Apple TV To Be Revamped 132
An anonymous reader writes: This Wednesday, Apple is hosting an event in San Francisco to announce updated versions of some of its products. One device getting a lot of the attention will be the Apple TV, which has languished for several years without significant changes. Apple is making a renewed push for the living room. The company has expanded its partnerships with TV studios over the past few years, launched its own streaming music service, and also made inroads on gaming. The new Apple TV will try to do all these things, including support for apps. It will also reportedly feature universal search: "Essentially, you'll be able to search for a show or movie once, and see results from all sorts of different sources." A side effect of this ambitious goal is that the device will more than double in cost, going from $70 to $150.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple rumors are more PR releases than made up fantasies these days.
Re: (Score:1)
citation needed...
Re: (Score:2)
I can tell they have havent shocked me at an event in ages with something that didnt "leak"
Re: (Score:1)
broad "predictions" that were nothing more than probable steps Apple might take... rumours ;)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would anyone who already has a laptop want to own a TV at all? If you can answer this, you can answer why a laptop owner might want to watch content on a TV instead of a laptop.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
agreed. it goes back to the "leanback experience" that people have talked about.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, I could use the TV as a monitor, but then I wouldn't be able to watch TV!
That's why your TV has more than one input. Plug an RPi, NUC, or other small computer into one video input, and plug your other TV sources into another video input. It's the same way people can play Double Dragon Warrior or Body Harvest Moon on a PlayBox, press a couple buttons, and be watching Monday Night Sportsball on ESPN.* On the other hand:
Right now I'm watching a college football game. Who in their right mind would choose to watch something like that on a tiny laptop screen when there's a huge TV right here in the living room?
Because someone else in the household wants to watch another show broadcast at the same time.
* "Extremely Stupid People's Network", according to Mad
Re: (Score:3)
Why would anyone who already has a laptop want to own a TV at all?
Because for watching TV, a TV is generally the best device for that...
Nothing like sitting on the couch, chilling out, watching a 70" TV with your family together. Everyone sitting huddled around a laptop? That doesn't sound very social.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone who already has a laptop want to own a TV at all?....
Because there is more than one person living in my household. I guess I could just give every family member a laptop for movie night. But then we might as well be asking, why would anyone who has instant-messanging want to have a face to face conversation at all?
Re: (Score:2)
The linked New York Times article mentions that it will need an internet connection.
You know, I heard the Amazon Fire TV devices, Roku, and Chromecast also list an Internet connection as a requirement. I wonder why...
Re: (Score:3)
I think the bigger issue is that those devices are coming down in price - AppleTV is going up. All have versions available in the ~$40 range, and all work pretty well. I can't imagine an AppleTV doing anything that my FireTV doesn't already do for cheaper.
Re: Apple TV (Score:1)
I can... it'll make more profit for AAPL.
Re: (Score:3)
I can't imagine an AppleTV doing anything that my FireTV doesn't already do for cheaper.
Well that's just a sign of a limited imagination.
Cost is not an issue (Score:3)
If someone is decideing between a Roku or an Apple TV based on a $80 price differential then they probably can't affort to buy shows anyhow. What matters is what's the easiest thing to use , gives you great results, and doesn't become an on-line attack vector in your home because you left it unpatched. For example, I bought my Amazon firestick because it delivered the content I wanted in the most simple way and it keeps it self updated and patched. It's not over complicated. I don't want something that
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix is $8 a month, so they can afford the shows but still feel that Apple TV is overpriced.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix is $8 a month, so they can afford the shows but still feel that Apple TV is overpriced.
If all you are watching is Netflix then yes you don't need apple.
Re: (Score:3)
cant speak for fireTV or others but the roku is a fine device
Re:Apple TV (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously, you can't see why anyone would, then Apple must be wrong, I mean they were wrong about their smartphone, it barely sold any at all before they quit making it.
We have a Apple TV and are extremely happy with it, like most Apple products is it not very customizable, so instead of customizing it, we watch TV on it. My wife and I are retired, and we enjoy things that just work and don't require fiddling with. We have also tried Plex, and FireTV and find the Apple to be more to our liking. It may also have to do with being able to watch our 300+ movie library stored on my MacOSX and served up via iTune family sharing.
The new TV (assuming there even is one) providing App support could be cool, and iPhones and iPads are already used for more gaming by casual gamers (only a couple hundred million - barely any market at all). So, if the TV could play those same iPad games from the App store, we will certain play a few - also, since games bought on the App Store are mostly family sharing enabled, I expect we will be able to play all those games we already have on the new TV - yup, I expect you are right though, Apple has blown it again.
Re: (Score:3)
"The linked New York Times article mentions that it will need an internet connection. "
It already does.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same as Roku. Why spend an extra $200 to get as smart TV when you can spend $100 for the Roku? Apple TV is the same, except they're being a bit goofy for going after TV deals directly instead of just allowing plugins of any sort.
Re: (Score:3)
in the end i now can turn any hdmi capable display into a smart device, and i saved a good amount of money
I realize im raving about the roku on this thread, just a happy customer, nothing more
Re: (Score:2)
I realize im raving about the roku on this thread, just a happy customer, nothing more
I wouldn't really call it a "Roku Rave" since you can replace the name of the device with any number of other devices just as easily. It could a happy Amazon FireTV, Apple TV, or even smart Blu-Ray player owner. The best part being you can replace from malfunction, upgrade, or change the "smarts" down the line without throwing out what might be a perfectly fine HD screen in the process. Or position the device someplace were it can get better network connectivity compared to where your HDTV screen need to be
Unversal search (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean like owners of Roku and Tivo boxes have been able to do months/years?
Apple is trying to reproduce its success from the cellphone market in the set top box. Bring out features that were alrea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's a matter of priorities. Some of us just don't care if it's 50 or 150 as the main point. That being said, I won't buy one. The Apple TV has one main weakness and it's the lack of a media server (painfully obvious with iTunes too). Sharing media between your computers, TV, tablets and phones (plays everywhere on everything) is a basic feature. That's why I'll keep using Plex for movies and TV series, at even higher cost than the Apple solution.
Re: (Score:2)
I use Airplay to stream to the AppleTV any locally stored content like this.
AirVideoHD Server and client app makes things easy for watching media on your iOS devices and AirPlay to your Apple TV.
Alternatively, you can mirror your Mac screen to your TV with AirPlay.
Plenty of options here.
Re: (Score:2)
There's Beamer [beamer-app.com]. It streams every movie I throw at it to the Apple TV with no problems.
Re:Unversal search (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? Because it's all about integration with the Apple eco-system. The current Apple TV is a useful companion device to the iPhone, iPad and Mac and the new one will add to that. If you're not invested in their eco-system then buying would not be useful to you.
Re: (Score:2)
As a matter of principle, I do my best to avoid any products that are said to be part of some corporate "ecosystem".
Re: (Score:2)
As you say, it's a tradeoff. And it's one I'm just not willing to make.
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly it's just extra support for iTunes. What other integration is there with phones/pads/computers? You mean chromecast and making your phone videos go to tv? That works with other devices. So what happens if Roku or Amazon or Google get iTunes support, then where's the Apple TV advantage?
Apple TV in the past has languished with little support from high levels at Apple, it's not the cool fad of the day so gets overlooked. So I suspect it'll get overlooked in the future as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Off the top os my head I can think of iCloud photos & videos, AirPlay, Siri, iPhone/iPads as controllers, etc. Lots more to it than just iTunes.
In the past Apple has called the Apple TV a hobby. They maybe ready to take it more seriously now.
Re: (Score:2)
Why will it fail abysmally because the AppleTV is not a bloody TV. This now having to compete with actual big screen Android TVs http://www.trustedreviews.com/... [trustedreviews.com] rather than bullshit pretending a box with no screen is a TV. So this time Apple way off the mark and behind the times and just making a token adjustment to try to catch up. All in one computers are rapidly growing in size, dozy M$ also doesn't seem to have woken up to this.
People do not want a box to hook up to their idiot box, they want an id
Re: (Score:1)
People will buy this and vigorously defend their decision because it is an Apple product. You know this, right?
Throw out your display when the STB breaks? (Score:2)
People do not want a box to hook up to their idiot box, they want an idiot box that will do all of it for them
SeaFox makes a good point [slashdot.org] that if you have a nice display, you might not want to throw it out when your receiver breaks or becomes obsolete, and it's easier to orient an external receiver for good Wi-Fi reception than to do so with a display.
smarter TVs mean the game console is also dying
How well do "smarter TVs" work with two to four remote controls? How responsive are they to player actions on said remote controls? And how does one load a game onto them while living in an area with harshly capped Internet? For those who live too far from the DSLAM, c
Re: (Score:2)
I did specifically note the rapid growth in size of all in one computers. Then the is question of how many years are left in optical disk drives before they are replaced by far more portable flash ram or it's equivalent. Things change and now Apple is starting to 'lag' much like M$ does.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the is question of how many years are left in optical disk drives before they are replaced by far more portable flash ram or it's equivalent.
It'll probably be a long time before 32-64 GB of removable flash memory is cheaper than stamping out one BD-ROM.
Re: (Score:2)
Beware the cost demons of packaging, shipping, transport, retail and delivery. Small is cheap to get from the producer to the end user. Small consumes far less resources all along the way, so the last remaining cost difference is not production costs but the completely artificial impost of patent costs. So basically governments of the world are conspiring to burn it to the ground in order to pump up patent profits. No second thought about, hey wait dudes, it is really, really fucking stupid to serve patent
Re: (Score:2)
If it simplifies the TV-to-TV peripheral interface, I'm in, regardless of what new streamed content we may get.
Re: (Score:2)
why would i pay 150 for something
That's a pretty stupid question to posit before you know anything about what the $150 model does.
Re: (Score:3)
You probably wouldn't because hating Apple is a major part of who you are as a person.
However, for normal people, I suspect the clincher will be that the Apple TV will have an App Store. Obviously that makes it a cheap console with cheap apps. Plus all the many more things that the third party app developers will come up with.
You don't get that with a Roku.
Roku apps are called channels (Score:2)
the Apple TV will have an App Store. [...] You don't get that with a Roku.
Roku apps are called channels [lifehacker.com]. There are plenty of them, some unlisted (so that they don't show up in the channel store if they don't have to), and there's no $99 per year fee to develop your own channel [roku.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Unversal search (Score:5, Insightful)
Hum. Apple TV has existed for years. They just never marketed it.
This new one is just a a 3rd gen.
It's always been an internet device. And it can access content off your networked Macs. I use RipIt to rip my DVDs into iTunes for access off all my devices (iOS, Apple TV & other Macs).
The Apple TV is simply a purpose- specialized screen-less iPhone, essentially.
Re: Unversal search (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why would we mod you down? Of course Apple waits a few years and lets other companies invent the wheel. Then they take it and make money with it by making it easy to use and BORING. So far it seem stop work for them, I realize that you are only interested in really cool products that you can tweet and that the company making it has no interest in profits. Personally, I will take the Apple product which will work, be supported and be improved over time... They may be late to the game, but if winning means ma
Re: Unversal search (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "main" search? You mean there are multiple searches?
Can you just speak to search for something and play it on a Roku, without so much as picking up a remote? Pretty sure you will be able to on the new Apple TV. It's trivial if they put Siri on it.
"Siri! Play me last weeks American Odessey."
"OK"
Re: Unversal search (Score:1)
So.... Exactly like Amazon Fire TV?
Re: (Score:2)
a) No. With Amazon Fire you need to pick the remote up and press a button to speak to it. Experience of Siri is that for a plugged in device, simply saying "Hey Siri" is enough.
b) No. Their speech search only works with Amazon's own content. It's not universal search. Experience of Siri (and Apple generally) is that it will be universal search.
c) You're attempting to play that game where Apple's device has to beat not only the feature list of the device that everyone is arguing about, but every single other
Re: (Score:2)
The saving grace of Amazon was that Amazon had a lot free content if you were a Prime Subscriber. It also had a Plex Client. I guess if Apple has Apps now, and one of those is a Plex client, then that would be good.
At the end of the day, though, I
Getting with the times. (Score:1)
"It wasn't reporting a steady stream of passwords, search terms, and just generally overheard words while listening for "Siri" back to Apple for passing through their corporate analysis and sales partitioning algorithms, and NSA's computers in those mysterious buildings whose costs rival the Apollo program and Manhattan project.
Yawn. (Score:2)
nt
app store (Score:5, Insightful)
The App Store on the Apple TV should be just as revolutionary as it was on the iPhone 3 when it came out. Instead of making a deal with Apple or Comcast or Roku to get your content on TV, you'll just write an app. This should open up TV to a whole new universe of niche providers and accelerate the trend of shrinking audiences for cable and broadcast shows.
I'm looking forward to all the new choices.
Re:app store (Score:5, Insightful)
People on Slashdot seem dismissive (as usual) but I also am pretty excited about what third party apps mean for the TV space. I think it could be really exciting, and it's pretty easy for anyone to have a go at it if they like.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing new here. Other devices already have apps, and those apps are the ones that get the content. It's how Roku, Google TV, Chromecast, FireTV, and smart televisions work. Though with greater or lesser amount of ability to add new apps. They may be called "channels" but they're really the same as apps.
The only thing in the announcement that sounds new is the move to talk to TV content providers directly. That sounds a bit bad actually, as it may mean that content partners with Apple may get
Re: (Score:2)
Other devices already have apps, and those apps are the ones that get the content.
If "content" is all you think AppleTV apps will do, the Force is not the only thing facing an awakening in a few months...
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm only going off what the news article said.
Re: (Score:2)
I will be dismissive for a different reason: content of the app store.
If you look at platforms like Kodi you'll find a very feature rich plugin section. A large number of these plugins feature things that facilitate piracy, make that piracy automatic, allow easy content searching for piracy, and improve cataloging of the pirated content. Then when you're not pirating things you're downloading aftermarket program guides from non approved sources, accessing streaming services not typically available on the de
Re: (Score:2)
When they are not even making the App Store work properly?
The app store works great - discoverability is just poor, which means you must result to (*gasp*) actually marketing instead of having customers fall upon you.
Since they brought and integrated Testflight into it, the App Store is a pile of crap
That may be the stupidest complaint I've ever heard about the App Store, since TestFlight has zilch to do with the App Store at all (Test Flight for those unaware is a means to get beta versions out to people f
Re: (Score:3)
Hmm. I didn't know that. Apple's entry into the market should still lead to a lot more content choices.
Re: (Score:2)
Any there any large services NOT on Roku? Because of their open SDK, pretty much everyone has made a Roku channel. Apple will still lead to more exposure, but Roku's been the leader in the content game for a LONG time.
Re: app store (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple entered the market 8 years ago. Roku has been doing fine.
Re: (Score:2)
And Netscape was around before Microsoft got into web browsing, and Blackberry dominated the smartphone market before Apple came along. Roku best not be complacent.
Re: (Score:3)
Doubt it. Apple has been in the market for a very long time already, and is falling far behind except with iTunes fans who already have lots of content there. They are playing catch up. The only thing happening here is a reminder, even to Apple fans, that Apple TV exists.
I prefer a device that is completely agnostic, no preference to one channel or the other, whereas I think Apple will play favorites.
Re: (Score:2)
I just did some searching and, yeah, most of what I was hoping to see is already on Roku. Now I'm thinking of buying one.
But maybe with the new Apple/Cisco deal, the Apple TV will have WebEx support. That's one thing I don't see on Roku.
Re: (Score:2)
Same for Android TV, there is nothing revolutionary on a store for TV set top box applications
Not nearly as "appish" (Score:2)
You don't have to make a deal with Roku to be in their platform, just write an app.
First of all, do you know Brightscript [roku.com]? I don't know many people that do...
Now compare that with the number of people who know the iOS SDK.
Also on Roku you are just making a "Channel", not an app. You don't have much in the way of a controller. You don't have any integration with media (iOS apps can be built to read and do things with all iTunes media). The Roku SDK is very content-presentation centric, instead of being a
Re: (Score:2)
You can play Angry Birds on Roku. How much more control do you want? Touch screen is out. Now I can imagine hooking up a computer so you have mouse and keyboard, but what' the point. It's a *TV*.
It really sounds like the Apple fans who utterly ignored Apple TV for seven years are just now realizing it exists and trying to drum up the support. The reality distortion field has broken down and it will take a lot more than a press release to get it up at full strength again.
Re: (Score:2)
Touch screen is out.
Why?
You lack imagination as to what a new control scheme could do, or even an iPhone/iPad pairing (which you can't do with the Roku SDK as far as I can tell).
It really sounds like the Apple fans who utterly ignored Apple TV for seven years are just now realizing it exists and trying to drum up the support.
I never had one as to me it was less functional than most other players (though I did get one for my parents since it was easier to use). The new AppleTV though should be quite a lot
Re: (Score:2)
This has existed for quite a while now, with the 'Remote' app.
Re: (Score:2)
It really sounds like the Apple fans who utterly ignored Apple TV for seven years are just now realizing it exists and trying to drum up the support.
iPhone 2G was a curiosity before the App Store. It was a slow phone/iPod hybrid with an interesting GUI.
For 7 years, the Apple TV without the App Store has been second rate. The App Store changes things.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, but if it's apple it's going to be a walled garden.
Re: (Score:2)
That will be sad for ideologues who dislike such arrangements, but at least they'll have something new to moralize about.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because it's Apple. No one complains that they can't replace the GPS software on a new car with Waze, before they go home to play some GTAV on their Playstation 4.
Re: (Score:2)
Naw, Windows doesn't mandate a walled garden, Linux doesn't mandate a walled garden, even Apple's computers don't mandate a walled garden, if they did then everyone would be complaining loudly. Is it too much to ask to allow open applications in the smart TV market, especially with a company that's playing catch up?
Re: (Score:2)
That's not a real response, maybe because there isn't a real response that can be made.
No one is going to complain about "walled gardens" on car software - well, maybe they will now that Apple is getting into the car software business, because Apple. No one complains about "walled gardens" on their Bluray players, or the "walled gardens" on their game consoles.
walled garden = ad hoc argument masquerading as principle.
Re: (Score:2)
That's how Roku works. Roku does not make deals to get content, instead it has lots and lots of apps .Apple sounds like it is playing catch up.
Rumoured to be no 4k support (Score:2)
Re:Rumoured to be no 4k support (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Or eyes/viewing distances that make 4k even useful?
Re: (Score:2)
And at what point is that? You mean at a point where most people don't have 4k TVs and most content is barely 1080p and most people don't have connections that support 4k streaming?
Well, Apple likes to target the people with money which significantly increases the odds. I really don't understand why TV can't take a few pages from Spotify and Steam though like offline mode (download now, view later) and automatic pre-release caching of content, it's not like the next episode of Game of Thrones is broadcast live. No stuttering, no degradation, no broken connections and even if they don't want to do full offline mode even a shitty cell phone connection should be enough to authenticate an
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Apple likes to target the people with money which significantly increases the odds.
And how will targeting richer people help with the fact that there isn't a lot of content at 4k? There's no excuse not to have 1080p right now but 4k is years away maybe even a decade. At that point, if rich people want to replace their $150 1080p Apple TV with a 4K version, it's not a huge cost
I really don't understand why TV can't take a few pages from Spotify and Steam though like offline mode (download now, view later) and automatic pre-release caching of content, it's not like the next episode of Game of Thrones is broadcast live
Because most people who want to see a show or a movie want it instantly. And the decision to watch that video is more or less spontaneous and not planned.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Apple likes to target the people with money which significantly increases the odds.
No apple targets zealots who like to buy the latest Apple product. Yes they have money, but having money does not mean people will instantly go out and just upgrade everything on a whim. If they did they likely would not have money. I know of lots of people who disposed of perfectly fine iPhone 5 to get the iPhone 6, but not a single one of them would throw out a functional 1080p TV for an equivalent 4K model. I'd wager that when content is available in 4K people still wouldn't do it. TVs in general are tre
Only one thing matters to me... (Score:2)
Price "doubled" (Score:2)
It is a bit misleading to say that the price has doubled. While the ATV is currently at $69, it has traditionally sold at $99. The $30 drop was in anticipation of its originally scheduled debut in late Spring, which got delayed.
So it is more like a 50% increase than a 100%+ increase.
I want snotTV (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You are just a stupid troll.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet Apple sells a lot more now than when Jobs was alive. Go figure.
Re: (Score:1)
Umm... Do you mean assassinations?