New Apple TV uses USB-C for service, ditches optical audio out port

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 189
    k2kw wrote: »
    This just feels 66% done.

    I think it's a nice jump over their current Apple TV offering, but it certainly doesn't bring TV out of the 1970s, to paraphrase Tim Cook, so I'd say your 66% is extremely generous. I'd say it's less than 10% done at this point, and I'd gladly explain all the reasons why I feel that way but I don't have an hour to write it all out.
  • Reply 82 of 189
    bumpman wrote: »
    Why are we using USB C for power in the MacBook but not using it for power in the ?tv?

    That's easy, the Apple TV's PSU is integrated. That means AC power goes from the Apple TV to the wall outlet. With pretty much everything else Apple sells there is an external PSU that converts AC to DC externally.
  • Reply 83 of 189
    Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

    Anyone know if USB-c can be used to add external storage to ATV? If so, this will be a big deal.



    Jailbreak.

     

    Though the 3rd-gen hasn’t even been cracked yet, so enjoy waiting five or more years.

  • Reply 84 of 189
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post



    For these outraged with omission of optical port, revamp your home theater. Technology will change over time and old tech will be ditched. Btw, learn to configure your home theater the right way. You don't need any optical port.

     

    You mean you don't need an optical port on the Apple TV. A home theater with a front projector needs a digital audio output at the playback device because it don't have one on the projector, like a TV. So if your sound system is a SoundBar or an older receiver that don't have HDMI, how do you get the audio without a digital audio output on the playback device? You'll need to buy a converter box that splits out the HDMI digital audio into a optical or digital coax. The cheap solution. Or buy a new receiver with HDMI inputs. The more expensive solution. This is something you didn't need to do with the old AppleTV and every DVD and BR player on the market. 

     

    The only people that has to use HDMI for audio are the ones with a system that can decode DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD for 7.2. Otherwise the technology in optical will be enough. And right now BlueRay disc players are the only source for DTS-HD and DolbyTrueHD. As far as I know, no one is yet streaming these audio codecs over the internet. Unless it's highly compressed. So for now, and maybe for quite a while, an optical output on an AppleTV is not old technology.  

  • Reply 85 of 189
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,391member
    elijahg wrote: »
    And replace my perfectly functioning home theatre audio system with one that's got HDMI in? No thanks. I've never even seen a HDMI-in audio system...
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Having to buy additional equipment is regress not progress.

    HDMI devices have been available for over 10 years, toslink is old, doesn't need supported anymore. Next you'll want Apple to include DVD drives with all their computers.
  • Reply 86 of 189
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rkehlor View Post



    anantksundaram - I agree with the others who've said it totally blows to not have the audio out... for the main reason of streaming audio via AirTunes WITHOUT having to have the tv on. This is a deal killer for me -- I don't want an ugly HDMI audio converter extra box to plug in, and i don't want to have to turn on the TV to play music.



    I also don't want to always have to turn on the stereo to watch TV on the apple TV, or other sources for that matter (since I'd have to rewire everything through my stereo's HDMI switcher, which is pain). Don't most people use the multiple inputs on the back of the TV, anyway? otherwise, you have to always change remotes/inputs, switch the stereo source, flip back to the cable mode, etc. I hate having to switch sources or remotes all the time. I have one audio return from the TV to the stereo, so that whatever video source the TV is showing, the stereo input is "TV". When I listen to music, the stereo input is AUX (apple tv audio).



    Am I the only one with this setup?

     

    That's fine if all your components are by the TV or under it. But it's not the ideal solution if all your components are 10 feet away in a case off to the side. With your set up, one would need to run 15' video cables (plus any audio cables for playback devices that don't use HDMI) from all the playback devices to the TV.

     

    The other way of connecting all the playback devices to the receivers would only require just one 15" HDMI video cable (and maybe a composite video cable for an old VSH or laser disc player) from the receiver to the TV. A lot less cable clutter. The TV only needs to switch between HDMI 1(or 2 or 3 or4)  and TV (for older cable boxes or OTA).  The playback device switching is done with the receiver. The only draw back is you must always turn on your receiver, even if you don't want to listen to surround sound and just want to use the speakers on your TV.

  • Reply 87 of 189
    appexappex Posts: 687member
    USB 3.1 type-C (reversible) 2nd generation?
  • Reply 88 of 189
    Why this is a problem.
    1. Can't get SURROUND SOUND. My 2 yr old TV can send optical out to my receiver but only sends 2 channels.
    2. Can't Play music without the TV on.

    Tried a HDMI splitter before. Because HDMI protocols require two way chat my TV simply doesn't play ANY sound from the Apple TV anyway with the splitter in between.

    Guess I should get with the program and throw out my perfectly good TV and/or home theatre system that I spent $8000 on. Thanks for those suggestions :(
  • Reply 89 of 189
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by foggyhill View Post

     

     

    You can even find those things cheaper than that if you're ready to dig a bit.

    http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/hdmi-to-coax-audio.html for example

    They're 3$ a pop if you're ready to buy 500 ;-).; more typical $20.




    Which begs the question of why on earth Apple didn't just include an optical port and thus make the new ?Tv attractive to a lot more people, since you have neatly demonstrated that the cost of the parts would have been trivial.  Why intentionally make life a lot harder and require visually and technically unaesthetic workarounds?   I thought Apple were about making peoples lives simpler and better.

  • Reply 90 of 189
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,391member
    cnocbui wrote: »

    Which begs the question of why on earth Apple didn't just include an optical port and thus make the new ?Tv attractive to a lot more people, since you have neatly demonstrated that the cost of the parts would have been trivial.  Why intentionally make life a lot harder and require visually and technically unaesthetic workarounds?   I thought Apple were about making peoples lives simpler and better.

    Why should I have to pay more for a device so you can get the features you want, when modern receivers don't require them?
  • Reply 91 of 189

    Would this work then:

     

    USB C to Micro USB plus SPDIF converter: http://stanleyelecs.com/se1001.html

  • Reply 92 of 189
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post





    Why should I have to pay more for a device so you can get the features you want, when modern receivers don't require them?

    Completely agree. I know 6 separate people with current generation aTVs and not a single one uses the optical out - they all, myself included, either:

    a) use HDMI out to the TV and then the TV speakers (i.e. in my bedroom)

    b) use HDMI out to the TV, then optical out from the TV to their sound bar, receiver or other audio device (i.e. in my family room with Sonos SoundBar)

     

    So, while there are certainly people (apparently, based on the response to this thread) out there that do use the optical out on the aTV, could it be that they're not the majority of people? Jeez, don't people think Apple does a bit of research into this stuff to figure out which size best fits most?

     

    Oh, and for what it's worth, when listening to audio, I actually like having my TV on to see the album art...reminds me of the good old days with LPs (and no, I'm not complaining that there's no turn table in my aTV so I can still use LPs and have actual liner notes). 

  • Reply 93 of 189
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post



    Ditching optical out is a logical step. The future is things like Sonos Playbar rather than a dedicated receiver.



    The 10/100 Ethernet and lack of 4k do surprise me though and this price point.

     

    I'm not even sure they really have ditched it long term since the A8 and the output can do it.

    The issue is that 4K is right now in flux.

  • Reply 94 of 189
    hodarhodar Posts: 278member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CoinAPhrase View Post

    The time for the optical port has come and gone.  Few will miss it.

    Glad to see USB-C on here.

    I am mystified as to why the Bluetooth is 4.0.  They missed a huge HomeKit opportunity for advancement if they had gone with 4.1 (like the iPod Touch!) or 4.2.

    HDMI only at 1.4 is disappointing, but understandable since they didn't go whole hog to UHD.  Since there are so many of the next gen technologies that are in flux (competing HDR formats, more patent assertions on HEVC, wide gamut with inconsistent tech), I would expect next year's model to be the one that gets all of these to "just work" and well.

    I will buy this one as a solid advance over the previous model, but it looks like my ideal unit will have to wait until next year.

     

    Ok, I'll bite.
    Are the changes from HDMI 1.4 to the next higher revision hardware related, or only software?
    Are the changes on Bluetooth 4.0 to 4.x simply firmware changes?
    If so, then this could all be changed with a future release of tvOS, correct?
  • Reply 95 of 189
    hodarhodar Posts: 278member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Crudman View Post

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post





    Why should I have to pay more for a device so you can get the features you want, when modern receivers don't require them?

    Completely agree. I know 6 separate people with current generation aTVs and not a single one uses the optical out - they all, myself included, either:

    a) use HDMI out to the TV and then the TV speakers (i.e. in my bedroom)

    b) use HDMI out to the TV, then optical out from the TV to their sound bar, receiver or other audio device (i.e. in my family room with Sonos SoundBar)

     

    So, while there are certainly people (apparently, based on the response to this thread) out there that do use the optical out on the aTV, could it be that they're not the majority of people? Jeez, don't people think Apple does a bit of research into this stuff to figure out which size best fits most?

     

    Oh, and for what it's worth, when listening to audio, I actually like having my TV on to see the album art...reminds me of the good old days with LPs (and no, I'm not complaining that there's no turn table in my aTV so I can still use LPs and have actual liner notes). 

     

    Then there are people, like me; that have a modern AV receiver that take their sources in as HDMI (HDMI from PS4, HDMI from XBOne, HDMI from DishNetwork and HDMI from AppleTV) and let the receiver do all the heavy lifting. It makes cabling so much cleaner and easier.
  • Reply 96 of 189
    The optical port is an obsolete standard that should have been killed a long time ago. The best possible sound it can deliver is COMPRESSED 5.1 sourrond or UNCOMPRESSED 2.0 stereo sound.
  • Reply 97 of 189
    19831983 Posts: 1,192member
    Too many things missing from this iteration of ATV despite some major improvements too...I'm going to wait until next years model. Hopefully by then everything will be sorted.
  • Reply 98 of 189
    I hope the usb will be for a video camera for FaceTime etc.
  • Reply 99 of 189
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post





    Why should I have to pay more for a device so you can get the features you want, when modern receivers don't require them?



    Because the extra cost would be trivial.  I will bet less than 5% of purchasers would ever use the ethernet port so by your logic it shouldn't have one.  From previous posts it would appear that a lot more people would miss the optical port than the ethernet one.  The argument that many thousands of consumers should throw out perfectly good existing equipment costing considerable sums to replace just so Apple can save 50c or a $1 per unit is ridiculous.

  • Reply 100 of 189
    1983 wrote: »
    Too many things missing from this iteration of ATV despite some major improvements too...I'm going to wait until next years model. Hopefully by then everything will be sorted.
    Nothing is missing. Anything that you perceive to be missing can be simply added via a dogle. As I said in my earlier post, optical ports actually deliver lower quality sound. That said, why would anyone ever want to use it?
Sign In or Register to comment.