Apple engineers lack optimism about the Apple TV strategy, claims report

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 63
    JapheyJaphey Posts: 983member
    chasm said:
    Is it worth the price upgrading from a Apple TV 3 to the 4K or going for the Google Chromecast? 
    Yes.
    The Chromecast, like anything from Google, is a security and privacy nightmare masquerading as a functional peripheral. Does it work, and it is cheaper? Yes. Will you be further profiled and advertised to/manipulated by literally any entity or individual that wants to target you? ALSO YES.

    Upgrading to the new one from the 3 is a no-brainer IMO. In addition to regaining features and apps like YouTube that are disappearing from the 3, you get:

    * Dolby Vision/HDR10 support if your TV supports it
    * The ability to control both the TV and the Apple TV box with a single remote (which finally has a mute button!!)
    * Dolby Atmos and Lossless Audio over AirPlay if you have HomePods (and coming this fall, HomePod minis)
    * A vastly better remote
    * eARC support for your other connected-to-the-TV devices (DVDs, consoles, etc)
    * Apple Arcade support
    * A three-month free trial of Apple TV+ if you don't already have it (So cheap! So good!)
    * Um, 4K ... and the superior Apple TV 4K interface, screen savers, and TV calibration
    * Little features I enjoy, ike "what did he/she say?", the TV app to let me know where something I want to watch is available, and the Apple Events app, which I am not sure is available on other stores/platforms.

    The security and privacy aspects alone justify the higher price for me, but all these other features and that make the new Apple TV 4K a downright bargain in my eyes. The TV I own has a Roku interface (no longer connected to the internet) ... dear lord what a grossly inferior and spyware-like experience!

    Those smaller stick units from Google and Amazon and Roku have their uses, I guess ... smaller to take with you when travelling, for sure ... but the trade-off is too much for me. My old Apple TV lasted many years, while my friends with cheaper sticks seem to replace them every 2-3 years for various reasons (mostly when one of the companies gets in a fight with one of the streaming app companies ... or they just "stop working one day.")
    Great post. May I add to your list? Apple Fitness+ support, excellent HomeKit video camera integration, and the aforementioned app switcher. I know I talked about it earlier, but I’ve made it my mission to remind people not to take it for granted, because it’s such an overlooked little feature that no other streaming device can offer. Well, maybe the Google thing can, but I’ll never know because I won’t ever use one. It’s really only a few additions away from being the perfect living room device. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 63
    JapheyJaphey Posts: 983member
    Beats said:
    The solution is easy:

    GIVE A SH**!!

    It’s sad that casual forum posters in 2016 had better ideas than Apple has executed in 2021.

    AR, Gaming, FaceTime, Fitness and other huge multi-billion dollar industries are lost on Apple TV.

    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.

    This is rationalization. Apple TV is simplifying both hardware and software. People who can afford home theater buy it. The middle class and above aren’t throwing away their sound bars, speakers, game consoles and receivers.

    The problem is APPLE TV SUCKS!!
    Yeah, we didn’t get the upgrade we wanted. And ATV is missing several features that seem obvious to some of us. But, can you honestly think of any other streamer out there that is better? I will agree that they’ve made significant investments in areas that would be perfect in an ATV, so there is no way this current model is all that Apple has planned. There has to be something better on the horizon. The question is when? Maybe they’re waiting until they drop their AR vision on the world, I don’t know. But I’ll bet money this rumor from Gurman is probably bullshit. 
    edited August 9 watto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 63
    Apple makes products which look fantastic, are all integrated, are astonishingly well designed and made and produce extremely high quality results.  This applies to hardware and software. There is a price to be paid for all of this, of course, and it would seem a lot of people are prepared to pay that premium. There is nothing else to compare with the range of Apple products.  There may be better individual products but everything Apple produces goes with everything else it produces.  Having said that, there are gaps and as other posters have said, a home tv/sound system is missing. I have been hoping Apple would produce an Apple quality tv since Steve Jobs first proposed the idea years ago.  Just imagine what that could do, in conjunction with the other Apple products!
    GeorgeBMacBeatsjeffharriswatto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 63
    mike54mike54 Posts: 479member
    Apple has abandoned the AppleTV. I bought the AppleTV4 on release almost 6 years ago, and the current Apple TV hasn't evolved since then, its virtually the same. There has been the usual things like bluetooth, 4k, dolby etc. The biggest change was TV app and recently the remote, after 5 years!  There is little effort put into this product, it still is an afterthought for Apple. Big shame. And of course I didn't buy the 'new' AppleTV.
    GeorgeBMacBeatspscooter63
  • Reply 45 of 63
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 10,693member
    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.
    I've been hoping for a long time for a simple wireless Dolby distribution solution that doesn't require a proprietary speaker purchase, which has been typically so far at eye watering prices, questionable audio quality & risking proprietary software reliance, planned obsolescence & data mining.

    Any wifi surround I have found required the purchase of a proprietary sound bar at a minimum, along with unknown data mining considerations - potentially building profiles of every user and what & when they watch...

    I currently run Apple TV 4K+  to Airport Express to discrete dedicated audiophile amps & speakers - the audio quality seems excellent if limited to 2+2 channels.

    Improvement requests if possible would be a persistent preference setting for AE/speaker selection & options for wireless surround sound, including ATMOS. I'd be in the market for more Airport Express if that came to pass...

    This could potentially offer customers a wireless home theatre potential unrivalled by what seem very limited systems available to date, assuming Apple could offer true hardware privacy without iCloud, Siri and always on EQ 'ears' with this week's privacy questions in the news.

    A HomePod may be excellent for what it is, however could it ever rival the audio quality of Klipshorns, and irrespective of compulsory links to Apple servers...
    While it's true that HomePods can't compete with high end 5.1 or 7.1 home theater systems, it comes amazingly close.  The biggest difference is in the fullness of the sound as well as on a high end home theater system with a 10" or 12" subwoofer you not only see and hear the gates of Mordor open, but you feel it too.

    But, your point is excellent that there are a lot of people out there wanting a quality, easy to use, wireless 5.1 or 7.1 Dolby Atmos home theater system -- which Apple could have done with its HomePods.  It would have greatly enhanced and complimented what they show on Apple TV and TV+.  And, Apple's lossless Dolby Atmos music sounds absolutely amazing on a Dolby Atmos system.

    Greyhound won awards for its sound.  But you need a high end sound system to really hear it.

    Homepod likely got killed off because of bad marketing:   it was marketed as a smart speaker you could ask about weather and even play a song on.   But, as a single speaker with crappy Siri and an extremely high selling price, it would simply never make it in that market.   Homepod missed its calling as the basis for a simply, easy to use wireless Dolby Atmos Home Theater system.

    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 63
    LOL...what "strategy" do Amazon and Roku have for hardware? They're selling iterations of the same tech they've always sold. 
    Agreed. It’s a strange argument to put Apple’s streaming box completely in with Amazon and Roku. These are two companies offering options at every price point to gain volume.  They are streaming sticks or boxes, that’s it. Apple isn’t going to be offering a cheap stick version. When has Apple ever done the cheap high volume thing? AppleTV is the box with a little more that joins your iCloud, has the hub, Apple Music library, minor gaming, iphone control some control via watch, gets the eco upgrade. And It then Has Apple pricing. 
    If those things are unneeded then you should buy the less expensive roku. 

    With that said it would be good for Apple to consider home integration and AppleTV as one. Also agree, give 1/2 year AppleTV+ with purchase. 
    GeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 47 of 63
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 10,693member
    LOL...what "strategy" do Amazon and Roku have for hardware? They're selling iterations of the same tech they've always sold. 
    Agreed. It’s a strange argument to put Apple’s streaming box completely in with Amazon and Roku. These are two companies offering options at every price point to gain volume.  They are streaming sticks or boxes, that’s it. Apple isn’t going to be offering a cheap stick version. When has Apple ever done the cheap high volume thing? AppleTV is the box with a little more that joins your iCloud, has the hub, Apple Music library, minor gaming, iphone control some control via watch, gets the eco upgrade. And It then Has Apple pricing. 
    If those things are unneeded then you should buy the less expensive roku. 

    With that said it would be good for Apple to consider home integration and AppleTV as one. Also agree, give 1/2 year AppleTV+ with purchase. 

    My thoughts exactly!  An integrated, high end home system integrating:
    -- Homekit (a picture in picture on your Apple TV pops up when somebody steps onto your porch)
    -- Apple router acting as a hub for all home products
    -- Apple TV 4K with Dolby Atmos
    -- Wireless (true) Dolby Atmos sound for Home Theater.

    WIth all of that there would be no reason to risk getting infected with the virus in a theater.
    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 63
    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.
    I've been hoping for a long time for a simple wireless Dolby distribution solution that doesn't require a proprietary speaker purchase, which has been typically so far at eye watering prices, questionable audio quality & risking proprietary software reliance, planned obsolescence & data mining.

    Any wifi surround I have found required the purchase of a proprietary sound bar at a minimum, along with unknown data mining considerations - potentially building profiles of every user and what & when they watch...

    I currently run Apple TV 4K+  to Airport Express to discrete dedicated audiophile amps & speakers - the audio quality seems excellent if limited to 2+2 channels.

    Improvement requests if possible would be a persistent preference setting for AE/speaker selection & options for wireless surround sound, including ATMOS. I'd be in the market for more Airport Express if that came to pass...

    This could potentially offer customers a wireless home theatre potential unrivalled by what seem very limited systems available to date, assuming Apple could offer true hardware privacy without iCloud, Siri and always on EQ 'ears' with this week's privacy questions in the news.

    A HomePod may be excellent for what it is, however could it ever rival the audio quality of Klipshorns, and irrespective of compulsory links to Apple servers...
    While it's true that HomePods can't compete with high end 5.1 or 7.1 home theater systems, it comes amazingly close.  The biggest difference is in the fullness of the sound as well as on a high end home theater system with a 10" or 12" subwoofer you not only see and hear the gates of Mordor open, but you feel it too.

    But, your point is excellent that there are a lot of people out there wanting a quality, easy to use, wireless 5.1 or 7.1 Dolby Atmos home theater system -- which Apple could have done with its HomePods.  It would have greatly enhanced and complimented what they show on Apple TV and TV+.  And, Apple's lossless Dolby Atmos music sounds absolutely amazing on a Dolby Atmos system.

    Greyhound won awards for its sound.  But you need a high end sound system to really hear it.

    Homepod likely got killed off because of bad marketing:   it was marketed as a smart speaker you could ask about weather and even play a song on.   But, as a single speaker with crappy Siri and an extremely high selling price, it would simply never make it in that market.   HomePod missed its calling as the basis for a simply, easy to use wireless Dolby Atmos Home Theatre system.

    ... lossless decoding within Apple TV 4K to Airplay channels could mean no HomePod or AV Rx required, although either could still be used by choice...
  • Reply 49 of 63
    ivanh said:
    I dumped Apple TV months ago after I got the Google TV.
    So you had to repurchase all the movies you bought on Apple TV on Google TV? 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 63
    chasm said:
    Is it worth the price upgrading from a Apple TV 3 to the 4K or going for the Google Chromecast? 
    Yes.
    The Chromecast, like anything from Google, is a security and privacy nightmare masquerading as a functional peripheral. Does it work, and it is cheaper? Yes. Will you be further profiled and advertised to/manipulated by literally any entity or individual that wants to target you? ALSO YES.

    Upgrading to the new one from the 3 is a no-brainer IMO. In addition to regaining features and apps like YouTube that are disappearing from the 3, you get:

    * Dolby Vision/HDR10 support if your TV supports it
    * The ability to control both the TV and the Apple TV box with a single remote (which finally has a mute button!!)
    * Dolby Atmos and Lossless Audio over AirPlay if you have HomePods (and coming this fall, HomePod minis)
    * A vastly better remote
    * eARC support for your other connected-to-the-TV devices (DVDs, consoles, etc)
    * Apple Arcade support
    * A three-month free trial of Apple TV+ if you don't already have it (So cheap! So good!)
    * Um, 4K ... and the superior Apple TV 4K interface, screen savers, and TV calibration
    * Little features I enjoy, ike "what did he/she say?", the TV app to let me know where something I want to watch is available, and the Apple Events app, which I am not sure is available on other stores/platforms.

    The security and privacy aspects alone justify the higher price for me, but all these other features and that make the new Apple TV 4K a downright bargain in my eyes. The TV I own has a Roku interface (no longer connected to the internet) ... dear lord what a grossly inferior and spyware-like experience!

    Those smaller stick units from Google and Amazon and Roku have their uses, I guess ... smaller to take with you when travelling, for sure ... but the trade-off is too much for me. My old Apple TV lasted many years, while my friends with cheaper sticks seem to replace them every 2-3 years for various reasons (mostly when one of the companies gets in a fight with one of the streaming app companies ... or they just "stop working one day.")
    I always wondered about Google’s privacy overreach with their TV products. Which size to get though, the 32 or 64GB model? How much space does the TV app take up? 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 63
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 410member
    Apple TV is good for people in the Apple ecosystem. If they're trying to lock people into that ecosystem, they're doing great. It's a high-quality product, and costs more (more than it should, but that's the Apple tax). Apple TV is good if you don't want ads. What I see them saying is that they don't have a good strategy. I believe that. they don't seem to. A good strategy would be to bring different things to bear to offer some better living room experience. They try to kind of go into the gaming direction, but there's no hear there. Siri sux in the living room compared to Alexa, no argument there. I think the problem is to unify video, audio and AI into a unifying strategy, and have the engineering team and everyone else work towards that strategy. We don't know if that's lacking or not, because usually that happens behind the scenes as Apple, but based on their product output, I believe it. Apple in general seems to only be able to focus on one thing at a time. If they're working on M1, everything else seems to languish, if they have a problem and working to stave off something in a different area, everything else seems to be ignored (not completely, just enough to be noticeable).
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 63
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    It’s kind of obvious from the outside. The question is whether Apple abandons it or not. My GF and I both have the same Vizio TV. They both have the same versions of software. They do not both operate identically. The UI is shit. The apps are all shit. The performance is shit. I am close to buying both an Apple TV and a Blu-ray player so I can stop using my old MacBook Pro 5,5 as a half-assed media device cluttering the area near the TV. It would piss me off to find that Apple TV is just as buggy as iOS, or that the apps are just as badly made as the ones on “smart” TVs, or that Apple have abandoned it shortly after I buy one... but I HATE “smart” TVs with the fury of a billion exploding stars.

    They’re absolute garbage and, as data mining tools for their advertiser sales, the companies selling them have ZERO motivation to improve a goddamned thing about them for the sake of TV-purchasing CUSTOMERS. Like with Google, we are just cattle to these bastards, bullied into using their products because the invisible fist of corporatism and greed has made sure we have no meaningful choices. Pick one or the other, it’s all the same garbage.

    Speaking of advertising and bad technology: this site gets worse by the day. Forced videos and now “sponsored” articles (though really, marking them as such is the real change, since these have existed for a while now).

    Advertising ruins EVERYTHING. Ad blockers exist because advertising is intolerable and willfully abusive. Don’t bitch about anyone blocking your incessant garbage; you forced our hands and did it to your own goddamned selves.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 53 of 63
    dewmedewme Posts: 3,942member
    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.

    Hiding an Apple TV behind a TV isn't a huge challenge. I have two Apple TVs (4K) attached to TVs with zero exposed wiring. It just takes a little bit of fiddling with tie wraps and possibly some adhesive tie wrap mounts to pull it off. Granted, I have a quad power outlet, cable, and Ethernet in the wall behind the TVs. In a previous dwelling I had a closet behind the TV wall stuffed with all of the home theater equipment (and Apple TV) and the HDMI, network, and power cables coming through a grommet between the spaces.

    The single greatest challenge for all scenarios involving hiding AV clutter is having power, cable, and network connections in the wall (or in an adjacent closet with a pass-though) that are hidden by the TV screen. If you're building or remodeling your home you can get all of this stuff figured out ahead of time, but trying to get a clean looking install after the fact can be a pain. A retrofit is always doable with a bit of work, the right fixtures, and some spending money.

    That said, my overwhelming preference would be for Apple TV (Pro?) to be implemented as a sound bar form factor, with eARC, quality front speakers, wireless sub, optional wireless rears, tilt and swivel Facetime camera, Face ID, and far field beamforming microphones. The Face ID could be used for enforcing parental controls and Screen Time limits with the kiddos. Facetime would be used for teleconference meetings and friends and family stuff. The camera would of course support the face following camera and beamforming microphones could be used to move the camera and audio focus to the person speaking. These kinds of features would allow this device to be used both in home and office environments. I can easily see this device being used for doing daily standup meetings that span multiple offices/campuses, especially where individuals take turns speaking.

    Yes, this would be a bigger ticket purchase. To offset this I would like to see Apple do a lower end streamer that can compete on price against the Amazon, Roku, and Google stick devices. The current Apple TV is definitely a reliable and premium device, but its feature set and capabilities seem a bit feeble for the price point it demands.I continue to buy Apple TVs primarily because they are so well meshed into Apple's ecosystem. But I never feel like I'm getting a lot of bang for the buck. That's my 2 cents.

    watto_cobrapscooter63
  • Reply 54 of 63
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,638member
    Doval said:
    Beats said:
    The solution is easy:

    GIVE A SH**!!

    It’s sad that casual forum posters in 2016 had better ideas than Apple has executed in 2021.

    AR, Gaming, FaceTime, Fitness and other huge multi-billion dollar industries are lost on Apple TV.

    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.

    This is rationalization. Apple TV is simplifying both hardware and software. People who can afford home theater buy it. The middle class and above aren’t throwing away their sound bars, speakers, game consoles and receivers.

    The problem is APPLE TV SUCKS!!
    What device can you give you almost lossless Dolby Vision streaming and Dolby Atmos like Apple TV.

    just because your Chinese box can give you tons of pirated shit or your Google chrome cast  is $5 and let’s You watch all the tired crap on Netflix doesn’t  mean it’s the best lol

    again Porsche vs Kia

    Well, the worse games on my shitty Switch running on an outdated iKnockoff chip is better than the best games on Apple TV running an A12!!! That is mind blowing!! That’s like a cheap used Kia running 3 laps around a new Porsche!!

    Then we have actual old Apple devices with features like TouchID, FaceID and even iTunes gift card redeem!!!

    We don’t want Apple TV to be priced $100 more than cheap Chinese knockoffs because it’s $100 better, we want Apple TV to be a game changing device like iPod, iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch, AirPods.
  • Reply 55 of 63
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,638member
    dewme said:
    tjwolf said:
    Apple’s core clientele are middle to upper income folks.  These folks are looking to simplify, not further clutter their living rooms.  That’s why, I think, Apple TV was never going to be a big seller.  It’s not  about it’s price - it’s about clutter and wiring.  As much as I’ve ridiculed Gene Munster for his years’ long prediction of an impending actual Apple TV set, I think that would be the only way Apple could have succeeded in the living room.  Apple should have sourced some 65”+ OLE panels from LG, added a thin & sexy frame to it, and built a user friendly UI on top.  Add some HomePod like built-in speakers & Homkit hub capability (maybe even throw in a wi-fi router a la AirPort) and Apple would have had a huge success.

    Hiding an Apple TV behind a TV isn't a huge challenge. I have two Apple TVs (4K) attached to TVs with zero exposed wiring. It just takes a little bit of fiddling with tie wraps and possibly some adhesive tie wrap mounts to pull it off. Granted, I have a quad power outlet, cable, and Ethernet in the wall behind the TVs. In a previous dwelling I had a closet behind the TV wall stuffed with all of the home theater equipment (and Apple TV) and the HDMI, network, and power cables coming through a grommet between the spaces.

    The single greatest challenge for all scenarios involving hiding AV clutter is having power, cable, and network connections in the wall (or in an adjacent closet with a pass-though) that are hidden by the TV screen. If you're building or remodeling your home you can get all of this stuff figured out ahead of time, but trying to get a clean looking install after the fact can be a pain. A retrofit is always doable with a bit of work, the right fixtures, and some spending money.

    That said, my overwhelming preference would be for Apple TV (Pro?) to be implemented as a sound bar form factor, with eARC, quality front speakers, wireless sub, optional wireless rears, tilt and swivel Facetime camera, Face ID, and far field beamforming microphones. The Face ID could be used for enforcing parental controls and Screen Time limits with the kiddos. Facetime would be used for teleconference meetings and friends and family stuff. The camera would of course support the face following camera and beamforming microphones could be used to move the camera and audio focus to the person speaking. These kinds of features would allow this device to be used both in home and office environments. I can easily see this device being used for doing daily standup meetings that span multiple offices/campuses, especially where individuals take turns speaking.

    Yes, this would be a bigger ticket purchase. To offset this I would like to see Apple do a lower end streamer that can compete on price against the Amazon, Roku, and Google stick devices. The current Apple TV is definitely a reliable and premium device, but its feature set and capabilities seem a bit feeble for the price point it demands.I continue to buy Apple TVs primarily because they are so well meshed into Apple's ecosystem. But I never feel like I'm getting a lot of bang for the buck. That's my 2 cents.


    I hide the Apple TV on the VESA mount behind the TV. It stays put.

    There are many ways to approach the TrueDepth camera. I think on top of the TV with MagSafe would be best. It would be so tiny most people wouldn’t notice it.

    Apple already has a “cheap” version. The version currently on the market or they can lower the price further of last gen’s Apple TV and being in a new powerful one.
  • Reply 56 of 63
    hmlongcohmlongco Posts: 320member
    People already have TVs and sound bars. What would be great, however, is an Apple TV with a camera or cameras that could let you do Facetime calls and meetings and whatnot on those existing devices in their existing living rooms.

    Picture an Apple TV that tucks behind your TV screen with a camera that peeks up over the top. And picture said camera (or cameras) with Center Stage where it would follow you around the room, or pick out individual faces within a room.
  • Reply 57 of 63
    JapheyJaphey Posts: 983member
    ivanh said:
    I dumped Apple TV months ago after I got the Google TV.
    So you had to repurchase all the movies you bought on Apple TV on Google TV? 
    Why would anyone have to repurchase movies if they switched? Linking movie purchases to Movies Anywhere (along with Amazon Prime, GooglePlay, YouTube, Microsoft Movies, Disney, Universal, and others) means you can take all your different movie and tv libraries and combine them to use on other platforms. 

    edited August 9
  • Reply 58 of 63
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,048member
    Wasn't Apple TV a "hobby"?
    It still is, apparently.
  • Reply 59 of 63
    sdw2001 said:

    They killed HomePod because it wasn’t worth the sales.  It’s the their second failed home audio product…after the iPod HiFi.  Both were great products that were overpriced and over-designed.  They’ve resisted going this way with the TV.  

    Apple’s audio output products, speakers, ear buds, etc., have never been very good sonically.

    The Apple TV is still a capable product that outperforms other streamers in quality and speed.  I wouldn’t mind an expanded version with sound bar and/or UHD Blu-ray, but it would likely be twice the price.  I don’t see what releasing a bare bones version would accomplish.  
    Apple’s strategy of letting the user select their own output devices (monitors, speakers, etc.) based on their own needs and budget makes more sense. I’m picky about audio solutions, so being able to fully spec and setup a system is something I much prefer over plain vanilla solutions.

    My #1 AppleTV 4K is connected to my bedroom system, a 32” Viewsonic monitor (not a TV), KEF LSX wireless speakers and KEF 10” subwoofer. It looks and sounds great. Before the AppleTV I was using iPads and iPhones to stream movies and whatnot. 

    The most irritating thing about the iPad is that many apps didn’t properly scale to the monitor (2560 x 1440) or even my standard HDTV. Often, in disgust I’d just connect to my MacBook Pro. The AppleTV solved that and now it’s less wonky and much easier to deal with. Older versions of iOS supported full-screen scaling, so I think maybe Apple used the old Canon cripple hammer technique to push AppleTV sales.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 60 of 63
    bsimpsen said:
    We have five AppleTVs driving five different brands of TVs/projectors. Using the shared Home Screen, we need understand only one interface and the experience is identical everywhere. All remotes are the same, all apps are in the same place, our favorites and histories are on all units, if we pause viewing in one place, we can pick it up in another. Does anyone else offer that?
    That sounds great!

    Just got a second AppleTV 4K for my living room (4K TV arriving soon), so how do you set them up to work that way?
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.