-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Apple Will Debut New Apple TV In September
- Thread starter giga
- Start date
- Status
It's weird to think that Apple might be the company that finally undoes Nintendo.
brianmcdoogle
Member
If these new rumors of touch/motion/buttons/microphone in the controller are accurate, I wonder if they're going to try and charge 149 or what.
infiniteloop
Member
I think the minimum will be $129, but wouldn't be surprised at $149.
If it enables the playing of iOS games on my TV comfortably with a controller, I'll pay it. And I'll fund at least 50 bucks of that by selling my current Apple TV.
These would be stupid price points and would essentially kill the device.
Said everyone in response to every Apple announcement ever.
WordAssassin
Member
Because not everyone owns an iPhone or an iPad. This isn't an Apple Watch that ties in to an already existing product, this can be marketed to anyone and everyone. You really think Apple would tie the controller of their Apple TV to an additional, several-hundred dollar purchase? That's insane.
Apple TV is its own thing. It's awesome how it integrates with Apple's ecosystem, of course, but you can be a Windows, Google, etc user and still have an Apple TV and not need any of the other shit they make to get it working. Requiring a separate purchase in the $200-400 range just to control it is downright absurd.
Now, they may make it so that games and such could also be played with any of Apple's other products, much like how the current Apple TV can use the actual remote or the Remote App for iOS, but it's not like you have to go out and buy an iPod Touch to use your Apple TV. They'll probably update the Remote App to mimic the new physical remote, but they won't require it of Apple TV users.
brianmcdoogle
Member
The best was the lead up to the iPad when "analysts" and "experts" were predicting $999, and it ended up being half that price... and they complained about it being too expensive anyway.
Rodney McKay
Member
My girlfriend and I have been wanting a new Apple TV to replace our crappy old one for ages. Every Apple conference there were rumors and then nothing would come. We just want one that is faster and easier to navigate (like with voice search or something).
But we got a new TV recently and it has Android built in, so it has a ton of apps built in, runs them well, and has support for Chromecast for anything that it doesn't have. And my favorite video playing app on my iPad (nPlayer) just got Chromecast support too, so we don't really need an Apple TV for Airplay anymore either.
If this new Apple TV coming out is going with the kitchen sink approach and loading in a high tech remote with motion and touch interfaces and the ability to run games I might be interested, but not if it balloons the price to double the current price of an Apple TV or more. And if the games are just iOS games on the TV, I don't think I'm going to be interested in that either, since most of those I like to play while I'm watching TV, not INSTEAD of watching TV.
But we got a new TV recently and it has Android built in, so it has a ton of apps built in, runs them well, and has support for Chromecast for anything that it doesn't have. And my favorite video playing app on my iPad (nPlayer) just got Chromecast support too, so we don't really need an Apple TV for Airplay anymore either.
If this new Apple TV coming out is going with the kitchen sink approach and loading in a high tech remote with motion and touch interfaces and the ability to run games I might be interested, but not if it balloons the price to double the current price of an Apple TV or more. And if the games are just iOS games on the TV, I don't think I'm going to be interested in that either, since most of those I like to play while I'm watching TV, not INSTEAD of watching TV.
Spoiler: The "less than $1000 tablet" rumor was deliberately leaked by Apple to set pricing expectations high so they could smash them.
brianmcdoogle
Member
My point is, you can't expect one price and say "that's a little on the high end" and have the price come in at half that, and then say "it's still too high", especially considering the competition and prices at the time.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Can we at least remember this is essentially a beefed up Netflix machine before we talk about price points? $150 and this device will not compete with the others, regardless of features. $200 and its DOA
Except it's not.
That's the wrong mindset.
This is Apple looking to take control of your TV and eventually, your entire house.
Do you have any links for the analysts who did this?
brianmcdoogle
Member
Podcasts back in the day. TWiT, Buzz Out Loud, stuff like that. Also TV people on CNBC and whatnot.
History of iPad rumors:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/26/the-apple-tablet-a-complete-history-supposedly/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/26/the-apple-tablet-a-complete-history-supposedly/
TheAbsolution
Member
Whether people will care enough about that at this moment to pay the premium is the question.
Yeah, that's nice, but no tablets existed to compete with it. A 200-300 dollar Apple TV is going to get laughed at and people will go right on back to buying Roku, Chromecast, and Fire TVs just like they're doing now.
McHuj
Member
Don't think this has been posted yet, and probably more for the gaming side:
http://www.macrumors.com/2015/08/28/apple-tv-motion-sensitive-control/
Unless, it's truly evolutionary, I don't think it will take off unless it's under $149.
http://www.macrumors.com/2015/08/28/apple-tv-motion-sensitive-control/
Unless, it's truly evolutionary, I don't think it will take off unless it's under $149.
davidcotton
Member
£199/£299/£399 then
The Real Abed
Perma-Junior
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's why they made it $100 in the first place. The original AppleTV, i.e. basically the first player on the scene, cost like $250. It wasn't until the competition came along and the scene changed that they redid the device and lowered the price. Hopefully they can keep the price low now.
KoruptData
Member
Does Apple TV support Apple Music?
Not now, but it will soon.
I like how the article linked refers to the gaming as "good enough". Sums up why Nintendo's business has been obliterated by Apple/Google. "Good enough" is pretty much anyone I know cares about when it comes to mobile gaming (or gaming in general).
jimbobsmells
Member
That's great. Congratulations.
Mark Gurman says price will be around $150–$200.
http://9to5mac.com/2015/08/30/apple-tv-4-200-october/
Streaming service will be available for ATV3 too:
http://9to5mac.com/2015/08/30/apple-tv-4-200-october/
Streaming service will be available for ATV3 too:
TheAbsolution
Member
$150 is within the reasonable price range that Apple can sell this at with the Apple premium.
For that Price it better be amazing and Somehow be able to operate my whole entertainment system. $200 for a remote that only works with the Apple TV would be nuts.
Zeyphersan
Banned
I can dig it
That would be betting a lot of having some special apps. I know some people will buy it because Apple but I'm not sure what it aims to do better than < $50 sticks.
TheAbsolution
Member
Price isn't the only consideration here. What about fees? Support? Cancelling anytime you want? Watching on any device? Ease of use? Channel selection?
All of those can be worth it over the cable TV "experience".
Siri, motion remote, a real app store/SDK, modern internals (a8), and 16gb of storage should be enough.
infiniteloop
Member
Good that the streaming service will be available on the current model.
From where? Whats the channel lineup? DVR? how much to rent the box?
From where? Whats the channel lineup? DVR? how much to rent the box?
The Main Event
Member
I'm in. Time to upgrade my Apple TV2.
I have a fancy Comcast X1 voice operated remote that I never use. I have a TV, an audio reliever, a cable box, a Blue Ray Player, an Apple TV, etc, and I only want to use one remote, not six of them.
I don't care how easy to use or how many bells and whistles the new Apple remote has... If it follows Apples usual design philosophy of only operating other Apple equipment then myself and many other people aren't going to care about motion controls or otherwise how good it is.
A universal remote is not happening, no matter how much you want it. Expecting Apple (or any other set top box maker) to support your blu ray disc player and audio receiver? Your expectations are nowhere near where they need to be.
I'm not saying I expect a universal remote from Apple. I thought I made it clear that I don't expect one. What I'm saying is a fancy remote that only operates your Apple TV is well yawn worthy. And I'm someone who has a ridiculous amount of Apple products.
You just listed a bunch of devices you said you only wanted to use one remote for. That's what I meant by universal. So this expectation for Apple (or Google, Roku, or Amazon) to make a remote that can control these other devices of yours isn't reasonable. How is a remote only working for one device some Apple design philosophy and not the norm?
infiniteloop
Member
i have 3 HDMI inputs in use: Cable box, Apple TV, Mac mini for Plex.
If the new Apple TV can replace all them when the streaming service is out, then great.
If the new Apple TV can replace all them when the streaming service is out, then great.
I think that's the idea -- replace everything.
I still wonder what they plan to do with audio.
Apple has no audio equipment plan. Their plan is HDMI out and then do whatever you want with your second or third remote for Audio IMO.
well my point is that if all these articles are correct that Apple is making a play to control the living room and take over selling TV subscriptions over the Internet, and if they're key selling point is going to be a fancy intuitive remote control that "just works" much much better than everything else out there... Then to have it not be a universal remote is a big mistake.
- Status