about $40k you can get started, it won't get you much though.
Here's some education for you: ATV 4 works well for many of us. Admittedly not perfect. If you're that unhappy and feel it is a "joke" then just use something else.
I can certainly understand if you don't care for the ATV4, want more out of Apple's efforts in this space, etc. But really, to make the statement that "ATV is a joke compared to high end streaming systems", and then to follow up with "If you have about $40k you can get started" is just really senseless. Who would ever compare those options?
I hadn't heard of Kaleidescape before, and saw your comment about "$40k"...completely missing the "k"! I went to the Kaleidescape wondering what this $40 solution I never heard of was all about!
Did either of you read my post? I was talking about Tim Cook.
My point being I'd be stunned if he even has a ATV. His world has a Kalaidescape and he doesnt need an ATV because that would be beneath him.
Last edited:
Yes...I read your post 2-3x. Here it is: "Tim has enough money to buy Kalaidescape. He doesn't need an ATV. ATV is a joke compared to high end streaming systems." You compared ATV to Kalaidescape in that post, and then again in a later post.
Anyhow, this is off-target. Every mainstream streaming box on the market (i.e. - those under $200) has both pros and cons.
I agree. Not every device is going to work for every person. Each has short comings including ATV 4. But that does not make the ATV 4 (or any others) a "joke".
Last edited:
I agree. The problem is many people don't have realistic expectations in my opinion.
Apple comes out with a product and sticks with it for a while. So the market needs to be unexplored or a path very well laid out.
For example if Apple released a 4k ATV when Netflix first released 4k content people that think its a joke now would think its a joke because it can't decode VP9 for Youtubes 4k content. If they released another ATV to implement a hardware decoder capable of that they would think its a joke because it can't decode HDR10. Another AppleTV...its a joke because it can't decode Dolby Vision. Another AppleTV....etc etc...
Roku is an example of this. I don't have enough spare bedrooms in my house for their previous models to go into. They sell them all concurrently which is good for the consumer to buy based on their TV but annoying for someone that had the 4k HDR tv to begin with.
Streaming 4k content is currently crap anyway. My 4k TV can do nearly as good of a job upscaling 1080p content. I'll admit their is a visual difference however not enough to run out and buy a new box to experience, not yet anyway. If someone is looking to get the most out of their 4k HDR TV I would probably suggest an Xbox One S so you can play UHD BD. Now that is a stunning picture.
YouTube must be serving 4K in codecs other than VP9, as I can watch 4K in Safari? VP9 is only supported in Chrome as far as I know.
I hate that I can't download purchased films for offline viewing.
If you aren't going to have Netflix quality streaming speeds, don't offer me a streaming device with poorly encoded huge file size films.
If you aren't going to have Netflix quality streaming speeds, don't offer me a streaming device with poorly encoded huge file size films.