New Apple TV sales start on Oct. 26, ships next week, Cook says

2456710

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 184
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,061member
    irnchriz wrote: »
    By the time 4K is relevant your LG set will probably be broken.

    I disagree. 4K is relevant to me right now.

    All the TVs people I know purchased in 2015 are also 4K sets.

    The price differential is minimal.

    This will be a relatively quick transition.

    I'm an apple partisan myself, but I'm not going to call 4K irrelevant just because Apple doesn't make a 4K streamer right now.
  • Reply 22 of 184
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,347member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by polymnia View Post





    As much as I dislike ranting and whining, I also feel the 3 reasons you've given aren't super compelling.



    I bought a 4K LG with the WebOS 2.0 smart features earlier this year. Of course I'd prefer an Apple interface, but the LG WebOS is perfectly serviceable and the price was pretty reasonable. And if I have one, 4K is not something only a tiny percentage of people can afford, in fact I feel soon 4K will completely replace 1080p just like 720p was replaced several years ago.



    There is 4K content just waiting for delivery. The NBC show The Blacklist is available via Netflix in 4K and it is pretty awesome! I'd imagine most top shelf TV is shot at least 4K these days.

     

    So Apple should support 4K in the Apple TV because of.. a show on netflix?

     

    Apple will not support 4K until their own ecosystem does. 4K content is still extremely rare, and adoption is not yet at the point where it makes sense for Apple to support. Also, I'm sure the Apple TV will look fine on your LG TV, since 99% of content is not broadcast in 4K anyway. 

  • Reply 23 of 184
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,605member
    polymnia wrote: »
    I disagree. 4K is relevant to me right now.

    All the TVs people I know purchased in 2015 are also 4K sets.

    The price differential is minimal.

    This will be a relatively quick transition.

    I'm an apple partisan myself, but I'm not going to call 4K irrelevant just because Apple doesn't make a 4K streamer right now.

    4K is a stopgap, they are dumping sets on the market to clear them because 8k sets and content are just round the corner. It's like buying an HD ready 720p set with a component connector when full HD 1080p sets are a few months away.
  • Reply 24 of 184
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post





    Optical doesn't support 7.1 audio so why not just move to HDMI only.



    I didn't know that optical doesn't support 7.1, but my soundbar is only 5.1, so it wouldn't make a big difference, at least with my set up at the moment. I just bought that soundbar last year, so I'm not willing to replace it just yet, as it works fine, and sounds ok.

  • Reply 25 of 184
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,061member
    slurpy wrote: »
    So Apple should support 4K in the Apple TV because of.. a show on netflix?

    Apple will not support 4K until their own ecosystem does. 4K content is still extremely rare, and adoption is not yet at the point where it makes sense for Apple to support. Also, I'm sure the Apple TV will look fine on your LG TV, since 99% of content is not broadcast in 4K anyway. 

    Partially, yeah. iTunes is a competitor of netflix.

    The content isn't as rare as you think. Most high production value tv is certainly recorded in 4K these days. The content hasn't been distributed widely, yet. But it exists. The Blacklist is only broadcast at 1080p, but it's there in 4K on Netflix. Same with Breaking Bad.

    I'm sure apple and everyone else is working on getting the contracts and distribution infrastructure in place to deliver 4K widely.

    Nothing is broadcast in 4K now. And I doubt broadcast or disc-based distribution will be the way most 4K content is ever delivered. 4K will be the format for which streaming will be the main distribution.

    At least that's how I feel this will play out.
  • Reply 26 of 184
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,061member
    irnchriz wrote: »
    4K is a stopgap, they are dumping sets on the market to clear them because 8k sets and content are just round the corner. It's like buying an HD ready 720p set with a component connector when full HD 1080p sets are a few months away.

    Well, think about that for a minute. All tv formats are stopgap solutions. Ever since B&W gave way to color. We've had 4K at the high end for a few years now. It's finally entering the mainstream in terms of pricing. Of course there is a new tech on the horizon. But it will be a few more years before 8k hits the mainstream.

    In the meantime all the major distribution will begin deploying 4K. Apple TV is sitting it out for the next year. It wouldn't be the first time Apple sat out the early stages of an emerging trend. When they do enter the fray, you will be on board, I'm sure.

    And so will I.

    I'm just going to enjoy The Blacklist in 4K on Netflix in the meantime ;)

    EDIT: to be clear, the HDMI plugs on the 4K sets accept 4K signals. So it is quite possible to pipe in high quality 4K input beside the Apps like Netflix. Although, as I mentioned in my comment above, I feel most 4K will be streamed, often by built in Apps. And hopefully next year's Apple TV. And maybe the 2017 Apple TV will spit out 8k. Sounds awesome!
  • Reply 27 of 184
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,061member
    levi wrote: »
    Agree, not sure how prevalent 4K TVs are at this point.

    I don't have an iPhone 6s to test with yet, but my LG WebOS tv offers its own version of AirPlay in most apps on my iOS devices, and I wonder if it would be possible to stream the iPhone 6s 4K stream to the 4K LG using the LG native wifi streaming?

    It has handled 1080p just fine.
  • Reply 28 of 184
    19831983 Posts: 1,225member
    slurpy wrote: »

    Why is every single one of your posts a depressing rant or whine? There are a million reasons why the Apple TV does not support 4K, some of which are:

    1) Price point
    2) Much more powerful hardware needed to smoothly run a 4K interface
    3) Tiny percentage of 4K TV owners

    Really, it's not that flabbergasting. 4K adoption- either through hardware or content- is not wide enough to warrant making pricing and performance tradeoffs to support it. Why can't you ever be positive or optimistic about anything? The new Apple TV is a massive improvement from its predecessor, in terms of user interface, capabilities, input, remote, and power. Why not take a second to appreciate that, then to focus all your energy on the fact that it doesnt support a TV resolution that barely anyone owns, that barely any content is available in, and that takes a ridiculous amount of bandwidth that very few people have?
    Stop excusing Apple for not future proofing the latest Apple TV for 4K. Hardware prices for this tech have already plummeted. My par for the course 40Mbs internet connection can already stream 4K with bandwidth to spare. Beginning next year there's going to be a huge push by hardware manufactures and content providers alike to bring 4K to the mainstream. Also as far as I know the A8 is capable of streaming 4K too. There is no reason why Apple couldn't of implemented this considering how close 4K is now to becoming mainstream.
  • Reply 29 of 184

    I am very much looking forward to this – and wonder how much it will cost in UK and in Euro(pe).

  • Reply 30 of 184
    ksecksec Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:


     Think of it from Apple's PoV. I could see how Apple wouldn't want to offer a 4K capable Apple TV until there was 4K content they could offer. Sure, pulling content from the iTS isn't the only feature. Just having a 4K UI or being able to see your pictures in better detail, or the iPhone 6S-series video, would be enough. Or maybe it's because they don't yet have an H.265 en/decoder that will support the profile needed, which may explain why 4K is disabled by default on the 6S-series and why there is no talk of H.265 for the iPhone when recording in 4K.


     

    Its not really about 4K. Unless Apple purposely strip down the decoder, A8 should well be capable of decoding H.264 4K @ 30fps. For 4K, especially with Streaming or Downloading you really do want HEVC. 

     

    Which leads to the main problem. HEVC support. The A8, aka iPhone 6 was suppose to be able to decode HEVC, it uses it for Facetime. But for some reason Apple has since strip it out. My guess is that it is mostly a patents thing.

     

    The 4K video encode in 6S is still only H.264 and not HEVC. Even the playback doesn't mention HEVC support. Developers of Plex has stated the HEVC Hardware decoding support is with A9 officially only.  

     

    So this is rather annoying. From a Network perspective there is an huge saving transferring files in HEVC. 

     

    Blu Ray didn't matter, but really the HEVC patents is a bag of hurt.

  • Reply 31 of 184
    http://softorino.com/waltr/play-4k-video-on-iphone-6

    Maybe just maybe ? could pull an iPod touch 2nd gen Bluetooth switcharoo on us and activate 4K at a later time and date. I know color me crazy, but stranger things have happened.
  • Reply 32 of 184
    helgehelge Posts: 11member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Can someone explain why the iPhone 6s supports 4K video recording, we now have 4K and 5K iMacs yet the ?TV doesn't support 4K (while competitor boxes from the likes of Amazon and Roku do)? That makes no sense to me other than Phil Schiller decided it needed to be held back so Apple had a reason for you to buy a new one in a couple years.



    There is no point for 4k availability for the masses. I am sure an early adaptor will have the required network connection but in general is the infrastructure not ready for that. One of the reasons several companies try to develop codecs to reduce the bandwidth requirement. Current 4k users have the movie-data somehow cached, be it Blue-ray, or storing the movie in the cache. but not streamed.

  • Reply 33 of 184
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dhawkins541 View Post



    http://softorino.com/waltr/play-4k-video-on-iphone-6



    Maybe just maybe ? could pull an iPod touch 2nd gen Bluetooth switcharoo on us and activate 4K at a later time and date. I know color me crazy, but stranger things have happened.



    Don't bother. 4K is far from being mainstream at the moment and will take a couple of years at least from being close to that. Anyone who's cheerleading 4K (I suspect mainly because of the lack of 4K in new ATV) right now are just spec-whore. To properly appreciate 4K contents in a normal living room size you need the screen bigger than 70". How many home will adopt that?

     

    And streaming 4K? You got the resolution but lacks of bit-rate. Is that what you call quality? I'll watch a good-authored Blu-Ray disc over that any day.

     

    If someone are really videophile they ain't talking about Netflix or YouTube, period.

  • Reply 34 of 184
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    These interviews with Tim Cook are so boring. We all know the questions that will be asked. We pretty much know what his answers are going to be and what questions he won't answer (e.g. questions about an Apple car). So far tonight we got a question on Apple Music, a question on ?Watch, a question on ?TV, a question on iPhone innovation (buying into the stupid meme that "s" cycle phones are just minor improvements), a question on cars, on Apple retail and on privacy. And with the privacy question no one seems to be pushing back on the trade offs. I wish someone would push Cook on that because there definitely are trade offs and if people had the choice I think some would choose a Google Now/Google on Tap experience. They would be willing to make that trade off. But Apple makes that choice for you. And the choice right now is an inferior experience.



    The only news made tonight was that ?TV ships next week.

     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Can someone explain why the iPhone 6s supports 4K video recording, we now have 4K and 5K iMacs yet the ?TV doesn't support 4K (while competitor boxes from the likes of Amazon and Roku do)? That makes no sense to me other than Phil Schiller decided it needed to be held back so Apple had a reason for you to buy a new one in a couple years.

     

    Why is every single one of your posts a depressing rant or whine? There are a million reasons why the Apple TV does not support 4K, some of which are:

     

    1) Price point

    2) Much more powerful hardware needed to smoothly run a 4K interface

    3) Tiny percentage of 4K TV owners

     

    Really, it's not that flabbergasting. 4K adoption- either through hardware or content- is not wide enough to warrant making pricing and performance tradeoffs to support it. Why can't you ever be positive or optimistic about anything? The new Apple TV is a massive improvement from its predecessor, in terms of user interface, capabilities, input, remote, and power. Why not take a second to appreciate that, then to focus all your energy on the fact that it doesnt support a TV resolution that barely anyone owns, that barely any content is available in, and that takes a ridiculous amount of bandwidth that very few people have?


     

    Are we sure that the new Apple TV hardware will not support 4K? It might just be a software update in a year or two.

  • Reply 35 of 184

    Oh ffs! Are we back to that fucking 4K issue, seriously? How many times do we have to revisit this same fucking discussion about 4-fucking-K?

     

    On a happy note, I'm so excited to get this new ATV, can't wait to give it a whirl, see what Apps end up in the App store, what gameplay is like (this is a big one for me). Any news yet on when the Steelseries Nimbus controller will be available for purchase? I signed up to be notified, nothing yet, hoping we get some news soon. I think it'll be very interesting to see which media centre apps get some traction. Will Plex reign supreme on the new box? Will Kodi do well? Will there be a new one that people use? I'm assuming if you don't get the majority of your content from one of the streamers or download sites, the alternative media centres will be one of the hot apps in the App Store.

     

    Fun, fun, can't wait!!

  • Reply 36 of 184
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Have you demanded an explanation of why Google Chromecast only supports 1080p when YouTube features 2160p content? No? It's only wrong when Apple does it?

    No because I couldn't care less about Google Chromecast.
  • Reply 37 of 184
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    With yours, I couldn't even be bothe
    It's really a poor decision as far as futureproofing goes. 4K sets are rapidly dropping in price; I saw one LG unit on sale recently for under $600; I paid that much for a 720p Bravia in 2008 (which I'm still using actually).

    Well I think so too. Perhaps this signals Apple is going to update ?TV more frequently then. And they'll need a reason for you to buy another one in a couple years.
  • Reply 38 of 184
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,716member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

     



    Don't bother. 4K is far from being mainstream at the moment and will take a couple of years at least from being close to that. Anyone who's cheerleading 4K (I suspect mainly because of the lack of 4K in new ATV) right now are just spec-whore. To properly appreciate 4K contents in a normal living room size you need the screen bigger than 70". How many home will adopt that?

     

    And streaming 4K? You got the resolution but lacks of bit-rate. Is that what you call quality? I'll watch a good-authored Blu-Ray disc over that any day.

     

    If someone are really videophile they ain't talking about Netflix or YouTube, period.


    Apple is smart to wait on 4K; there's still plenty of development to happen and all those folks that bought early are going to be sad that they are missing the latest 4K "standard" features like HDR.

     

    I'm buying an AppleTV when it comes out, and will likely have it for more than a few years while the 4K "standard" settles out. Then it will be the rush to 8K; such is the need to pull consumers into something new. Not seeing much need for more than 4K in my lifetime and HDR is frankly a better feature over resolution anyway.

  • Reply 39 of 184
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    nolamacguy wrote: »
    yes, and people are free to make that choice -- by buying a google powered phone. what's stopping you? Apple, like any manufacturer, makes a thousand choices for you when designing a product. so goes Google. choosing the one you want is how you approach this. complaining that the one you like doesn't make all the choices the way you would have is a pointless bit of navel gazing. vote with your dollars. what's stopping you?
    That's a pretty shitty response. I think it's a completely legitimate question. At the All Things D conference in 2008 Steve Jobs said privacy means "people know what they're signing up for" and that if "some people want to share more data than other people do" that's fine, just ask them and ask them every single time. The fact is we know Apple doesn't make its money via advertising or by selling people's data, it makes the majority of its money by selling hardware. I want Apple to do whatever it has to to make people less reliant on Google services. I hate the fact that so many people own iPhones but their homepage is littered with Google apps. If that means Apple has to do more things server-side than only on device, fine. Just make it explicitly clear what you're doing why you're doing it and how your protecting people's data. And make it opt in. Personally I am not concerned that Apple will use my data for nefarious purposes so I would most likely agree to giving them more data if it gives me a better user experience in the end.
  • Reply 40 of 184
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mac_dog View Post





    I fell asleep mid-way into your 3rd sentence.



    You got further than me then.

Sign In or Register to comment.