Developer alleges spotting new Apple TV model, unannounced 'tvOS 11' in use logs

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited March 16
Developer Firi Games claims to have seen a single instance of an unreleased Apple TV, running a new version of tvOS -- which may be the postulated 4K version of the product thought to be in testing.




First reported by MacRumors, developer Firi Games claims that it has seen a Cupertino IP address using an "AppleTV6,2" running "tvOS 11.0" to play one of their games. Apple's fourth-generation Apple TV with Siri Remote is an "AppleTV5,3."

The device ID, OS version, and IP address could be faked, so the veracity of the report is unverified.

However, a report in February claimed that a new 4K Apple TV is being tested by Apple, and is codenamed "J105." The device is said to debut as soon as this year, is said by Bloomberg's Mark Gurman to feature the higher resolution, and "more vivid colors." Internal hardware designation and product family identifications differ.

Apple's set-top box has been stuck at 1080p resolution since March 2012, when the third generation of the device was revealed to customers. Presumably, a 4K bump would also include a an upgrade to the A8 processor in the current model to handle the higher resolution -- even though the A8 can reportedly handle 4K.

The October 2015 update of the Apple TV to the fourth generation added the aforementioned A8 processor, Siri search, and the ability for the device to run apps rather than rely on pre-installed services. Apple released tvOS 10 in September 2016 for the $149 device, and the latest beta release of tvOS 10.2 was released on Tuesday.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    sog35sog35 Posts: 12,408member
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    lmagoocali
  • Reply 2 of 47
    jason98jason98 Posts: 734member
    sog35 said:
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    The bizarre part here is that Apple sells 4k recording devices since iPhone 6s...
    edited March 16 lmagoocaliSpamSandwichSoliwilliamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 47
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 29,101member
    Well, you know that Apple follows, they don't lead in many things.

    Sometimes they do, but not as much as they used to. I guess they have been waiting for more 4K Tvs to be sold, and for more 4K content to come out. I'm not so sure that's a great plan though, because they give up that market to others, even if the new standard isn't really usable at the time.

    People are remarkably cheap, and won't buy one unit, only to buy a new one two, or three, years later, even if it doesn't cost much. That's why the Google and Amazon USB Tv devices have done so well. They're extremely cheap, and seem to work well enough. Apple needs a really cheap device for this too.
    edited March 16
  • Reply 4 of 47
    bellsbells Posts: 44member
    sog35 said:
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Engineering is about balance.  At the time 4G didn't make sense from Apples perspective for variety reasons.  I bought one and found  it perfectly acceptable. 
    StrangeDayslolliverdaven
  • Reply 5 of 47
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 1,413member
    sog35 said:

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Complete nonsense. 15 months ago even fewer people cared about 4k than they do today. The mass market consumer is still happy w/ 1080p (anecdotally, I'm an enterprise developer and I have no plans to replace my 1080p plasma any time soon, especially with a crummier LCD tv). iTunes doesn't even offer any 4k content and nobody is crying about it, they certainly weren't 15 months ago.

    Will the new ATV offer it? Very likely. But that doesn't mean Apple needed to be engaged in the spec wars at its earliest opportunity. Ain't how Apple rolls, bubba. You should know that, but not knowing it is why you're a poor investor.
    edited March 16 king editor the grateeightzeroMetriacanthosauruslolliverwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 47
    neilmneilm Posts: 475member
    melgross said:
    Apple needs a really cheap device for this too.
    Which isn't going to happen, any more than it has with any other product line.
    Apple doesn't do cheap.
    edited March 16 StrangeDaysMetriacanthosauruslolliverwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 47
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 1,413member
    melgross said:
    Well, you know that Apple follows, they don't lead in many things.
    You're missing your sarcasm tag I think. Apple certainly leads, but they don't rush to play the spec game -- they lead by building things that generally work better than the competition. Case in point, while I don't like it's symmetricalness, I love the operation of a touch-based remote -- swipe-scrubbing is way better than button cycling. I no longer reach for my Harmony One because touch is that much better -- especially with the instant thumbnails at all times. And asking the remote "What did he say" for rewind + temporary captions is genius.
    People are remarkably cheap, and won't buy one unit, only to buy a new one two, or three, years later, even if it doesn't cost much. 
    Care to explain cell phones? People (normals) routinely replace them every couple of years, and they aren't cheap devices.
    edited March 16 calilolliverwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 1,726member
    sog35 said:

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Complete nonsense. 15 months ago even fewer people cared about 4k than they do today. The mass market consumer is still happy w/ 1080p (anecdotally, I'm an enterprise developer and I have no plans to replace my 1080p plasma any time soon, especially with a crummier LCD tv). iTunes doesn't even offer any 4k content and nobody is crying about it, they certainly weren't 15 months ago.

    Will the new ATV offer it? Very likely. But that doesn't mean Apple needed to be engaged in the spec wars at its earliest opportunity. Ain't how Apple rolls, bubba. You should know that, but not knowing it is why you're a poor investor.
    I think that a lot of early 4K adopters will end up upgrading to get HDR, which is, in my opinion, the real benefit over 1080p, so I would be very happy to purchase a new Apple 4K TV if it supports HDR.
    cali
  • Reply 9 of 47
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 1,709member
    melgross said:
    Well, you know that Apple follows, they don't lead in many things.
    You're missing your sarcasm tag I think. Apple certainly leads, but they don't rush to play the spec game -- they lead by building things that generally work better than the competition. Case in point, while I don't like it's symmetricalness, I love the operation of a touch-based remote -- swipe-scrubbing is way better than button cycling. I no longer reach for my Harmony One because touch is that much better -- especially with the instant thumbnails at all times. And asking the remote "What did he say" for rewind + temporary captions is genius.
    People are remarkably cheap, and won't buy one unit, only to buy a new one two, or three, years later, even if it doesn't cost much. 
    Care to explain cell phones? People (normals) routinely replace them every couple of years, and they aren't cheap devices.
    Actually, he's right. Apple doesn't lead. What Apple does is watch others stumble and then use that knowledge to build a better product. They watched Microsoft struggle with tablets for 10 years before they released the iPad. 
    pscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 47
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 3,233member
    melgross said:
    Well, you know that Apple follows, they don't lead in many things.

    Sometimes they do, but not as much as they used to. I guess they have been waiting for more 4K Tvs to be sold, and for more 4K content to come out. I'm not so sure that's a great plan though, because they give up that market to others, even if the new standard isn't really usable at the time.

    People are remarkably cheap, and won't buy one unit, only to buy a new one two, or three, years later, even if it doesn't cost much. That's why the Google and Amazon USB Tv devices have done so well. They're extremely cheap, and seem to work well enough. Apple needs a really cheap device for this too.
    Initially, 4K sets had all sort of limitations, no HDR and pretty crappy pictures all around (most people think they look better because they're looking at 4K stream vs 1080P stream which are encoded at a much lower bitrate, an indictment of 1080P streams but not 1080P).  Most of those sets were also ridiculously small, which means 4K meant jack shit (was merely there for marketing reason and because panel makers had switched to 4K panels with higher profit margins....).

    Also, the Apple TV couldn't run the UI or games in 4K, so it would be a crappy 4K with everything else in 1080P.

    As penetration of 4K increases and certain standards and trends coalescence, Apple can build a good product to serve the upper end of the market that will last a few years instead of being an half assed product that serves it half way for 1-2 year.

    Most of those Google and Amazon USB crap have an abysmal response time, slow as sludge. Many people don't care about quality, but those people aren't usually buying Apple's stuff.
    edited March 16 jony0tmaybrucemclolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 47
    sog35sog35 Posts: 12,408member
    sog35 said:

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Complete nonsense. 15 months ago even fewer people cared about 4k than they do today. The mass market consumer is still happy w/ 1080p (anecdotally, I'm an enterprise developer and I have no plans to replace my 1080p plasma any time soon, especially with a crummier LCD tv). iTunes doesn't even offer any 4k content and nobody is crying about it, they certainly weren't 15 months ago.

    Will the new ATV offer it? Very likely. But that doesn't mean Apple needed to be engaged in the spec wars at its earliest opportunity. Ain't how Apple rolls, bubba. You should know that, but not knowing it is why you're a poor investor.
    No 4k content?  How about those friken 4k videos you've been filming on you iPhone 6s and iPhone 7 the past 2 years? Or even damn photos that have a higher resolution than 1080p?
    edited March 17
  • Reply 12 of 47
    sog35sog35 Posts: 12,408member
    bells said:
    sog35 said:
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Engineering is about balance.  At the time 4G didn't make sense from Apples perspective for variety reasons.  I bought one and found  it perfectly acceptable. 
    It would literally cost pennies for Apple to include 4k on the ATV4.

    The only logical reason why they didn't include it was to upsell when the ATV5 comes out. 

    As an Apple shareholder and fan, its pretty shameful
  • Reply 13 of 47
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 1,521member
    It is possible a 4k refresh is relatively easy to do. New processor and some software and you're ready to go. How useful or desirable it is is a separate question. I have no need or desire to upgrade just for 4k. YMMV.

    That said, if the refresh contains a coaxial antenna jack on the back and a couple of OTA tuners in the box, hell yeah I'm buying.

  • Reply 14 of 47
    wigbywigby Posts: 556member
    sog35 said:
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Unacceptable to the 10% of people like you that bought into 4K. Is it really unacceptable to the other 90% that don't know or care about 4K? Ask Amazon Fire and Roku customers who bought into 4K too. Hey can count the 4K content yhey watch on one hand. Apple has a huge catalog and customer base to convert to 4K. That being said, I would expect 4K Apple TV support this year. The only question is does Apple release a lower price 1080p next to the 4K model?
    Metriacanthosauruswilliamlondon
  • Reply 15 of 47
    wigbywigby Posts: 556member
    sog35 said:
    bells said:
    sog35 said:
    Friken finally.

    I got a 4k tv last year and are dying to run 4k media on it. 

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Engineering is about balance.  At the time 4G didn't make sense from Apples perspective for variety reasons.  I bought one and found  it perfectly acceptable. 
    It would literally cost pennies for Apple to include 4k on the ATV4.

    The only logical reason why they didn't include it was to upsell when the ATV5 comes out. 

    As an Apple shareholder and fan, its pretty shameful
    It would cost a few bucks but the catalog and bandwidth is what costs a lot more. They have to uprez the largest legal movie and TV catalog available on the Internet. Since no one wants to see some titles only in 1080p and some in 4K, Apple has to wait for the studios both for technical reasons and for contractual reasons. It's not trivial and not cheap when you try to release all titles in 4K to 100 countries in one day. And on top of that there's all the developers that need to uprezz assets too.
    lolliverwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 47
    jason98jason98 Posts: 734member
    wigby said:
    Unacceptable to the 10% of people like you that bought into 4K. Is it really unacceptable to the other 90% that don't know or care about 4K? Ask Amazon Fire and Roku customers who bought into 4K too. 
    Better ask 200m+ iPhone 6s / 7 owners who tape videos in 4K since 2015.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 17 of 47
    wigbywigby Posts: 556member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Complete nonsense. 15 months ago even fewer people cared about 4k than they do today. The mass market consumer is still happy w/ 1080p (anecdotally, I'm an enterprise developer and I have no plans to replace my 1080p plasma any time soon, especially with a crummier LCD tv). iTunes doesn't even offer any 4k content and nobody is crying about it, they certainly weren't 15 months ago.

    Will the new ATV offer it? Very likely. But that doesn't mean Apple needed to be engaged in the spec wars at its earliest opportunity. Ain't how Apple rolls, bubba. You should know that, but not knowing it is why you're a poor investor.
    No 4k content?  How about those friken 4k videos you've been filming on you iPhone 6s and iPhone 7 the past 2 years? Or even damn photos that have a higher resolution than 1080p?
    Who is watching 4K home videos on Apple TV? You might be but 90% of Apple TV users don't care because they don't even have 4K TVs.
    edited March 17 Metriacanthosauruslolliverwilliamlondon
  • Reply 18 of 47
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,478member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:

    It really was unacceptable that ATV4 did not have 4k.
    Complete nonsense. 15 months ago even fewer people cared about 4k than they do today. The mass market consumer is still happy w/ 1080p (anecdotally, I'm an enterprise developer and I have no plans to replace my 1080p plasma any time soon, especially with a crummier LCD tv). iTunes doesn't even offer any 4k content and nobody is crying about it, they certainly weren't 15 months ago.

    Will the new ATV offer it? Very likely. But that doesn't mean Apple needed to be engaged in the spec wars at its earliest opportunity. Ain't how Apple rolls, bubba. You should know that, but not knowing it is why you're a poor investor.
    No 4k content?  How about those friken 4k videos you've been filming on you iPhone 6s and iPhone 7 the past 2 years? Or even damn photos that have a higher resolution than 1080p?
    Who spends much time sitting around browsing their own photos or watching the videos they filmed on a television set?  A couple of times and I'm done with that.  It's certainly not the kind of thing that would make me happy that I bought a 4K television set and a 4K-capable set-top box for.  Woo hoo.  Look what I can watch!!!

    The previous poster is right.  Most television watchers want to watch television shows, not flip through their own private media, and there hasn't been very much 4K content available.  The fact that the only thing you could come up with was privately captured photos and videos pretty much confirms that there isn't enough actual content out there.
    edited March 17 lolliverwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 47
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 1,521member
    jason98 said:
    wigby said:
    Unacceptable to the 10% of people like you that bought into 4K. Is it really unacceptable to the other 90% that don't know or care about 4K? Ask Amazon Fire and Roku customers who bought into 4K too. 
    Better ask 200m+ iPhone 6s / 7 owners who tape videos in 4K since 2015.
    I have an iPhone 7 right here in my hand. I had to hunt around to figure out if I had the thing set to record 4k, because I've got the 32GB model, and it would be a huge waste of storage if I was shooting in 4k. I'm actually kinda pissed it isn't more obvious how to turn this *off*.
  • Reply 20 of 47
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 1,521member
    I did notice that the Canadian telecom Rodgers has been heavily promoting 4k for NHL games. It seems like 4k's long suit would be sports - you can get the sharp image of that puck over the line, or the ball out of bounds - but of course the cameras at these games take a big investment too. Sports is a huge market, and I would have expected the NFL for sure to be pushing this. Its a selling point and reason to charge more for the sports packages like Sunday Ticket.
Sign In or Register to comment.