atlapple wrote: »
It would actually be easy. Apple already has the UI and ecosystem in place. The game developers would simply have to code for another console made by Apple, then Apple just supplies the hardware needed. Right now gamers have two real options Xbox One and PS4. Both are trying to do multimedia, Xbox One comes with a limited amount of Apps to download, Internet Explorer and online content. All Apple really needs to do is increase the hardware specs on Apple TV.
What people on this forum wanted:
Full touch screen remote
Dolby Atmos, TrueHD, DTS-HD audio
Dedicated game pads
What most of the population want:
Easy to use search = universal, Siri, touch interface
Some cool apps.
IMO, Apple delivered what the mass market wants. They will sell tens of millions of these. If Apple released the hardcore $399 device they would probabily have a hard time selling a million of them.
I agree with this. The cost of making the latest A-chip is probably pretty expensive relatively speaking which is why we only see these thing in the latest iPhones that have a cost of over $500 off contract. The A8 has more than enough juice to run a 1080p screen since the iPhone 6 Plus is this product now. Apple is already featuring third party gaming controllers figuring that not all users are going to want gaming pads anyway.
I am a little mystified on the 4K thing though. This is the first real year for 4K in the mass market. Most of the TV manufacturers have 4K sets squarely in the middle range of the market now with 1080p getting pushed to the bottom and still available in some of the biggest sizes for the price sensitive buyer (but fewer models). The iPhone 6S now shoots 4K as it stands, the only product that can view that video in Apple's product line is the iMac 5K and the Mac Pro with third party screens (I'm sure there will be a Mac event in a month to update those). And HDMI 2.0 to drive 4K @60fps is readily available now.
The A8 is an awesome chip but perhaps it's not enough to drive 4K for gaming. The A8X is more expensive. The A9s are all spoken for with the iPhones and iPad Pro.
As an owner of multiple Apple TV1's and 2's, and long time Apple zealot, I'll be one to say this isn't the best STB on the market. I was VERY underwhelmed by it and what it can do NOW. And in the end, that's what matters.
If it can only do about the same stuff (and less) as an Amazon $25-$40 FireTV Stick (which I now have on every TV in my house) - why would I pay $149 for ONE, NOW? (And yes, I know the voice remote doesn't come with the FTV Stick, but it does if you use the free remote app.)Forget all the possibilities of what it can do in the FUTURE. Mass adoption means INSTANT gratification. Can my mother shop on Amazon from the NEW Apple TV? Because I doubt she or 99% of users will ever shop GILT. LOL.And if this is what's NEW to the Apple TV TODAY, and the next version of the Fire TV is certainly coming soon, whether the more sound technological platform or not, the public is going to swarm that $39 FireTV Stick. Every. Time. Just watch.Oh, and what was I expecting? Some kind of a la carte video services. Ability to connect, catalog, and playback your personal video library that's NOT stored in iTunes or iCloud. Maybe SOME kind of integration with standard cable or satellite STBs - an "Apple layer" guided by Siri that somehow allowed you to search outside of the specified handful of apps it DOES search.
Does anyone know for sure if they consolidated the "Computer" icon into the Movies/TV Shows icons? It looks like it base on the picture, but I'm hoping I can now pick "Movies" and see all content to stream from my iTunes library mixed in with the cloud.
sog35 wrote: »
you need to upgrade to HDMI receiver
thrang wrote: »
I'll get one, as it shows promise but I'm not jumping out of my socks yet...I hope it supports 4k, and will be followed by a 4K option in the iTunes Store.
But the 800 pound elephant in the room is Apple could not, apparently, break the existing distribution paradigm for television content. Nothing that comes close to being able to cut the cable cord. For a device called Apple TV, there was very little talk of television.
blazar wrote: »
1. It is better than the current appletv on several fronts.
2. It creates more reasons for tv show producers to get on apple TV. They can sell apps related to their TV shows for example.
3. A few people will play games, perhaps even ad sponsored games. Ios and AX processors can scale and improve MUCH faster than the playstation iterations. Underestimating apple in this regard is a mistake.
4. At least some of the apps will be useful, but many you wont care about due to redundancy on your phone.
5. Clearly many were wishing for a full scale 4k gaming behemoth... I am one of those people. I feel like apple should have taken this bull by the horns. With metal/swift, they are ready to do this if they had game studio enthusiasm. I suspect they need to convince game developers that they can get a large established base of hardware.
I envision the huge and success ios games will be ported to apple tv so that you can continue a game you were playing on your phone...
You mind putting these thoughts and words in a sequence where we can understand their meaning?
Watch it again tonight...
i did not hear her say that, though to be honest, I was taking my hot dogs out of the broiler...
But it was very odd that was not mentioned prominently - even when they showed the image of the back panel, they didn't reference which version of HDMI. I think the HW may still be in flux, as there were no video and audio specs, which they often summarize on a slide.
This is especially so with the 4k video focus on the new iPhones.
H.264 video up to 1080p, 60 frames per second, High or Main Profile level 4.2 or lower
H.264 Baseline Profile level 3.0 or lower with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
MPEG-4 video up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
Just watched that segment again - no 4k mention, she says shot in HD...
mcdave wrote: »
I hate the app model but whatever she's selling, I'm buying. She could have presented a pineapple with cocktail sticks shoved in it and I'd have been sold!
sog35 wrote: »
Did anyone think the iPhone/iPad would bring an end to portable gaming in 2007?
sog35 wrote: »
Hell no. It takes time for devs to make games. At least 12 months or more to make really great games. And no way any of the devs got dev kits for the new AppleTV earlier than last month.
Really disappointed to see the deletion of the optical out. That may well be the deal breaker for me. I mainly stream music (to my amp) and films/TV programmes (to my TV) from my mac mini so a lot of the other new features are irrelevant to me. A lot of what was demo'd (especially Siri) just seemed to be to get me to buy/rent films and TV series. Still £120 (guess) isn't a huge amount of money so I may ask Santa for one anyway.
Also I can't seem to find the answer to this, so if anyone knows please reply: will my ATV3 get the new TV-OS or is it hamstrung by its slow processor and lack of storage?
Apple always does this. They lay the foundation, which is never as "amazing" as everyone was thinking/hoping, and then slowly builds. After a few short years their product is 1000x more amazing than anyone had originally imagined.
It gets old sometimes.
This is a bummer, though HDMI 1.4a can play UHD up to 30 fps at 4:2:0 colors space I believe, so this could support 4k films based content at 23.976
No mention of H.256 support at this time either on the spec page...