The New AppleTV: 4k or not 4k? That is the question.
The long awaited AppleTV 4(th generation) has been announced. The biggest and most obvious thing missing was 4k capabilities. I have seen arguments for and against 4k, and I thought I would address some of the arguments against it in this post.
No one owns a 4k television
Is Apple a company that sits and waits for a future technology to be popular before they adopt it?
Let's just look at a bit of their history:
1. MacBook - how many people owned USB-C before they made this the only none headphone port on thus computer?
2. Thunderbolt/FireWire - don't tell me these were ever mainstream.
3. Tablets - where was the large tablet market when the iPad was introduced?
It is obvious that Apple is usually the company that kicks us in the behind and tells us to move on to bigger and better things.
Let's just look at a bit of their history:
1. MacBook - how many people owned USB-C before they made this the only none headphone port on thus computer?
2. Thunderbolt/FireWire - don't tell me these were ever mainstream.
3. Tablets - where was the large tablet market when the iPad was introduced?
It is obvious that Apple is usually the company that kicks us in the behind and tells us to move on to bigger and better things.
There is no 4k content
There isn't a ton of 4 k content on the commercial market, unless you count YouTube, that I agree with. However, content follows the technology. When I bought my very first 1080i HDTV ( a huge 57 inch Hitachi console TV), about the only thing to watch with it was "Hogan's Heroes" reruns on HDNET. If equipment makers had sat around waiting for content, we would still be be watching old standard def programming. If Apple supported 4k with this box, they would push the studios to provide more content.
There is no benefit to 4k
That is the worst argument. I saw the same argument about HDTV and Blu-Ray. Let's be clear, more pixels equals more detail. Yeah, if you sit too far away to see the extra resolution, then the benefits shrink. However, that has always been the case. It is one of the reasons many people have 65 inch TVs instead of 27 inch TVs these days.
To quote Apple:
"The 27‑inch iMac with Retina 5K display has four times as many pixels as the standard 27‑inch iMac display. So you experience unbelievable detail. On an unbelievable scale."
As you can see from the Apple photo below, 4k represents a huge benefit over 1080p.
To quote Apple:
"The 27‑inch iMac with Retina 5K display has four times as many pixels as the standard 27‑inch iMac display. So you experience unbelievable detail. On an unbelievable scale."
As you can see from the Apple photo below, 4k represents a huge benefit over 1080p.
Apple simply isn't ready for 4k yet
The amazing thing is that they are already touting 4k video for their new iPhone 6s. To quote Apple:
"It takes brilliant 4K video, up to four times the resolution of 1080p HD video"
4k video recording will already be part of Apple's best selling consumer item by the time the AppleTV 4 hits the market. So are these "brilliant 4k videos" supposed to only be seen on 27 inch iMac displays or would it make more sense to enable us to watch them on the much larger displays in our living rooms?
"It takes brilliant 4K video, up to four times the resolution of 1080p HD video"
4k video recording will already be part of Apple's best selling consumer item by the time the AppleTV 4 hits the market. So are these "brilliant 4k videos" supposed to only be seen on 27 inch iMac displays or would it make more sense to enable us to watch them on the much larger displays in our living rooms?
4k is too expensive to implement at under $200
That would make sense if it wasn't for the fact that the Nvidia Shield does 4k in a similar device for less than $200. In fact, it comes with a gaming remote with a headphone port, 2 USB3 inputs for adding devices like cameras and external drives, has 24/192 high resolution audio included, and 3GBs of RAM. It has Google Voice search, an App Store, and does more than the new AppleTV.
The only place they cut corners is that they only provided 16GB of storage, where the AppleTV at the same price has 64GB. However, that is countered with the fact that the Nvidia has a microSD slot that can provide more onboard storage for games and movies. As an example, Apple sells the 64GB AppleTV for $50 more than the 32GB version. For around $20 you could add 64GB to the onboard 16GBs (giving you 80GB of storage). That makes it slightly more expensive if you need exactly 64GBs, but it scales up nicely because you could add a 128GB card to it later when you need it. With Apple, you are stuck with 64GB until you buy a new AppleTV.
In any event, if Nvidia can offer all that at $200, Apple should be able to offer it even cheaper thanks to the economies of scale. Note: Since I wrote this article, Amazon has announced a new 4k FireTV and Alexa that costs...wait for it.....$99!
The only place they cut corners is that they only provided 16GB of storage, where the AppleTV at the same price has 64GB. However, that is countered with the fact that the Nvidia has a microSD slot that can provide more onboard storage for games and movies. As an example, Apple sells the 64GB AppleTV for $50 more than the 32GB version. For around $20 you could add 64GB to the onboard 16GBs (giving you 80GB of storage). That makes it slightly more expensive if you need exactly 64GBs, but it scales up nicely because you could add a 128GB card to it later when you need it. With Apple, you are stuck with 64GB until you buy a new AppleTV.
In any event, if Nvidia can offer all that at $200, Apple should be able to offer it even cheaper thanks to the economies of scale. Note: Since I wrote this article, Amazon has announced a new 4k FireTV and Alexa that costs...wait for it.....$99!
So why isn't there an AppleTV 4k?
That is the 4 million dollar question. If I were to speculate, my guess is that there are two reasons.
The first is that Apple likes large margins. It isn't that they could not make a profit by offering a 4k AppleTV at $200. It is that they have a formula that says they need to make X amount on every unit sold or it isn't worth their time.
The first is that Apple likes large margins. It isn't that they could not make a profit by offering a 4k AppleTV at $200. It is that they have a formula that says they need to make X amount on every unit sold or it isn't worth their time.
The second reason is to give them an obvious upgrade path. It is the equivalent of not including a camera in the first iPad or a speaker in the first iPod Touch. Apple, in this area, isn't trying to push us to 4k because they have no dog in that fight. If they had a 4k TV, they would be more interested. In a year or two, don't be surprised if Tim Cook gets up on stage and tells us about the magical, brilliant detail offered with their new 4k AppleTV.
You must hate Apple or be an Android Fanboy
Nope, I own several AppleTVs and love the platform (see my article "In the Defense of the AppleTV" for proof). In fact, I may end up buying one of the 4th gen models down the road if new apps are added that take advantage of Homekit or integrate in a compelling way with iOS.
It is nice that they gave it a spec bump and Siri ( although I would have preferred it to be implemented in a way that made it more similar to the Amazon Echo, but that is an article for another day). I also look forward to seeing the new apps that developers come up with.
It is nice that they gave it a spec bump and Siri ( although I would have preferred it to be implemented in a way that made it more similar to the Amazon Echo, but that is an article for another day). I also look forward to seeing the new apps that developers come up with.
Final Thoughts
It may surprise you, but I don't currently own an 4K HDTV. Right now, I own a 32 inch, 4k monitor, though. Unfortunately, at this point, I don't even own a 4k video source to push to the display. I plan to get a new laptop next year when Skylake (that has USB-C / Thunderbolt 3 that will drive two 4k displays simultaneously) is available. In other words, I am buying things now to prepare for the obvious 4k change that is coming. I don't update tech every year, so I always try to plan ahead.
To that end, I waited for Apple's announcement, and since the AppleTV does not support 4k, I went ahead and ordered the Nvidia Shield (it was just delivered, so I will review it soon). I will run it with my 4k monitor until I get the new laptop, and at that time, I will put it in with my 1080p living room system (one of the benefits of having advanced specs is that they are backwards compatible). Then when there is enough content, I will update my living room TV.
As I mentioned, I may also end up with a new AppleTV, 4 but I want to wait and see what it can offer me that I can't get with the combination of the AppleTV 3 and the Nvidia Shield. Right now, nothing I saw in the demonstration is thrilling me, but the spec jump and Siri alone may be enough to sway me since I use so many Apple devices and anything that expands that ecosystem and makes it more user friendly has to be considered.
To that end, I waited for Apple's announcement, and since the AppleTV does not support 4k, I went ahead and ordered the Nvidia Shield (it was just delivered, so I will review it soon). I will run it with my 4k monitor until I get the new laptop, and at that time, I will put it in with my 1080p living room system (one of the benefits of having advanced specs is that they are backwards compatible). Then when there is enough content, I will update my living room TV.
As I mentioned, I may also end up with a new AppleTV, 4 but I want to wait and see what it can offer me that I can't get with the combination of the AppleTV 3 and the Nvidia Shield. Right now, nothing I saw in the demonstration is thrilling me, but the spec jump and Siri alone may be enough to sway me since I use so many Apple devices and anything that expands that ecosystem and makes it more user friendly has to be considered.
RSS Feed