New iPhone shoots 4k video, new Apple TV can't play it.

[kilofoxtrot]

Weird...... one would think otherwise. It appears the new Apple TV supports 1080p at best.

Bummer..

 

[Bigeric23]

I guess about as weird as 4K video on a 16GB iPhone. :concern:

 

[aballerdotcom]

Why am I not surprised?

That's Apple though.

Release it then make customers wait for the a new release to get all the options or the options that should of been in the first one and are no longer needed.

 

[Not Quite Right]

Most users have 1080p sets currently, the 4K penetration is not there yet. Better to keep the price in check now and wait for demand to build, rather than incur the expense for a feature few could use ...

 

[Art H]

I'm sorry but thats not good rationale. More and more people have much faster internet connections and 4k televisions have become ubiquitous in the marketplace. They are very cheap at this point. The content is there already, and growing daily. Have you seen Amazons latest release??? It just doesn't make sense for Apple to release this Apple TV sans 4K, meanwhile the phones record and can edit 4k videos. I think Apple is hiding something from us at this moment. I'll be a monkeys uncle if I am buying an Apple TV without 4K in 2016.

 

[Not Quite Right]

So don't buy one then. Sounds like Amazons Fire TV is a better fit ...

 

[Derrick4Real]

it's strange and not exactly uniform but as a consumer 4k is not on my list of conditions at all so it's not a big deal to me. Apple tv has never really been for me because i need a device who's primary job is playing my own content off an attached usb hard drive full of movies and music of varying codecs (at the moment until i can reencode some of it). As opposed to buying content from itunes. But 4K just isn't a condition. Largely because i got a 1080i tv also and when i upgrade i'm unlikely to pay extra for 4k. More hdmi ports? yeah i'd pay extra though.

 

[kilofoxtrot]

I am perplexed at the lack of 4k. Usually Apple is at the forefront of technology. USB-C, 802.11ac BT4.0 etc etc

Based on Apple's AppleTV refresh cycle, not saying that it wont change, 4k will be common well before the next AppleTV is released.

To me, that is very un-Appleish.

I think Art is on to something. I wouldnt be surprised if the new unit is capable of 4k, its just not enabled.

 

[mphillips828]

I'm sorry but thats not good rationale. More and more people have much faster internet connections and 4k televisions have become ubiquitous in the marketplace. They are very cheap at this point. The content is there already, and growing daily. Have you seen Amazons latest release??? It just doesn't make sense for Apple to release this Apple TV sans 4K, meanwhile the phones record and can edit 4k videos. I think Apple is hiding something from us at this moment. I'll be a monkeys uncle if I am buying an Apple TV without 4K in 2016.

Just checked out bestbuy and the cheapest 4K offering for a tv is: $829.99 for a 43" vizio. That's in Canada. And that's not cheap and people would be much more inclined to spend that same amount of money to get a 1080P tv that's like 60". Get a lot more bang for your buck not getting 4K at this point in time in the consumer market. 4K is awesome but it's not there yet in the general population.

 

[SprSynJn]

Most users have 1080p sets currently, the 4K penetration is not there yet. Better to keep the price in check now and wait for demand to build, rather than incur the expense for a feature few could use ...

Why do you suppose they are offering it on the new iPhone then?

 

[Not Quite Right]

Why do you suppose they are offering it on the new iPhone then?

Keeping up with the Joneses ... Plain and simple.
Next year this time we'll all be talking about who's upgrading to the AppleTV S with 4k support, a faster processor, support for tvOS 2, and more storage space ...
What are you guys new to Apple products, or something? ...

 

[Art H]

Just checked out bestbuy and the cheapest 4K offering for a tv is: $829.99 for a 43" vizio. That's in Canada. And that's not cheap and people would be much more inclined to spend that same amount of money to get a 1080P tv that's like 60". Get a lot more bang for your buck not getting 4K at this point in time in the consumer market. 4K is awesome but it's not there yet in the general population.

I was under the impression that size doesn't matter..... It's the motion of the ocean........

 

[mphillips828]

I was under the impression that size doesn't matter..... It's the motion of the ocean........

Size always matters. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise!

 

[SprSynJn]

What are you guys new to Apple products, or something? ...

No, just wanted to hear your reason as to why they would offer it on one device, but not the other. Personally I've never given it much thought. Whenever they bring it out is when I wonder whether or not it's needed.

 

[mphillips828]

No, just wanted to hear your reason as to why they would offer it on one device, but not the other. Personally I've never given it much thought. Whenever they bring it out is when I wonder whether or not it's needed.

I really think Apple has thought about this. To make the Apple TV play 4K they would have had to increase the base price point by probably a decent amount. Enough to make the base model seem too expensive for the general consumer. And the cons outweigh the benefits. Basically you get the ability to output 4K yet the only thing most people would have to take 4K video is the new iPhone. All tv and movies now aren't 4K so that wouldn't affect anything.

Now if they did it they would have to increase the base price point and people like myself wouldn't justify spending that much more for a resolution that isn't main stream yet.

Also if they included 4K it would only benefit those using a 4K TV which lets face it, most people don't have yet and won't for a few more years.

Finally it also only benefits those with the newest iPhones. For the vast majority of people who aren't buying the new iPhones the 4K doesn't even matter.

Not much benefit to including 4K this time around. In an update in 2 years it may make more sense. Until I think Apple research sees that the majority of TVs being purchased are 4K compatible, they won't have much reason to provide that in their offerings.

Apple will never be the top of the specs race and this shouldn't surprise us ever.

 

[MCube74]

Apple will probably release 4th Gen Rev A next year. Just like they did with the 3rd Gen.

 

[cwaffles]

I though Apple said from the get go that the Apple TV would not do 4K video. In all honesty it makes perfect sense to me. We have a 4K TV and honestly, there still not a bunch of 4K videos out there on Nextflix, etc. Not sure how many folks have 4K TV's but FAR more people have TV's that can do 1080P. A 4K Apple TV would cater to a very limited audience right now.

 

[marcobrien]

The hardware has been checked & it fully supports 4K. I just think they'll enable it in a future tvOS update. I reckon they're waiting for all the 4K specs & protocols to be finalised as at the moment, I think it's still not been fully agreed by all the 4K manufacturers.

Keeping my fingers crossed. Don't want to be upgrading my Apple TV every year like I do with my iPhone & iPad.

 

[Ledsteplin]

My understanding is the 4k is not for everyone. It's mostly for professionals. You don't want to use it a lot anyway. It takes a LOT of space. 720p is best for most everyday videos. Even 1080p takes a lot of space. I took 5 four minute videos with 1080p. They took up about 3 gb of space on my 6s Plus. I uploaded them to YouTube. I'm using 720p from now on unless it's wedding videos or some such.

 

[wdfly]

Most users have 1080p sets currently, the 4K penetration is not there yet. Better to keep the price in check now and wait for demand to build, rather than incur the expense for a feature few could use ...

"Yet" is the only important part of your post. In less than 2 years it will be the norm and Apple will refresh the Apple TV with 4K enabled and we will buy new boxes all over again and that was their plan all along.