How Apple Is Preventing the Apple TV From Becoming a Console Rival (redbull.com) 129
An anonymous reader writes: Apple's new set top box is on sale now, and has launched with several high profile games in the new tvOS App Store, including Guitar Hero Live and PS4 hit Transistor. However, as one writer points out, the Apple TV is still not an adequate console replacement, and it's not because of the graphics. Instead, several software issues and restrictions issued by Apple itself prevent developers from creating blockbuster exclusives for the platform, including the requirement that all games be playable using the bundled remote, lack of support for four players, and the 200MB initial app download limit. If these remain in place, can the Apple TV become a viable games platform, where the Ouya and PlayStation TV have failed before?
No. (Score:2, Informative)
That is all.
it's been out one week. (Score:2, Insightful)
Not even one week. 5 days. it's entirely likely that the apple tv will continue to gain new features, like 4-player and higher downloads. The remote thing doesn't sound so awful to me, it means that people can download and try out games even if they don't have a controller...
I see a lot of possiblities in this. One big diff will be when you can control apple radio with siri, the way you can on the iphone. a problem tho with apple radio playing on a tv is that tv speakers usually suk where as stereo speakers
Re: (Score:2)
expanding on this, if apple can get the content deals in place, then they could become a netflix-slayer overnight with a new apple movies service...
Re: (Score:2)
Based on what Apple's streaming music service has been able to slay competitors, Netflix has nothing to worry about.
Netflix already has a install base on just about everything out there. Apple's streaming service would likely be limited to Apple TV, iPads, and iPhones, and would go up against established players Ruku, Chromecast, and Fire TV as well as all the little guys, embedded applications, tablets/phones (including Apple's own), etc that work with Netflix. Again, I don't think Netflix has anything to
Re: (Score:1)
Based on what Apple's streaming music service has been able to slay competitors, Netflix has nothing to worry about.
I'm not sure what sources you're looking at; but 2 seconds conversation with Google seems to show quite a different picture of Apple Music's success so far [appadvice.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you define success? As of late October, Apple music had 15 million users, of which 6.5m were paying [fortune.com] and 40% of users dropped their subscription after the free trial ran out. iTunes has 800m registered accounts so that's less that 1/10th of 1% paying customers for their user base, or just under 2% of their user base that even tried it during the free intro. By those measures, yeah, not all that much of a success especially since Apple wanted 100m subscribers [pastemagazine.com].
Spotify has 75m users of which 20m are p
Re: (Score:1)
Spotify has 75m users of which 20m are paying
...and it has had since 2008, IIRC, to get to that point; so...?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just Android.
Alternative services are on ALL OTHER DEVICES.
Netflix is the thing that Apple included because it has to because it's not the dominant player in the industry. It's much like Apple including Microsoft support. They would leave it off if they thought they could get away with it but they can't.
Re: (Score:3)
Not completely true, Amazon is taking their services Amazon prime and limiting it to just Amazon approved devices. Android, chromcast, Apple TV haven't made the cut.
I don't understand the mentality of limiting your product to only select markets when you have the ability to go every where.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially since the market for people who want an "Amazon approved device" is far smaller than the Android/Chromecase/Apple TV/iOS markets.
But, thankfully, that's Amazon't problem, and not mine.
Re: (Score:2)
Not completely true, Amazon is taking their services Amazon prime and limiting it to just Amazon approved devices. Android ... haven't made the cut
That has not been true for a while now. You just need to download the app directly from amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/b?node=9... [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And for playing, you have a few set sizes on iOS, and near infinite on Android and PC.
Simplicity and consistency for the UI would restrict the release to fewer platforms. Funny how the same people who bash Amazon have no problems with Halo being Xbox only.
Re: (Score:2)
*snickers* C'mon now! You? Calling someone a fanboy like it's a negative? Sheesh... I'm inclined to think you're just trolling at this point. It did make me chuckle, so there's that.
Ah well, everyone's got their role to play.
Re: (Score:1)
*snickers* C'mon now! You? Calling someone a fanboy like it's a negative? Sheesh... I'm inclined to think you're just trolling at this point. It did make me chuckle, so there's that.
Ah well, everyone's got their role to play.
LOL! Point taken!!!
And I know I still owe you a suggestion on Mac stuff for your "charges", sorry! I promise I will put some thought into that...
Re: (Score:2)
I would be shocked if Apple allowed a Plex app.
Does it even do Youtube? That'd be a surprise too.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Prepare to be shocked:
https://blog.plex.tv/2015/11/0... [blog.plex.tv]
Re: (Score:2)
yes, there's a youtube app as well. all four networks, half dozen different sports networks, another dozen or so basic cable channels, a handful of premium cable channels. niche stuff like crunchyroll for anime. no amazon and no hulu.
Re: (Score:2)
Hulu's been on AppleTV for a while now, requires Hulu+ subscription. Maybe they don't have a tvOS app, but I think they're still available as an Apple-provided channel.
Amazon, well that's Amazon's thing. On the old AppleTV, Apple would write the channels with content partners
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No they couldn't. Apple isn't popular with most people, they just have a very devoted cult following.
So, since they are pretty much the highest-valued corporation of ANY kind in the World, that must be a pretty damn big "cult", eh?
So, how big does a Cult get to be before IT is the "Mainstream"?
Seriously. The Catholic Church, like ALL religions, started as a "Cult". But few would attempt to label them like that, now.
How is Apple any more of a "Cult" than Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Who said Linux (as in desktop GNU/Linux) isn't a "cult"? It certainly isn't particularly mainstream...it just seems like a weird non sequitur to throw in. If you include Linux as in Android/Linux, it's definitely mainstream (and more numerous, if less profitable, than the equivalent Apple devices
Re: (Score:2)
Nicely crafted sentence. Apple isn't popular with most (i.e. 50% or greater) people.
Wow, how true. And how meaningless. At 41% in the US smartphone market, they are by far the most popular smartphone, with their small handful of models beating out the entire line of Samsung (27%), LG (7%), and Motorola (6%). If your "cult" includes more people than all of the other major religions, your problem is one of terminology.
If Apple still only made Macintosh, you might be on to something - they only command 5% of t
Re:it's been out one week. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Casual gaming is the realm of the smart phone, where graphics, plot, latency, and overall quality are at the back of the bus to simplicity and pleasant graphics.
ok, let me tell you why you're wrong.
You're conflating two separate issues that trip up nerds: quality of a graphics/cutscenes/AI and quality of a game, which is the same thing as how fun it is. Consoles typically have better graphics/cutscenes/AI (primarily because they have larger budgets), but there are some fantastic, fun, high quality games on mobile. In fact, it's because of teh iphone & ipad that the indie scene has flourished, and we can get a great game for $15. It was only in response to this
Re:it's been out one week. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, but are you just making shit up?
People want a dedicated gaming console for many reasons .. not the least of which is it's what we're used to, and because we don't wish to build a dedicated gaming PC. Or because it's "good enough", or simple to use
Yup, you're just making shit up.
I've been a decidedly casual gamer since the 90s. I don't play online, I don't play the shiniest FPS games (because I lack the skill and interest), I sure as hell don't play hundreds of hours on a new title.
I find a couple of games I like, and at random intervals I'll fire up the console, play for a while, and turn it off ... it could be days, weeks, or months before I play again.
This was true on my N64, my Playstation 2, my Wii, my XBox 360, and on my tablet.
Casual gaming is not defined how you want to decree it is. Because what you're claiming casual gaming as is simply wrong, because people have been casual gamers for decades without smartphones.
Casual gaming is about people who infrequently play games, don't necessarily want invest hundreds of hours in a game, and don't chase the latest and greatest. It's about intermittent burst of fun, and has nothing to do with the device it's played on.
Re: (Score:1)
OUYA succeeded in changing SCE's policy (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure the screen is bigger, but the graphics aren't much better and you're monopolizing the TV.
But sometimes you want to monopolize the TV because that's more comfortable than trying to fit two to four adult bodies around a 19 to 24 inch desktop PC monitor, especially in games where sharing a screen doesn't mean splitting it. The idea of OUYA was to put indie games on a screen big enough for more than one person. It failed as a product but succeeded in getting competitors such as Sony Computer Entertainment to open up more to indie companies.
Re: (Score:1)
Ouya flopped because the games were broken, the controller was shit, and the Ouya console itself was weaker than a three year old mobile-phone. It's sole success was emulation, you know, running pirated ROMs.
Re: (Score:2)
Then who got Microsoft and Nintendo to change their policies? Back in March 2011, Reggie Fils-Aime of Nintendo likened "hobbyist developers" to American Idol contestants [wired.com]. But by late 2012, Nintendo was phasing out its ban on home offices. As for Xbox, it was originally announced that Xbox One developers would need a publisher, until Microsoft backpedaled in July 2013 [cnet.com] and announced what eventually became ID@Xbox.
Re: (Score:2)
It's my damned TV, my HDTV and phone have pretty much the same resolution, and sitting in my comfy chair is far more comfortable than holding a portable device.
So, why wouldn't they have this functionality?
Re: (Score:2)
maybe GP is a commie hippie who feels that "using" anyting is monopolizing it because it prevents others from using it, so possessions are iherently monopolistic, as is private property in general. all part of the capitalist conspiracy!
Re: (Score:2)
I think Microsoft is still in the red overall for the XBox franchise, and the Ooya is a stark reminder that nonportable microconsoles are of limited appeal. If all it lets you do is play the same games you can play on your phone why bother?
The problem with Ouya wasn't that nobody wanted what they promised. The problem was that nobody wanted what they were selling. The controllers sucked, the consoles overheated, they were pinned to two resolutions and if you plugged them into any device that didn't advertise those resolutions then they would fail all the way down to 640x480 even though the device has a perfectly good scaler RIGHT IN THERE and it can handle basically any resolution you like, render internally at whatever resolution you like, a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I see a lot of possiblities in this. One big diff will be when you can control apple radio with siri, the way you can on the iphone. a problem tho with apple radio playing on a tv is that tv speakers usually suk where as stereo speakers are often better. I'm not sure if there's a way to direct the sound output within the apple tv itself.
Who uses their TV speakers?!? Yuck!!!
Although I would have personally liked to see more audio-out options on the Apple TV (at LEAST a TOSLink Port, guys!), the sound comes out along with the rest of the HDMI signals (just like with an HDMI-equipped DVD/BD Player). And if you have a Receiver built in the past 5 years as part of your Entertainment system, it will be able to "Extract" the Audio from the HDMI signals (actually the audio is on its own pair of wires in the HDMI connector).
Or, if your audio ge
Re: (Score:1)
Who uses their TV speakers?!? Yuck!!!
I do, because they sound fine and I don't feel like shelling out a few hundred extra bucks to get anything "better"... don't care about surround sound, or subwoofers, etc.
It's not like I have a Vizio TV, so it actually sounds decent.
I have 2 "modern" (Flatscreen) TVs. One, a 47 inch LG "Smart TV" that I purchased almost 3 years ago, and the other, a 32 inch Emerson, which I have in the Bedroom.
Leaving the Emerson out of of for a moment, the LG is certainly not a Vizio-quality TV, I paid $999 for it at Fry's; but both of my TVs have HORRIBLE built-in speakers. Horrible, I say. But I don't care, because I never hear them. I use my "Stereo" instead.
I don't have a Surround Sound speaker setup (I do have an early Surround Receiver; but
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking about this in the wrong way. If you have a decent-ish home entertainment setup, you'll have a big black box called a receiver which all the HDMI signals are routed through (from Apple TV, your PVR, Bluray player, etc), which then feeds your TV. Most of them have a pass-through mode th
Re: (Score:2)
They can make a lot of software tweaks to add missing features, but they'll still be stuck with that A8 processor and either 32 GB or 64 GB of storage. That alone will be enough to limit the console to games with roughly the complexity of an XBox 360 or Playstation 3. That's not bad for a $199 box, but you won't see many AAA titles any time soon.
Re: it's been out one week. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Tv speakers are optimized for tv viewing, not music listening. Different profiles, different speakers.
Amateurgnostication (Score:4, Funny)
Super Street Fighter II (Score:2)
does it have more space than a Nomad?
Yes.
The biggest game for the Sega Nomad [wikipedia.org] was probably Capcom's Super Street Fighter II, at 5 MB. The biggest executable for Apple's tvOS is 40 times that according to the summary, and that's even before the game downloads its asset pack on first launch.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not the Nomad they were talking about.....
http://slashdot.org/story/01/1... [slashdot.org]
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, leave the poor noob alone.
App size limits?! (Score:2)
Whaaaat? So I can't immediately take up the all of the available space on your apple tv with my awesome calculator app? It's only 30GB but the graphics are awesome!
In all seriousness Fallout 4 is supposedly going to be a 28GB download. But the 50MB cellular limit on iphone/ipad is a pita.
Stupid remote (Score:2)
The requirement to be able to play games using that stupid remote shows how little Apple knows about gaming.
Fight for your bitcoins! [coinbrawl.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Or, that's the whole point. Apple strives to give the best "user experience". Releasing a half-baked product is NOT in their business plan. Why would Apple advertise this device as a "gaming console"? To be mocked by Sony and Microsoft (and the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race)?
Re: (Score:2)
Mocked as a late Roku knockoff or knocked as a weak gaming console. What's the difference?
Re: (Score:1)
Or, that's the whole point. Apple strives to give the best "user experience". Releasing a half-baked product is NOT in their business plan. Why would Apple advertise this device as a "gaming console"? To be mocked by Sony and Microsoft (and the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race)?
Show me where Apple is advertising the Apple TV as a "Gaming Console"? Just because they show that one of the Applications of the Apple TV is "Games" does not mean that they are saying "Time to throw away that XBox!"
On the main Apple TV Product Page, there are four "vignettes". Only one of the four discusses Games. And it isn't the top one.
On the Apple TV "site", there is indeed a "Games and More" Tab at the top, but again, it isn't the FIRST Tab, the content under that tab has Games mixed in with other
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't looked but I assume it's just a requirement that it can be used without an extra controller. However I bet most will not bother to make their apps work well with the included remote and will optimise it for a gaming controller anyway.
Kind of like how some versions of guitar hero let you use the ps3 remote in substitution of the instrument controller. It's not practical but it works in a pinch.
How will Lamborghini vehicles fly without wings? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously... is AppleTV being marketed as a video games console? No it isn't, nor has it ever been, at any point in time.
Complaining about how a (more or less) advanced media player can't compete against flagship console devices that were *designed* to play all these fancy schmancy games, is like complaining that Lamborghini's cars arn't capable of flight because they refuse to add wings and connect a propeller to it's powerful engine.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously... is AppleTV being marketed as a video games console? No it isn't, nor has it ever been, at any point in time.
Complaining about how a (more or less) advanced media player can't compete against flagship console devices that were *designed* to play all these fancy schmancy games, is like complaining that Lamborghini's cars arn't capable of flight because they refuse to add wings and connect a propeller to it's powerful engine.
I don't think think they are claiming that Apple TV would be a good console. They are complaining that for some nefarious reason Apple is refusing to compete in the console wars, probably due to some underhanded conspiracy they have supposedly cooked up with Sony, Microsoft and the gray aliens, to screw over the man^W gamer in the street ... or something like that (and don't ask me what the gray aliens have to do with it). This is Slashdot after all, when it comes to cooking up evil corporate conspiracy the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think a lot of companies have realized that shitty "mobile" games are where the money is anyway now. Even big names like Namco are moving into that area. Those guys who make Candy Crush pull in over $1bn a year, for games that costs a fraction as much as a AAA console title to make.
Re: (Score:2)
Your Lamborg
Re: (Score:2)
What convergence are you talking about? Is there something out there for TVs that you can't already do on a console?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure about that? 'Cuz my PS4 can already stream Netflix and Amazon Prime and I think it can stream Hulu. I'm pretty sure the PS3 could as well. And I doubt that the xBox would omit that functionality if Sony had it. The PS3 could play (some formats of) movies and music if I shared it from my computer to the network. I haven't tried that with the PS4 though because...
Ouya (Score:4, Interesting)
I had an Ouya console. It was inexpensive, had support for four wireless controllers, and was easy to use.
The biggest problem was a lack of good content at launch. A vast majority of the content was cheap, buggy, and not entertaining. The Ouya folks let anyone throw crap up into the system, it seemed. It may have been more successful with less but higher quality content.
Re:Ouya (Score:4, Insightful)
I had an Ouya console. It was inexpensive, had support for four wireless controllers, and was easy to use.
I had an Ouya. It was prone to overheating, the first-generation controllers had wireless connection problems, the controller would go to sleep and the system would decide that my bluetooth keyboard was now controller #1, and that would persist after waking the controller up. It was a piece of garbage.
The biggest problem was a lack of good content at launch.
Oh yeah? Not the fact that they rewrote the dashboard twice and it still sucked?
Real answer (Score:2)
The real answer is that Apple has never focused on games and gamers. There's no secret technical issue. They're making half-efforts. If they someday decide to care, then maybe they'll release a competitive solution.
Re: (Score:1)
The real answer is that Apple has never focused on games and gamers. There's no secret technical issue. They're making half-efforts. If they someday decide to care, then maybe they'll release a competitive solution.
No, of course not [wikipedia.org].
Goodbye Nintendo (Score:5, Interesting)
The Apple TV isn't marketed as a gaming console. It's advertised as a streaming box that also has games. The kind of simple whack-a-mole or platform-jumping games--the casual games. That is the same target audience with Nintendo's consoles. The iPhone/iPads are killing Nintendo's handheld devices, now the Apple TV is a threat to console too.
The serious gamers, who are willing to pay full price for AAA titles, will always want top-notch graphics. That means a gaming PC, a PS4 or an Xbox. As good as ARM processors are, they can't beat high-end dedicated graphic cards.
Re: (Score:2)
Top notch graphics means a PC. The peasantboxes have strengths, including a huge base of games, but the cases where the graphics compare are only because they are designed first for the console, and then ported to PC.
That being said- if this thing didn't require the use of remote for the games, there would be a gaming culture on it for certain.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the Nintendo has up to 4 controllers and.. a proper* controller.
*for varying definitions of proper.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you know what Nintendo's target audience actually plays. Their most successful franchises at the moment are Mario Bros (platforming), Mario Kart (racing), Legend of Zelda (action adventure) and Smash Bros (fighting). None of these would be playable with the Apple TV controller, and the 200MB limit would make load times for each level intolerably slow. There's no way they could take Nintendo's customers with what they've got.
Re: (Score:2)
Not that everyone has a 4K res TV but you do have built in longevity with those devices.
I used to feel the same way, especially when I was buying my first media devices. Back then it wasn't 4K, but there were still concerns with "the Wii doesn't have HDMI support" and the like. But then I realized that I generally keep the same TV for much longer than I keep the boxes that attach to it, and even after I upgrade my TV there are usually workarounds that allow me to keep using those devices until I'm ready to upgrade them.
Besides, at the moment I would say that network speeds and content availabi
"From the makers of Pippin..." (Score:1, Troll)
Yes, you can play from a computer (Score:2)
Can I play via my computer without some convoluted iTunes tie-in?
I don't know what is so hard about "open iTunes on remote computer".
But even if it were, you can use the Plex app on AppleTV to play media from remote systems.
Or of course you can AirPlay form any Mac or iOS device to the AppleTV to play also...
AppleTV as a games console: Not Yet (Score:4, Insightful)
When has Apple ever just dropped into a market? The last time I can remember was the Apple Newton; a device so far ahead of it's time it was a dismal failure in the marketplace.
Just as the iPod begat the iPod Touch, which begat the iPhone, Apple will (if they're so inclined) only move slowly forwards, consolidating their position in each incremental market move. Moving into a market where they have no experience is simply not the Apple way.
Re: (Score:1)
Except when they dropped into the mp3 player, tablet and smartphone markets all of a sudden, of course.
Re: (Score:1)
You totally missed his point. There was already a decent market for mp3 players, tablets and smartphones when they created those offerings.
Re: (Score:1)
Would Apple be creating a market by releasing a console? News to me, turns out the game consoles I've played since I was a kid didn't exist until Apple could retroactively invent the product they were imitating decades later. I'll just be over waiting for that to happen.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yorkshireman here (Score:3, Funny)
Thu wuh no disk drives, we ad to fit hole thing onna tape.
And thi dint av teams in them days, you ad to program by thi sen.
Re: (Score:2)
You had a tape?! Luxury! We have to make scratches on a broken bottle at the bottom of a lake.
Clearly they understand the Controller limitation (Score:5, Insightful)
What they don't want to do, is to create entire categories of games that have NO WAY of playing with the Siri Remote.
As for the incremental download stuff, that is intended to avoid a frustrating wait (and unnecessary server load and download-cap teasing) while scene after scene, level after level, loads in, which most casual gamers won't even get to in that session.
On the other hand, they didn't want to price themselves out of the settop-box market, by making the AppleTV cost as much as a PS4 or XBox 1.
They made their engineering choices VERY wisely. This was NOT intended to be the next PS4/XBox. It was intended to be a Set Top Box that would let a couple of family-members play fairly nice games, but as only ONE of the types of uses, not in any way the central one, which is delivering streaming entertainment through your TV.
Sorry, everything doesn't have to do everything equally well. That's why our DVD Players don't make Toast. Or, more properly, why you CAN make Toast in a "Toaster Oven"; but most of them pretty well suck as Toasters, compared to the dedicated appliance for that function.
Re: (Score:1)
IMHO Apple should have created an iDevice controller app & SDK for developers to use.
I believe I saw in the Apple TV Keynote Video at least one game that already uses an iPhone/iPod Touch as the second-player game controller.
And, no time to look it up right now; but I am nearly positive I saw an API in iOS 9 for use by Developers wanting to interact with TVOS.
Re: (Score:1)
While it makes sense for Apple to continue to focus the AppleTV primarily on the streaming content market, I think they could significantly expand their potential sales through gaming. Families who buy an AppleTV primarily as an inexpensive console for casual gaming would become potential customers for impulse streaming content purchases. (It's why even the most basic STBs have PPV functions.)
I agree it would be stupid for Apple to try to make the AppleTV a competitor to the PS4 / XB1. But I do think they have severely limited sales due to the restrictions they are putting on developers. The iStore description for games could clearly indicate what controllers are required / supported. The iStore app could even check what controllers have been paired with the AppleTV and give an extra "are you sure" prompt.
IMHO Apple should have created an iDevice controller app & SDK for developers to use. Multiplayer AppleTV gaming might even drive a few iPod Touch sales.
I think Apple is playing it pretty smart, actually.
They aren't betting the farm on AppleTV being a gaming platform, but they're preparing the ground for it nonetheless.
The remote restriction is so that people thinking about playing games on it won't be presented with nothing but titles that they can't even play.
The size restriction is to enable impulse buys without tying up the device for eons while a huge game downloads that they aren't even planning to play right away.
Once gaming has become established on
Re: (Score:1)
They made their engineering choices VERY wisely. This was NOT intended to be the next PS4/XBox. It was intended to be a Set Top Box that would let a couple of family-members play fairly nice games, but as only ONE of the types of uses, not in any way the central one, which is delivering streaming entertainment through your TV.
In addiotn, by t not trying to make it a gaming console they avoid all the comparisons to dedicated consoles that the Apple TV would lose. If game makers start producing games that come close to console level Apple can easily upgrade the Apple TV to accommodate them. It's a case of ensuring you have a successful launch and then seeing where the market goes and responding to it.
Right. For example, when the next generation of the Apple TV uses the A9 (or later) SoC, THEN we'll see some fairly-respectable gaming abilities. But I think that the hardware design of the Apple TV was frozen before the A9 was approved for new designs.
Re: (Score:1)
My toaster oven makes Texas Toast just fine, thank you. It goes quite well with my Chef Boyardee spaghetti.
I like the Ravioli better; but the Spaghetti and Meatballs are pretty good, too...
That's just THIS year (Score:3)
First, I agree with the comments saying that it's not clear that Apple cares to enter that space. They probably don't want to.
But if they do, they've got an advantage in that their update cycle is 5-7x faster than the normal console cycle. They can release a new Apple TV next year. And the year after that. They could release an Apple TV every 2 years and still have an update cycle that's 2-3x faster than Sony or Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the apple tv, not an iPad. Apple only releases one like every 3 years. That's still 2x the console market, but they also shipped something less powerful than a wii u.
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously think Apple aren't capable of increasing the rate at which they update the AppleTV?
Whilst historically they've only updated about every 3 years, they have the resources to update every 6 months if they felt like it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bandwidth.
4k at 30fps is like 45 mbps.
That's what's going to hold back 4k and why whinging about the lack of 4k is meaningless for now.
Re: (Score:2)
And how many 4k TV owners have any actual 4k content?