The 2013 Apple TV uses a single core Cortex-A9 CPU and a single SGX 543 MP1. It's like a 6x6 mm SoC. What, $5 per chip for that? Wouldn't be surprised if the BOM is $40.
If I'm not mistaken it's using a dual-core SoC that has one of the cores disabled, which is likely the result of the dual-core chip not being good enough for t's primary usage in an iDevice. This means those Apple TV chips are essentially free for Apple since they would have otherwise been junk.
Hmmm...will the A6 or A7 even support 4k resolution? This would be very nice to see and would put it out in front of its competition in that respect. I don't think any of its competition has 4k at this point and depending on what processor/video they have in it, it could take a little bit for them to catchup. The biggest thing if Apple gets 4k, is it needs to get content on the AppleTV in 4k or else obviously its worthless.
It depends on the content. I know some people who claim that the 3rd generation Apple TV is glitchy with fast action movies, but I've never seen it with my own or my friends'. The 3rd generation Apple TV is probably fast enough to display very easy 4K content.
I suspect the timing of the 4th generation Apple TV might depend in part on Apple signing new contracts with the content providers.
Wonder what he'll say about the pending Amazon box? Roku having Amazon is a standout feature for them. It's why I bought one. An Amazon box would be a major competitor to Roku from that aspect but probably won't be a flexible as the Roku.
Given Tim Cooks mastery of supply chain management and the economies of scale Apple enjoys on component purchases, I doubt Apple is losing money on each Apple TV.
Wait a minute? A CEO is spreading FUD about a competitor's product?
How strange...
Ballmer's gone.... There's a vacuum in the Anti-Apple FUD world (don't you hear that giant sucking sound?, especially after all the MS love about the iPad yesterday)... and nature abhors a vacuum
You beat me to it. Roku makes nice hardware and has some great features but the ecosystem surrounding the iOS universe trounces everything else at the moment. Manufacturing costs are next to nothing, its a board in a plastic case. The major components are ~ 3 years old, the R&D has long been recouped.
These are words of a nervous CEO.
in a world that is about to have a a real 'damn the profits, full marketshare ahead' player in the TV internet STB world.
This is the correct thought thread. Roku could 'play' when appleTV was a 'hobby.' But Apple is reaching out to the content owners, creating 'apps' (internet channels), and having these integrate to the non STB world (ipad, iphone, ipod). And with Amazon coming into the market, Roku is now a small time player with a 6 shooter caught inbetween two powers with unlimited ordnance looking at very profitable real estate when taken at scale.
As soon as I read "Apple loses money..." in the title, I knew it was BS. Apple NEVER loses money on anything, or does that $160B+ in cash reserves contradict that?
Apple TV is a very basic product, in a lovely package. The A5 inside is 2 years old, it only has about 8GB of storage and, what 512BM of RAM - it's very cheap to build, no battery, no display. Apple are not losing money on it.
Roku 3 is actually cheaper but might even cost more to make given Roku's lower sales and lower buying power. If Roku can make money, Apple certainly can.
The biggest thing if Apple gets 4k, is it needs to get content on the AppleTV in 4k or else obviously its worthless.
The problem with 4k is the standards are still in flux. And there's things like Dolby Vision around the corner. General feeling over at AVS Forum is that more 4k displays are coming out this year, but the formats and standards to support it aren't quite there yet. It may take another year or two for that side of the equation to stabilize.
Will Apple release a 4k capable aTV without the 4k environment being rock solid (see Blu-Ray)? Or is it really all just software things that need to be finalized and will Apple feel they can follow the standards where they may end up?
TRANSLATION: "Apple TV competes so aggressively with Roku on price that we are having lots of trouble making any money selling our Roku boxes. And if Roku can't make a profit, we just don't understand how Apple can."
If Apple spent a little time on making the iPad/iPhone Remote app better, the ATV would be a much better product. Example: to switch between various apps onscreen you have to back out of the one you are in and then find the other app and go through the same procedure to relocate where you were. How about a "Last" button like every remote in the world has! Or the ability to quickly store your viewing locations so you can scroll to them. This isn't brain surgery%u2026but obviously Apple is treating the product exactly like what Jobs called it: a hobby.
Though he offered no evidence to prove it, the CEO of Roku said this week that he believes rival set-top streamer Apple TV is a money losing product.
Isn't this the CEO that likes to dress up in women's clothes? There's no evidence to prove it unfortunately but I assume it must be the case. iSuppli estimated the gross margins at 35%:
Wonder what he'll say about the pending Amazon box? Roku having Amazon is a standout feature for them. It's why I bought one. An Amazon box would be a major competitor to Roku from that aspect but probably won't be a flexible as the Roku.
Amazon says they have no plans for a streaming set-top box.
Apple doesn't sell hardware at a loss. Next question!
I do like that the CEO says "loses" instead of "looses"
Even if it did, or just break even, its still making, money off the content sold on it. Kind of the opposite of the the iTunes/iPod thingy where the iTunes store was breaking even to sell more iPods. Either way, Apple is not losing money on this product. I can't really see how he can make a statement like that anyways without something to back it up. How the hell does he know how much Apple is making off an AppleTV, how much it costs to build/sell one, etc. Maybe Apple is getting better prices than Roku.
I don't think the margins are as high as other Apple products but I would be surprised if Apple isn't making a nice profit on each sale.
If I'm not mistaken it's using a dual-core SoC that has one of the cores disabled, which is likely the result of the dual-core chip not being good enough for t's primary usage in an iDevice. This means those Apple TV chips are essentially free for Apple since they would have otherwise been junk.
You're mistaken. The 2013 AppleTV has special single core CPU, single GPU version of the A5 SoC. It's the thrird SoC since the first black puck version came out.
It originally was an A4 SoC, then a 32 nm A5 with one of cores fused off or they cherry picked failed A5 SoCs that were going to go in the iPod touch or iPad mini 1st gen. The 2013 AppleTV has a special 32 nm A5 that is half the size of the prior 32 nm A5.
There's no way they do that without getting rid of CPU/GPU cores, and maybe even one of the memory busses.
Comments
Then what does this say about Google selling a device in the same category for 1/3 the price?
If I'm not mistaken it's using a dual-core SoC that has one of the cores disabled, which is likely the result of the dual-core chip not being good enough for t's primary usage in an iDevice. This means those Apple TV chips are essentially free for Apple since they would have otherwise been junk.
Hmmm...will the A6 or A7 even support 4k resolution? This would be very nice to see and would put it out in front of its competition in that respect. I don't think any of its competition has 4k at this point and depending on what processor/video they have in it, it could take a little bit for them to catchup. The biggest thing if Apple gets 4k, is it needs to get content on the AppleTV in 4k or else obviously its worthless.
It depends on the content. I know some people who claim that the 3rd generation Apple TV is glitchy with fast action movies, but I've never seen it with my own or my friends'. The 3rd generation Apple TV is probably fast enough to display very easy 4K content.
I suspect the timing of the 4th generation Apple TV might depend in part on Apple signing new contracts with the content providers.
Given Tim Cooks mastery of supply chain management and the economies of scale Apple enjoys on component purchases, I doubt Apple is losing money on each Apple TV.
Wait a minute? A CEO is spreading FUD about a competitor's product?
How strange...
Ballmer's gone.... There's a vacuum in the Anti-Apple FUD world (don't you hear that giant sucking sound?, especially after all the MS love about the iPad yesterday)... and nature abhors a vacuum
You beat me to it. Roku makes nice hardware and has some great features but the ecosystem surrounding the iOS universe trounces everything else at the moment. Manufacturing costs are next to nothing, its a board in a plastic case. The major components are ~ 3 years old, the R&D has long been recouped.
These are words of a nervous CEO.
in a world that is about to have a a real 'damn the profits, full marketshare ahead' player in the TV internet STB world.
This is the correct thought thread. Roku could 'play' when appleTV was a 'hobby.' But Apple is reaching out to the content owners, creating 'apps' (internet channels), and having these integrate to the non STB world (ipad, iphone, ipod). And with Amazon coming into the market, Roku is now a small time player with a 6 shooter caught inbetween two powers with unlimited ordnance looking at very profitable real estate when taken at scale.
As soon as I read "Apple loses money..." in the title, I knew it was BS. Apple NEVER loses money on anything, or does that $160B+ in cash reserves contradict that?
Apple TV is a very basic product, in a lovely package. The A5 inside is 2 years old, it only has about 8GB of storage and, what 512BM of RAM - it's very cheap to build, no battery, no display. Apple are not losing money on it.
Roku 3 is actually cheaper but might even cost more to make given Roku's lower sales and lower buying power. If Roku can make money, Apple certainly can.
The guy is clearly an idiot.
The biggest thing if Apple gets 4k, is it needs to get content on the AppleTV in 4k or else obviously its worthless.
The problem with 4k is the standards are still in flux. And there's things like Dolby Vision around the corner. General feeling over at AVS Forum is that more 4k displays are coming out this year, but the formats and standards to support it aren't quite there yet. It may take another year or two for that side of the equation to stabilize.
Will Apple release a 4k capable aTV without the 4k environment being rock solid (see Blu-Ray)? Or is it really all just software things that need to be finalized and will Apple feel they can follow the standards where they may end up?
- Jasen.
I do like that the CEO says "loses" instead of "looses"
Unlike many here.
Isn't this the CEO that likes to dress up in women's clothes? There's no evidence to prove it unfortunately but I assume it must be the case. iSuppli estimated the gross margins at 35%:
https://technology.ihs.com/388826/isuppli-teardown-reveals-apple-tvs-inner-ipad
So that's some evidence vs no evidence. Hmmm, which to choose?
Amazon says they have no plans for a streaming set-top box.
Apple doesn't sell hardware at a loss. Next question!
I do like that the CEO says "loses" instead of "looses"
Even if it did, or just break even, its still making, money off the content sold on it. Kind of the opposite of the the iTunes/iPod thingy where the iTunes store was breaking even to sell more iPods. Either way, Apple is not losing money on this product. I can't really see how he can make a statement like that anyways without something to back it up. How the hell does he know how much Apple is making off an AppleTV, how much it costs to build/sell one, etc. Maybe Apple is getting better prices than Roku.
So what does that say about Roku, whose prices are generally lower than the Apple TV?
I'm also pretty certain Roku isn't taking 30% on all the people that sign up for Netflix and Hulu, as Apple does from AppleTV....
Also pretty certain Roku doesn't have a comparable offering to the iTunes Store, which is a cash cow.
You're mistaken. The 2013 AppleTV has special single core CPU, single GPU version of the A5 SoC. It's the thrird SoC since the first black puck version came out.
It originally was an A4 SoC, then a 32 nm A5 with one of cores fused off or they cherry picked failed A5 SoCs that were going to go in the iPod touch or iPad mini 1st gen. The 2013 AppleTV has a special 32 nm A5 that is half the size of the prior 32 nm A5.
There's no way they do that without getting rid of CPU/GPU cores, and maybe even one of the memory busses.
15% margins are low margins for Apple.