msantti wrote: »
Love it when I am right.
portcity wrote: »
This is one of the few areas in which Apple is being steamrolled by the competition (Roku and Chromecast). I know the Apple TV is a small revenue stream for Apple but they at least need to add a lot more channels and update the user interface for users next week.
rogifan wrote: »
I own AAPL stock. I think Apple is woefully behind the competition in this space. And waiting for some sort of utopia in terms of content deals is silly in my opinion. Even if all the content deals or to hammer it out yet Apple could at least update the hardware and UI so it's on par with the competition.
Sorry, how the **** is the Apple TV being "steamrolled" by Chromecast. I own a chromecast. I'll stop short of calling it a piece of shit, but it is very limited, and does not have near the functionality of an Apple TV. Yeah, it's dirt cheap, it has that going for it. But "steamrolled"? Yeah, ok. I doubt Apple is chomping at the bit to release a $35 profitless piece of crap, nor is it threatened by the chromecast.
By the sound of it, half the Internet will have a collective orgasm if Phil Shchiller previews a new Apple TV and says "No Apple TV my ass!"
It's OK to have hundreds of apps on your iPhone on multiple home screens.
It would be terrible to have hundreds of apps on your ?TV on multiple home screens.
Unless there were a convenient way to launch exactly the one you want, say, ESPN.
E.g. "Hey Siri, show me ESPN."
Even better, maybe Siri could obviate the "app-as-content-silo" model.
"Hey Siri, show me all movies and episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation featuring Ashley Judd."
That's my version of "SockRolid TV."
Not too shabby a version at all. Don't think we disagree. If the UI's all muddled with junk you have to scroll or swipe through, the user experience degrades quickly.Still, UI's an Apple core competency and there's every reason to expect it to be navigable. Although, while I follow the news, I don't currently have any accessory box running and don't know how cumbersome the current TV interface is - especially given all the channels Apple's added since its last redesign.Also, Is designing for the app launching process fundamentally a different interface challenge on the big screen than do so for "channels"?? Will they be in separate sections/screens? I hadn't really thought about it until your question. There are interesting challenges here.Whatever, if they nail quickly doing what you want, even with lots of options available, they'll have a hit.
Your suggestion's likely the best, with a spotlight-like tool as a backup if Siri gets confused or it's noisy or......
nolamacguy wrote: »
woefully behind the competition? in what way? simply adding more crappy "channels" of stuff I won't watch doesn't advance the competition.
nolamacguy wrote: »
yeah except you have no fucking clue if you're right and won't until Monday.
Maybe it won't be called Apple TV anymore? Why not Apple Home?
Well, it was the only thing I was really interested in.
Don't see any other hardware being shown there.
But, I guess it is a DEVELOPERS conference so I guess I should not really get worked up for new hardware.
I'm not exactly sure what I want out of my AppleTV. It does sort of occupy a niche place to put content on my HDTV. The interface ain't great, but it functions.
What is most frustrating is the content available and its organization. I signed up for SlingTV right away just to get ESPN, since I refuse to pay $40/mo+ to comcast to get the tier that contains that. Sling tossed in a free Amazon Fire stick. There's a load of content on Amazon, but I just don't access it. But I do occasionally use the network "channels" on AppleTV to time shift a very few select shows. But...that requires a comcast cable subscription for those channels. I am experimenting with a mohu antenna to cut the cord, but I'd give up CBC that I like for hockey.
It gets tedious to sort all the options out. If Apple would give me a one-stop shopping solution, I'd be in.
It is a very competitive business. I ask myself why I can't buy a cell data package that simply is pay as you go. Priced per GB, I just pay for what I use each month. Perhaps price per gig drops as you consume more. Why isn't this available we ask? Well...duh.
msantti wrote: »
There won't be no new Apple TV.
Well the AppleTV never was the big wow in Europe. The channel selection is a joke.
Now Apple has downgraded the AppleTV even more with the new iTunes.
Forcing me to save my pictures on an Apple server to be able to watch the pictures on my TV is unacceptable.
I don't want to stream 80GB of data around the world to watch my pictures that sit on my computer.
I have no problem with the new option as long as they would have retained the old perfectly working one.
For the moment I don't want a new AppleTV, new hardware or no new hardware.