Why 4K mattered on ATV4...

[mellofello]

I sit well within that chart (7 feet away from a 65 inch 4K tv). Watching super HD 1080p Netflix on my Apple TV vs watching the 4K on the tv is very noticeably different. 1080p looks good, 4K is like looking out the window.


I have personally seen a difference streaming Netflix 4K next to Netflix 1080p on a 65 inch tv from about 10 feet away side by side. I helped a friend swap out his tv after Black Friday. We had them both hooked up and streaming dare devil from the internal apps.

The much higher bitrate of 4K really adds a lot more detail, and nuance to the picture. That chart does not tell the whole story at all.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

The problem is modern 4K TVs come with numerous other improvements to bit depth and dynamic range so it's not like you're looking at the exact same display just at different resolutions. There are so many other things that can contribute to the perceived sharpness of an image.

If you looked at a 1080p OLED display (like LGs) next to a standard 4K LCD you'd probably think the OLED looked better.

 

[rhett7660]

I see people say stuff like this but I haven't seen a resolution yet where I couldn't discern the difference. Granted I'm somewhat of a videophile and care more about picture quality than most. I could get behind the Japanese plan to go to 8k.

https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/...aky-launch-japan-aggressively-pushes-8k-video

Sony was demo'ing this at CES a few years back and wow. Yeah it was pretty intense.

 

[mellofello]

The problem is modern 4K TVs come with numerous other improvements to bit depth and dynamic range so it's not like you're looking at the exact same display just at different resolutions. There are so many other things that can contribute to the perceived sharpness of an image.

If you looked at a 1080p OLED display (like LGs) next to a standard 4K LCD you'd probably think the OLED looked better.

All the more reason to upgrade.

As I said though in my own experience at home, all things being equal super HD Netflix vs 4K Netflix on the same screen is noticeably sharper. It should be considering it is 2x the bandwidth.

If you value the best possible picture you can get then get A 4K tv. If you are a happy with adequate then stick with 1080p.

I always ask myself on all the 4K flame war threads. Who are these people who are so adamant about remaining Luddites with last generation gear, but are still into technology enough to find this corner of the internet where everyone is frothing over the latest?

To counter act the inevitable look at a OLED tv vs 4K response. LG is only making 4K OLED tvs at this point, and they cost as much as a decent used car for a college kid, so please be realistic.

4K lcds look great. I will be upgrading from my 2014 Samsung to a HDR set this year and I cannot wait. I'm sure by the holidays they will be right around $1000-1500 which while not cheap, is well within the range of most tech junkies budgets.

Do yourself a favor, and if you can afford it buy a 4K tv hook it up to fast internet, and see for yourself.

 

[matrix07]

I always ask myself on all the 4K flame war threads. Who are these people who are so adamant about remaining Luddites with last generation gear, but are still into technology enough to find this corner of the internet where everyone is frothing over the latest?

That's because there are many variables to picture quality. Pixel resolution is just one, and it doesn't automatically, or magically, make picture better despite marketing claim.
You said your TV are within the chart so it's likely 4K will benefit you more than other enthusiastic people. Still, it's debatable, for example, what is better between a great 1080p plasma set which has superior black level viewing a proper authored Blu-Ray disc, or 4K set viewing 4K content streamed from website, since each side gains something and lose something. "Better" in this case will be very subjective.
It isn't as weird as you think it is since we still never believe that camera that have more pixel will be automatically better.

 

[off_piste]

That's because there are many variables to picture quality. Pixel resolution is just one, and it doesn't automatically, or magically, make picture better despite marketing claim.
You said your TV are within the chart so it's likely 4K will benefit you more than other enthusiastic people. Still, it's debatable, for example, what is better between a great 1080p plasma set which has superior black level viewing a proper authored Blu-Ray disc, or 4K set viewing 4K content streamed from website, since each side gains something and lose something. "Better" in this case will be very subjective.
It isn't as weird as you think it is since we still never believe that camera that have more pixel will be automatically better.

I love the Elite Kuro but I'll take a 4K OLED any day of the week. Still wish I hadn't sold that set but I was lazy moving and thought I'd pick up a better set years later.

 

[mellofello]

Soon we will have 4K blu ray then we shall see.

 

[matrix07]

Soon we will have 4K blu ray then we shall see.

To be clear, what I said is now. I have no doubt that in 3 years this debate will mostly cease to exist. My next TV will definitely be 4K.
I just don't think it's worth it to throw away my premium 1080p 70" set for 4K right now, especially when the material rarely get proper 4K treatment, and the best screen is still too expensive.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

To be clear, what I said is now. I have no doubt that in 3 years this debate will mostly cease to exist. My next TV will definitely be 4K.
I just don't think it's worth it to throw away my premium 1080p 70" set for 4K right now, especially when the material rarely get proper 4K treatment, and the best screen is still too expensive.

I mean the $5,000 4K HDR OLED set that LG has sold for the past few months would wipe the floor with any plasma. Throw the HDR version of MAD MAX: FURY ROAD on and weep.

 

[Snoopy4]

Now I'm certain you're in the bubble and can't see out of it. ✌️

Actually, you're the one in the bubble making sweeping generalizations contradicted by realities of digital content delivery. The reason physical sales are down is people simply don't buy period, but streaming is but a mere They use redbox or simply order pay per view, this is why there isn't a Blockbuster store on every corner anymore. People have large catalogs of films they've bought over the years and simply don't feel compelled to re-buy until it's worn out given the backward compatibility with DVD which also alters the propensity to purchase.

It's okay man. Stay in the bubble.
[doublepost=1452755710][/doublepost]

Your words, not mine. I work on films, I'm also a photographer. I don't give a damn about some of the quality differences people rant about on forums. Forum folks make it seem like the difference between iTunes and Blu-Ray is akin to SD and HD. Hyperbolic mad men.

Then one would argue you aren't really a photographer. If you think iTunes is remotely close to BD, then you are in the bubble. If you think you aren't, I recommend prescription glasses. I witness image fails all the time while watching iTunes on sets as small as 46".

 

[matrix07]

I mean the $5,000 4K HDR OLED set that LG has sold for the past few months would wipe the floor with any plasma. Throw the HDR version of MAD MAX: FURY ROAD on and weep.

Please don't tease me.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I always ask myself on all the 4K flame war threads. Who are these people who are so adamant about remaining Luddites with last generation gear, but are still into technology enough to find this corner of the internet where everyone is frothing over the latest?

Generally, it's the "Apple is always right" crowd. Since Apple has not embraced 4K in the current TV, "nobody needs 4K," "it's a gimmick," "you can't see the difference," the chart, "until the whole Internet is upgraded", "until everything in the iTunes store is 4K", and so on. It was exactly the same back when Apple clung to 720p as the TV MAX for too long when pretty much everyone else had already embraced 1080. Same arguments. Same chart (just with different resolution numbers). Same passion...

...UNTIL Apple rolled out the TV3 "now with 1080p" and then the entire wall of "720p is good enough" seemed to vanish... overnight. Us consumers hungry for 1080p were bashed to no end with the same pool of anti-4K arguments (then anti-1080p) but when Apple finally rolls out an TV with 1080p, Apple was not bashed by the same crowd for embracing "the gimmick" that "no one can see." And "the chart" was simply retired for a few years until it could be resurrected by adding 4K to the listed resolutions and then slinging it in every anti-4K thread like it is absolute fact. You can do a search back into 2008 and find the very same chart only lacking the text references to 4K. Then, it was posted over and over as scientific proof why none of us needed 1080p.

It won't be long until there's an TV5 "now with 4K." Will this anti-4K crowd rip Apple for embracing "the gimmick" that "no one can see" per "the chart"? Or will it be another round of crickets from that group? That's rhetorical. We all know how that will go... the same as it always does. While Apple doesn't have some feature or benefit that some of us want, it's a stupid, useless feature that "99% don't want or need." Then Apple rolls out that feature and it's "Shut up and take my money" and "how did we ever get by without this <feature> before?" See bigger-screen phones and NFC as 2 other very tangible examples.

I look forward to TV5 while enjoying TV4 and 3s now. Those hungry for an all-Apple solution from iPhones shooting 4K to easily display that 4K on a 4KTV will get their wants met (by Apple!). And those perfectly happy at 1080p or 720p won't be affected in the least, as better hardware can easily play lessor software to it's maximum. Nobody has to throw out "perfectly good 1080p sets" or only download 4K video. instead, just like with the launch of the "3", it will "just work" with the TVs we already have and one can pick whatever video file option we want via iTunes- be that 4K, 1080p, 720p or SD.

 

[Irishman]

Not the same due to HD DVD. Far behind expectations? Oye. Where do people come up with this nonsense.

One reason the Internet is wonderful. Proof of stupid:

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/blu-ray/video/hd-dvd/blu-ray-will-be-dead-by-2012-here-s-why-464705

UHD bluray just started. Expect 100 titles this year. Without the competing format war, they're more bullish on titles as well.

Actually the projections given at CES this year were 100 per studio, for around 500 by year's end.
[doublepost=1452778366][/doublepost]

I dunno... every time I walk by the 4K TV's in Best Buy the drooling starts, once I reach the ones with curved screens I require a spit-bowl

Why the curve?
[doublepost=1452778633][/doublepost]

Yeah that would be absolute crap if that were the case having to get up half way through the movie to swap disks but I would imagine 1 disc has the 1080p movie and the extras and the 2nd disc has the 4k movie by itself. 50gb is probably enough to fit 1 4k movie by itself.

You're probably already doing blu-ray disc swapping without realizing it, as the extended editions of the LoTR trilogy are too long to fit on one blu-ray disc.

I'm sure they're not the only ones.
[doublepost=1452779073][/doublepost]

This is where UHD is getting it right. No DVD copies. Digital copies are here to stay, and to be honest I think it's great so that I don't have to tote the physical media around and they can be stored in a cool dark place and used in the primary viewing area.. I just wish Apple would kiss and make up with UV so my UV copies could be viewed on my ATV.

So, how many of your blu-ray movies have you downloaded the digital copies for?

 

[2010mini]

Generally, it's the "Apple is always right" crowd. Since Apple has not embraced 4K in the current TV, "nobody needs 4K," "it's a gimmick," "you can't see the difference," the chart, "until the whole Internet is upgraded", "until everything in the iTunes store is 4K", and so on. It was exactly the same back when Apple clung to 720p as the TV MAX for too long when pretty much everyone else had already embraced 1080. Same arguments. Same chart (just with different resolution numbers). Same passion...

...UNTIL Apple rolled out the TV3 "now with 1080p" and then the entire wall of "720p is good enough" seemed to vanish... overnight. Us consumers hungry for 1080p were bashed to no end with the same pool of anti-4K arguments (then anti-1080p) but when Apple finally rolls out an TV with 1080p, Apple was not bashed by the same crowd for embracing "the gimmick" that "no one can see." And "the chart" was simply retired for a few years until it could be resurrected by adding 4K to the listed resolutions and then slinging it in every anti-4K thread like it is absolute fact. You can do a search back into 2008 and find the very same chart only lacking the text references to 4K. Then, it was posted over and over as scientific proof why none of us needed 1080p.

It won't be long until there's an TV5 "now with 4K." Will this anti-4K crowd rip Apple for embracing "the gimmick" that "no one can see" per "the chart"? Or will it be another round of crickets from that group? That's rhetorical. We all know how that will go... the same as it always does. While Apple doesn't have some feature or benefit that some of us want, it's a stupid, useless feature that "99% don't want or need." Then Apple rolls out that feature and it's "Shut up and take my money" and "how did we ever get by without this <feature> before?" See bigger-screen phones and NFC as 2 other very tangible examples.

I look forward to TV5 while enjoying TV4 and 3s now. Those hungry for an all-Apple solution from iPhones shooting 4K to easily display that 4K on a 4KTV will get their wants met (by Apple!). And those perfectly happy at 1080p or 720p won't be affected in the least, as better hardware can easily play lessor software to it's maximum. Nobody has to throw out "perfectly good 1080p sets" or only download 4K video. instead, just like with the launch of the "3", it will "just work" with the TVs we already have and one can pick whatever video file option we want via iTunes- be that 4K, 1080p, 720p or SD.

I understand your opinion. But in this case Apple really is right. 4K, while a promising new tech advance, is still in its infancy. In fact it was very fractured amongst tech companies as to what is 4K.

http://www.fierceinstaller.com/stor...s-4k-quality-seal-ultra-hd-premium/2016-01-05

As you can see in the link a new consortium has formed to define exactly what is 4K. This means whomever purchased a 4K TV, set top box or BR player last year basically threw their money out the window.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

...or they are enjoying 4K now and for the upwards of years until this new consortium can arrive at some revised standard... or not. I'm pretty sure there's a solid answer to that question already for sale at Best Buy and similar... and already baked into the rest of Apple's product line (or is buying Apple's other products that support 4K now basically throwing money out the window too?).

This new consortium may refine or extend the current definition but it's not like they'll go opposite what is already for sale. Else, sheer momentum of what is for sale now and what will be sold until they decide something will win out over some revised standard that might be settled years from now... or not. Even if they decide something, those not participating in the group need to buy in (or not) too. See Blu Ray for example.

Is there room for 4K to get better? Sure. Is there room for 1080p and 720p to get better? Sure. How about SD? Sure. There's always room for improvement. If we all have to wait until perfection...

 

[2010mini]

...or they are enjoying 4K now and for the upwards of years until this new consortium can arrive at some revised standard... or not. I'm pretty sure there's a solid answer to that question already for sale at Best Buy and similar... and already baked into the rest of Apple's product line (or is buying Apple's other products that support 4K now basically throwing money out the window too?).

This new consortium may refine or extend the current definition but it's not like they'll go opposite what is already for sale. Else, sheer momentum of what is for sale now and what will be sold until they decide something will win out over some revised standard that might be settled years from now... or not. Even if they decide something, those not participating in the group need to buy in (or not) too. See Blu Ray for example.

Is there room for 4K to get better? Sure. Is there room for 1080p and 720p to get better? Sure. How about SD? Sure. There's always room for improvement. If we all have to wait until perfection...

Except shooting 4K video is not the main feature of the iPhone 6s/6s+. Can it stream 4K video natively from Netflix or other 4K providers?

No.

If you bought a 6s/6s+ just because has 4K you threw your money away.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Always an exception when it comes to Apple. I doubt you can find anyone who has already embraced 4K in some way- whether through iPhone 6, iMovie & FCPx, iPad Pro, Retina iMac, many 4K camcorders, many 4K TVs, Roku, Amazon, even some DirecTV/DISH/Cable are going to agree they feel they "threw money out of the window" or they wish they had waited until a collection of companies further refined a definition of what it is that may or may not be embraced by the time they get that job done.

I get that 4K years from now is likely to be better than 4K now. But years from now is years from now. 1080p years from now is likely to be better than 1080p now too. Apple doesn't roll out fully-baked perfection in anything they deliver. See iOS, OSX, WatchOS, TvOS updates always including "bug fixes" as part of the update rationale. Why doesn't the almighty hold back the launches of their own products until they achieve perfect incarnations? Are we "throwing money out the window" until Apple gets it perfectly right? Or are we enjoying the "as is" even if there are some unfixed refinements to be made in future updates? And, if so (and it is so), why is 4K different?

You always chime in to this kind of discussion, always taking this same side of the argument. When Apple rolls out TV5 "now with 4K" (likely) long before this consortium can settle on a final definition of 4K, do you then show up in those subsequent threads still making this same case... that Apple is wrong for embracing some Apple-chosen standard (highly likely compatible with the 4K we can already shoot with iPhones)? Or will it all be fine after Apple embraces 4K in the one product where they have not yet done so? Because if you feel this way before Apple rolls out 4K in an TV, it seems you should feel just as passionate AFTER they do... unless they wait until this consortium reaches a final conclusion.

Will we see you in those future threads arguing against Apple or will you follow the same path as those who passionately argued against 1080p... with much of the same rationale... while Apple clung to 720p as "good enough". Then, Apple rolled out the 3 "now with 1080p" and all those passionate arguments against 1080p just evaporated. Nobody called Apple stupid for embracing it. Funny how that works... every single time.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

Actually, you're the one in the bubble making sweeping generalizations contradicted by realities of digital content delivery. The reason physical sales are down is people simply don't buy period, but streaming is but a mere They use redbox or simply order pay per view, this is why there isn't a Blockbuster store on every corner anymore. People have large catalogs of films they've bought over the years and simply don't feel compelled to re-buy until it's worn out given the backward compatibility with DVD which also alters the propensity to purchase.

It's okay man. Stay in the bubble.
[doublepost=1452755710][/doublepost]

Then one would argue you aren't really a photographer. If you think iTunes is remotely close to BD, then you are in the bubble. If you think you aren't, I recommend prescription glasses. I witness image fails all the time while watching iTunes on sets as small as 46".

I'm a photographer with clients and a deeper understanding of imaging than probably anyone in this thread. I'm also not arrogant enough to believe that the general public gives a **** because they've proven they don't in the past. I understand that my reality isn't the reality. I understand that most people barely register the difference between SRGB and P3 (see new iMac). I understand that most people at the cinema don't care about 2K or 4K and don't even know what it means. I understand that for most people, especially in the United States, ignorance is bliss.

The facts are on my side. I've posted them in this thread before. You continue to go on like your reality is the only one. I'll repeat it again, physical sales continue to drop YOY while digital (streaming and downloads) go up by double digits YOY. You say there is no relation. You're a fool. ✌

 

[2010mini]

Always an exception when it comes to Apple. I doubt you can find anyone who has already embraced 4K in some way- whether through iPhone 6, iMovie & FCPx, iPad Pro, Retina iMac, many 4K camcorders, many 4K TVs, Roku, Amazon, even some DirecTV/DISH/Cable are going to agree they feel they "threw money out of the window" or they wish they had waited until a collection of companies further refined a definition of what it is that may or may not be embraced by the time they get that job done.

I get that 4K years from now is likely to be better than 4K now. But years from now is years from now. 1080p years from now is likely to be better than 1080p now too. Apple doesn't roll out fully-baked perfection in anything they deliver. See iOS, OSX, WatchOS, TvOS updates always including "bug fixes" as part of the update rationale. Why doesn't the almighty hold back the launches of their own products until they achieve perfect incarnations? Are we "throwing money out the window" until Apple gets it perfectly right? Or are we enjoying the "as is" even if there are some unfixed refinements to be made in future updates? And, if so (and it is so), why is 4K different?

You always chime in to this kind of discussion, always taking this same side of the argument. When Apple rolls out TV5 "now with 4K" (likely) long before this consortium can settle on a final definition of 4K, do you then show up in those subsequent threads still making this same case... that Apple is wrong for embracing some Apple-chosen standard (highly likely compatible with the 4K we can already shoot with iPhones)? Or will it all be fine after Apple embraces 4K in the one product where they have not yet done so? Because if you feel this way before Apple rolls out 4K in an TV, it seems you should feel just as passionate AFTER they do... unless they wait until this consortium reaches a final conclusion.

Will we see you in those future threads arguing against Apple or will you follow the same path as those who passionately argued against 1080p... with much of the same rationale... while Apple clung to 720p as "good enough". Then, Apple rolled out the 3 "now with 1080p" and all those passionate arguments against 1080p just evaporated. Nobody called Apple stupid for embracing it. Funny how that works... every single time.

If Apple rolled out a 4K Apple TV tomorrow I would never buy it. Even though I am in the market to purchase another ATV.

I'll wait until 4K is truly baked.

 

[derbladerunner]

Heated discussion. LOL. I think we can mostly agree on two things:

1. Apple is well aware of 4K TV set sales stats and broadband speed stats in key markets.

2. The next revision/update of the Apple TV hardware will almost certainly include 4K.

The only question is when this revision will go on sale, late 2016 or 2017? (I think Apple will update the box more regularly from now on)

I too was disappointed that Apple didn't include 4K, especially since the update to ATV4 took them so long.

Anyway, home theater aficionados and true cinephiles can soon buy UHD Blu-Ray discs (I even heard they will be region-free, so one can play movies from around the world) to get the best quality. No streaming service will beat that picture/sound quality for a long time. Unfortunately UHD Blu-Ray will likely remain in a small niche given the growing popularity of streaming and high initial pricing:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/uhd-blu-ray-disc-pricing-revealed

As someone who cherishes physical movies I have to admit that it's only a matter of time before DVD and (UHD) Blu-Ray formats are relegated to a small niche, much like audio CDs today.

Maybe by 2020, or at the latest 2025. Netflix service going global as of January 2016 is a sign of the times...

 

[benjitek]

Why the curve?

Google is your friend: [Why the curve?]

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If Apple rolled out a 4K Apple TV tomorrow I would never buy it. Even though I am in the market to purchase another ATV.

I'll wait until 4K is truly baked.

OK, and if Apple rolls out a 4K TV tomorrow, I'd buy at least one. So we cancel each other out.

And 1080p is not "fully baked" either. Some of the possible improvements to 4K could be applied to 1080p too... and 720p. But you've already embraced one of those anyway, haven't you?

I hope Apple does roll out a 4KTV tomorrow (and I just bought a "4" a few weeks ago). Much like the day they finally rolled out a 1080p version, the vast majority of the anti-1080p sentiment just evaporated. I expect the same in the anti-4K sentiment as soon as Apple endorses it in a "5"... except apparently from you... though I will be watching for you to show up in those threads finding fault with Apple for embracing 4K (even though I don't expect that to happen).

[doublepost=1452795144][/doublepost]

The only question is when this revision will go on sale, late 2016 or 2017? (I think Apple will update the box more regularly from now on)

If I was a betting man, I'd look at what preceded the launch of the "3". iPhone could record 1080p but had no Apple "just works" way to push that 1080p to a 1080p TV. Then iPad inherited iPhone's 1080p cameras so it too could shoot 1080p but had no "just works" path to a 1080p TV. THEN we got the TV3 "now with 1080p."

iPhones just got the ability to shoot 4K. Next Fall, iPads will probably inherit iPhone's 4K camera. At that event or soon thereafter, I expect TV5 "now with 4K."

1 iteration does not make a pattern but I'd bet that way anyway. It's hard for me to imagine Apple clinging to 1080p for 3-4 more years when almost everything else that is comparable has already gone 4K... and their most important product can already shoot 4K but has no "just works" way to flow that video to anyone's 4K TV.

 

[A7ibaba]

So basicly i must buy new 4K TV. And i bought 1920 panasonic plasma two years ago.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

No. Better hardware doesn't force anyone to buy anything. When Apple rolled out the "3", those with 720p HDTVs did not have to "throw out" their sets. The better hardware just fed it 720p. A 4KTV connected to a 1080p (or 720p) HDTV will easily feed that set 1080p (or 720p) to it's MAX... just as improvements in Macs or iDevice hardware doesn't automatically mean we have to throw away everything hooked to the Macs or iDevices they replace.

And just as iTunes continued to offer 720p and SD file options for downloading after the "3" launched, I expect iTunes will continue to offer 1080p, 720p and SD file options for downloading after the "5" launches.

Bottom line: A 4KTV launch has NO EFFECT whatsoever on anyone happy with the status quo... or even the former status quo pre "3". What it does do is let the 4K early adopters buy an Apple product to cover their wants too. IMO, that seems like a better idea than basically encouraging them to buy non-Apple products because they want their accessory items to maximize their new TVs (and perhaps play the 4K they shoot on their iPhones at 4K on their 4K TVs).

 

[Beerstalker]

Silly question; is there anything hardware wise preventing the Apple TV 4 from supporting 4K ? I'm guessing "maybe" the hardware to decode presumably H.265 ? I know the A8 is able to support it and so is the HDMI port.

If there's nothing preventing the hardware from supporting it, perhaps Apple will enable 4K when iTunes supports 4K ?

Yes and no. The HDMI hardware in it can theoretically support 4K resolution, so the Apple TV 4 could be updated to do so. However, the movie/TV studios are requiring HDCP 2.2 for all 4K transmission of their material over HDMI. HDCP 2.2 is only available in HDMI 2.0, which the Apple TV does not have.

So do you really think that Apple would bother updating the Apple TV 4 to output 4K resolution for just home videos, the home screen, apps, and games? I do not think they will bother. They will wait until they are ready to add 4K movies to the app store, and then release the Apple TV 5 with HDMI 2.0/HDCP 2.2 hardware. I think now that there is an actual "ULTRA HD PREMIUM" specification and certification process we might see them do that later this year/early next year.

As for iTunes copies/UV copies, I personally enter all the codes in now. I found that quite a few of my early ones expired and I decided if I was paying extra for them I might as well enter the codes and get them before they expire. I very seldom use any of them though. I don't think I have ever streamed or downloaded any of my UV movies. I have used more of my iTunes copies for when I go on trips, but that's about it. If I'm at home, or going to a friends/relatives house to watch a movie I bring my Blu-Ray copy. Heck I still pack up a blu-ray player and bring 20 or so discs with me to the hunting cabin every year for deer season, rather than messing with UV/iTunes copies. We don't have internet service there at all so streaming is useless.