Why 4K mattered on ATV4...

[Snoopy4]

I don't believe this is true at all. HDMI 2.0/HDCP 2.2 means different hardware.

There are no physical differences, so its a question of whether or not the device was prepped for HDMI 2.0 and/or HDCP 2.2 or not. The device itself may be ready, but the firmware and software needs an update to support it. Getting from HDMI 1.4 to 2.0a is not a problem if it was built 2.0a ready.

On HDMI Support:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/hdmi-2-0-explained/

As to the issue of HDCP 2.2 support, that's a separate matter, but it is possible to use a firmware update if (big if) they built the device to support it. The rest of your communication chain has to support 2.2 so that's a whole other mess. If you look at the back of the first BD player, there are two HDMI's. One to run to the receiver, the other to the display. That's a pretty ugly work around. My display and the BD player will support it, but my processor will not so that's going to cost some money.

That said, if the HDMI can be updated from 1.4 to 2.0a by firmware, then the ATV4 as a device would be able to support 4K film at 24/30 FPS which would be bueno. I still want my stinking 7.1 audio!

 

[Beerstalker]

HDMI 2.0a is a firmware upgrade to HDMI 2.0, not HDMI 1.4 as far as I can tell.

http://www.hdmi.org/press/press_release.aspx?prid=138

HDCP 2.2 is what really matters though. What would Apple have to gain by putting in hardware that could support HDCP 2.2, but not telling including that in the spec sheets? If the current Apple TV4 could support 4K why wouldn't Apple be telling everyone that now? Even if they had to say that it supports 4K, but 4K content won't be available in the iTunes store until later this year? Doing so would help them sell a lot more Apple TVs and get rid of all this complaining that is going on about why they didn't include it. I'm pretty sure they have done similar things like that before.

Why would Apple spend the extra money to include hardware that could do 4K now, but not talk about it, but then only include 10/100 ethernet instead of gigabit?

I think the Apple TV4 was designed and built a while ago and has been waiting for release until they could get their TV streaming package going. They finally realized that getting the TV streaming package deals in place was going to take too long and didn't want to hold the hardware back any longer so they finally released it. That way they can use it to start building up the app store and ironing out all the bugs. Then once that ecosystem has been built up, the 4K standards have been settled, etc. they can release the Apple TV5 with 4K@60fps/HDR/4:4:4/etc or whatever they end up being. By that time everyone will be complaining that it doesn't support 8K and we will have threads just like this again.

 

[mattopotamus]

HDMI 2.0a is a firmware upgrade to HDMI 2.0, not HDMI 1.4 as far as I can tell.

http://www.hdmi.org/press/press_release.aspx?prid=138

HDCP 2.2 is what really matters though. What would Apple have to gain by putting in hardware that could support HDCP 2.2, but not telling including that in the spec sheets? If the current Apple TV4 could support 4K why wouldn't Apple be telling everyone that now? Even if they had to say that it supports 4K, but 4K content won't be available in the iTunes store until later this year? Doing so would help them sell a lot more Apple TVs and get rid of all this complaining that is going on about why they didn't include it. I'm pretty sure they have done similar things like that before.

Why would Apple spend the extra money to include hardware that could do 4K now, but not talk about it, but then only include 10/100 ethernet instead of gigabit?

I think the Apple TV4 was designed and built a while ago and has been waiting for release until they could get their TV streaming package going. They finally realized that getting the TV streaming package deals in place was going to take too long and didn't want to hold the hardware back any longer so they finally released it. That way they can use it to start building up the app store and ironing out all the bugs. Then once that ecosystem has been built up, the 4K standards have been settled, etc. they can release the Apple TV5 with 4K@60fps/HDR/4:4:4/etc or whatever they end up being. By that time everyone will be complaining that it doesn't support 8K and we will have threads just like this again.

I think everyone should just agree the current ATV will not do 4K and move on. Anyone thinking otherwise is living in a fantasy.

 

[tanfan]

Some of the early adopters wont have all the benefits designed into the new standard but most, will have most of it. The little things missing are stuff that most people probably wouldn't notice the difference anyway. That said the early adopter phase is over. 4K TVs are everyplace and cheap. There is also more content than most think. The Roku 4 has more than a dozen apps/channels with 4K video.......UltraFlix was added recently and they claim to have over 1000 4K movies available, and 4K is all they do....
.....http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-t...e-on-roku-4-streaming-rental-ultra-hd-movies/

Apple won't add 4K until itunes becomes one of the places to get 4K.

 

[shandyman]

That said the early adopter phase is over. 4K TVs are everyplace and cheap.

£400 ($560) is not 'cheap' for a tv. That's how much they're starting from here in the UK.

Also, Ultraflix is rental only.

 

[mattopotamus]

Some of the early adopters wont have all the benefits designed into the new standard but most, will have most of it. The little things missing are stuff that most people probably wouldn't notice the difference anyway. That said the early adopter phase is over. 4K TVs are everyplace and cheap. There is also more content than most think. The Roku 4 has more than a dozen apps/channels with 4K video.......UltraFlix was added recently and they claim to have over 1000 4K movies available, and 4K is all they do....
.....http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-t...e-on-roku-4-streaming-rental-ultra-hd-movies/

Apple won't add 4K until itunes becomes one of the places to get 4K.

To be fair, the cheap 4K sets are the ones not quite up to par in the spec standpoint. You are looking at least $2K for a low end set (when on sale) that will support HDR and most are more than that.

 

[tanfan]

Cheap is a relative term I guess, but go ahead and blow holes, views will quickly change when Apple supports 4K in itunes and Apple TV, I'm guessing.....even if that's next month lol

 

[shandyman]

Cheap is a relative term I guess, but go ahead and blow holes, views will quickly change when Apple supports 4K in itunes and Apple TV, I'm guessing.....even if that's next month lol

It can be, but not at £400.... You could buy 2 1080p TV's for that amount....

 

[off_piste]

£400 ($560) is not 'cheap' for a tv. That's how much they're starting from here in the UK.

Also, Ultraflix is rental only.

I've seen 50" 4K sets for under $600. That's cheap. 60" for under a $1000. That's cheap. I'm not buying sets at that quality level but I'm overly particular about my picture quality.

 

[shandyman]

I've seen 50" 4K sets for under $600. That's cheap. 60" for under a $1000. That's cheap. I'm not buying sets at that quality level but I'm overly particular about my picture quality.

In the UK, it's $560 for 42" and that's the starting level. Maybe it's cheaper in the US, but the US is not the be all and end all.

 

[off_piste]

In the UK, it's $560 for 42" and that's the starting level. Maybe it's cheaper in the US, but the US is not the be all and end all.

Who said it is? It does, however, account for more than a third of all TVs in the industrialized world. In the emerging world China has nearly half of all those TVs. Both the US and China are transitioning to 4K with China actually being ahead of the US. It's prices are also cheaper than in the US.

So, while neither China nor the US are "the be all and end all" both are clearly driving the technology through sheer buying power. Rather than getting your feathers ruffled in some inadequacy-fueled yet imagined slight (this one is real) you can save your pounds and let us poor schmucks drive the price down for you.

 

[mattopotamus]

I've seen 50" 4K sets for under $600. That's cheap. 60" for under a $1000. That's cheap. I'm not buying sets at that quality level but I'm overly particular about my picture quality.

I'll tell you now, you're not getting any good PQ from a $1000 4K set. If you think you are, you are not particular about PQ.

 

[off_piste]

I'll tell you now, you're not getting any good PQ from a $1000 4K set. If you think you are, you are not particular about PQ.

It's all relative. If you're one who buys TVs on the low end of the spectrum it will look better than a similar class 1080p set.

 

[Snoopy4]

I don't believe this is true at all. HDMI 2.0/HDCP 2.2 means different hardware. Look at all the 4K TVs out there that have multiple HDMI inputs but only have one or two of them that are HDMI 2.0/HDCP 2.2 capable. It it was just a software change then why wouldn't all of them be compatible? Not to mention all of the 4K TVs that have been sold that don't have any HDMI 2.0/HDCP 2.2 ports at all, and will never be able to display 4K material from a Roku/Apple TV/ UHD Blu-Ray player/etc.

They aren't compatible because they weren't built to support HDCP 2.2. While they can't support HDCP 2.2 many can be upgraded to support HDMI 2.0a with firmware allowing them to support 4K. HDCP 2.2 will take some time to uptake because every device in the chain has to support it or the feed gets limited. That gets expensive for everyone because you couldn't buy a product with HDCP 2.2 until late last year. For me it means a new $3000-4000 processor. I'm looking at the Marantz to replace my beloved Lexicon because it appears Lexicon has wandered off into la la land.

That said, the hardware required for HDCP 2.2 would have been available for ATV4 and could have been built in awaiting a firmware update. If it was built in, but not active, then it is possible to upgrade. If not, then it will take a new device. My hunch is it can be upgraded to HDMI 2.0a, but not HDCP 2.2, but we won't know unless Apple tells us. They only give us the specs it has in the now.

I don't believe Apple is ready to stream 4K in terms of actually having any content storage ready to go so it is likely they will transition first to H.265 and improve the 1080p feeds and add 7.1 audio then begin to transition to UHD/HDR once ATV5 appears. That will drive their adoption, not availability of 4K on Netflix. I'm hopeful the H.265 is around the corner because I'd like to use ATV in the theater, but the PQ just isn't there yet when it gets blown up on a 100" screen. It's an absolute mess when a scene gets busy like the train wreck in Super 8 or tornados in Twister. If anything, these streaming devices has made content management a breeze. I looked for years at a system like Kalaidescape to do this, but it was so damn expensive I couldn't justify it.

I also wonder how much the new flying saucer they are building has to do with server rack space for all of this. Does anyone know if the new HQ has massive storage racks planned as a component of it? If they intend to start streaming 4K that's going to take massive data storage.

As for the competitors....

Roku is good to go, NVIDIA shield is good to go, and Amazon Fire TV is also good to go per their websites with regard to HDMI 2.0a and HDCP 2.2. ATV5 better come pretty quickly if this device can't be upgraded.

 

[macaximx]

They aren't compatible because they weren't built to support HDCP 2.2. While they can't support HDCP 2.2 many can be upgraded to support HDMI 2.0a with firmware allowing them to support 4K. HDCP 2.2 will take some time to uptake because every device in the chain has to support it or the feed gets limited. That gets expensive for everyone because you couldn't buy a product with HDCP 2.2 until late last year. For me it means a new $3000-4000 processor. I'm looking at the Marantz to replace my beloved Lexicon because it appears Lexicon has wandered off into la la land.

That said, the hardware required for HDCP 2.2 would have been available for ATV4 and could have been built in awaiting a firmware update. If it was built in, but not active, then it is possible to upgrade. If not, then it will take a new device. My hunch is it can be upgraded to HDMI 2.0a, but not HDCP 2.2, but we won't know unless Apple tells us. They only give us the specs it has in the now.

I don't believe Apple is ready to stream 4K in terms of actually having any content storage ready to go so it is likely they will transition first to H.265 and improve the 1080p feeds and add 7.1 audio then begin to transition to UHD/HDR once ATV5 appears. That will drive their adoption, not availability of 4K on Netflix. I'm hopeful the H.265 is around the corner because I'd like to use ATV in the theater, but the PQ just isn't there yet when it gets blown up on a 100" screen. It's an absolute mess when a scene gets busy like the train wreck in Super 8 or tornados in Twister. If anything, these streaming devices has made content management a breeze. I looked for years at a system like Kalaidescape to do this, but it was so damn expensive I couldn't justify it.

I also wonder how much the new flying saucer they are building has to do with server rack space for all of this. Does anyone know if the new HQ has massive storage racks planned as a component of it? If they intend to start streaming 4K that's going to take massive data storage.

As for the competitors....

Roku is good to go, NVIDIA shield is good to go, and Amazon Fire TV is also good to go per their websites with regard to HDMI 2.0a and HDCP 2.2. ATV5 better come pretty quickly if this device can't be upgraded.

I agree with your points. I am waiting for the specs of the new TVs and Receivers to make sure each device is compliant. HD Audio is important to me. Would love to see the TV 5 stream UHD HDR material with HDAudio.

 

[Beerstalker]

Yes, HD audio is one thing that I am disappointed with in the ATV4. Dolby TrueHD and DTS HDMA have been around for quite a while now and Apple should have included them.

Dolby Atmos, DTS-X, Auro 3D are still pretty niche and I can understand skipping out on them for now. Those should be added with the Apple TV 5 along with Ultra HD Premium certification.