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:
Nice.According to our sources, the software update that enables Apples cable-replacement service is currently planned to also become available for the third-generation Apple TV.
I hope they have a ton of them ready to ship to all countries.
Please have automatic 24hz output for movie playback.
It'll probably have HDMI-CEC, so that would mostly take care of the TV. The streaming service should replace your cable box. The only others left are your blu ray player and your receiver. The former you can't expect them to care about, so you're left with your receiver remote.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.
Siri, motion remote, a real app store/SDK, modern internals (a8), and 16gb of storage should be enough.
Did a search, didnt see anything. Do you have any hard links or you're relying on memory?Podcasts back in the day. TWiT, Buzz Out Loud, stuff like that. Also TV people on CNBC and whatnot.
LolSiri, motion remote, a real app store/SDK, modern internals (a8), and 16gb of storage should be enough.
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.
This might be new for Apple, but it's kinda old hat in the market.
The Shield didn't have the developer and app ecosystem that Apple has. People don't know what they want until it's delivered to them the right way. Not to mention as far as I know, the Shield never tried to be a Homekit-esque hub for smart devices around the house.Particularly I don't know that power is much of a draw, certainly wasn't for Shield. People mostly buy these to watch shows unless something changes, and it's not like nobody has tried other angles.
Time warner. Includes DVR and on demand for most networks. And again, not subject to bandwidth issues. 40 as the starting point is too high.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?
Not sure if you know, but there's a market for that model due to it being jail breakable. I sold mine for 130 two months ago.I'm in. Time to upgrade my Apple TV2.
Why? If Apple even has ambitions for TV services in other countries we won't see them before way past this device.This will launch exclusively for the US first, for sure.
Time warner. Includes DVR and on demand for most networks. And again, not subject to bandwidth issues. 40 as the starting point is too high.
Because those channels are only available in the US.Why? If Apple even has ambitions for TV services in other countries we won't see them before way past this device.
It should be a typical rollout like with the iPhone if they have enough units.
It's 119 a month for 50 meg Internet, basic cable including ESPN, and phone. Also includes two DVRs.You pay less than $40 per month for cable, DVR, and on-demand, and that also includes the rental fee for all of the equipment? That's a pretty incredible deal. Are you still on some kind of promotional period price?
I cut the cord a while ago, but I always hear horror stories of people paying $100-200 per month for their cable + Internet after all of the taxes, fees, rental costs, etc are added up. Maybe that's only people that have HBO, Showtime, sports packages, etc?
It's 119 a month for 50 meg Internet, basic cable including ESPN, and phone. Also includes two DVRs.
It's 119 a month for 50 meg Internet, basic cable including ESPN, and phone. Also includes two DVRs.
Dear lord, I'm paying $38 a month for 50 meg internet and HBO Go. I can't imagine spending $120+ to my cable company.
Wouldn't they just talk about their streaming services with the new apple tv ? if the streaming service is going to come out in 2016 why not just announce it
I'm a little confused about your math, then, if you're calculating that the TV portions of your package cost less than $40 per month. Obviously the fees and bundles different depending on ISP and where you live, but my 85 meg internet is ~$65 per month, so with slower internet + the bundle discount, the internet portion of your package should definitely be cheaper than that, which would make the cost of the TV/cable part quite a bit more than $40.
I guess what it will ultimately come down to is: will Apple offer DVR with its cable-replacement TV service, and what channels will be included.
Lots of things are "old hat" to the market, and then Apple comes in and implements them and it's the first time the mainstream starts using those features. Don't underestimate the power and reach of their user base and marketing.
The Shield didn't have the developer and app ecosystem that Apple has. People don't know what they want until it's delivered to them the right way. Not to mention as far as I know, the Shield never tried to be a Homekit-esque hub for smart devices around the house.
That's just the bundle price. Alone TV costs less than 40 dollars.
I don't know a single person that would dump cable for a 40+ dollar solution from Apple or anyone else whose quality rises and falls based on bandwidth. It's a horrible price. The people I know that have left just use Netflix and occasionally grab a month of HBO Now or Showtime. 40+ isn't going to get them back.
Really, Apple is unlikely to do much better in terms of app support because that's nearly everyone, even FireTV hasn't really seen huge success in apps either and they have both the largest ecosystem for TV apps and exclusive first party development. We just aren't seeing a lot of take from consumers or devs here
What benefit there was to using mobile platforms in the living room is a complete eroded with the current gen because they all support those things. I think the only open software avenue right now is to see if maybe you could get business users.
Really, Apple is unlikely to do much better in terms of app support because that's nearly everyone, even FireTV hasn't really seen huge success in apps either and they have both the largest ecosystem for TV apps and exclusive first party development.
Who are the current players for TV apps? Amazon and Roku? Apple TV will likely out rank those the day it's released.
What first party apps are only available on FireTV?
So the bundle costs more than buying the services separately? That makes no sense.
It's probably a good thing that Apple markets to more than just the "people you know" then, although I'm sure the size of those 2 groups is comparable ; )
I imagine this is aimed less towards cord-cutters and more towards current cable subscribers. Let's be honest -- if cord-cutters are getting by just fine on Netflix and an occasional month of HBO Now and Showtime, they're never going to come back to regular cable (or an equivalent streaming version) no matter what the price. They're kidding themselves if they think $15-20 (or maybe they expect even less!) per month for a full cable package is realistic.
No, the Phone service is 20+ and the internet is 55. Then factor in a couple DVRs and those new cable boxes that are mandatory just to receive a signal on Time Warner's network.
If the service is aimed at non-cord cutters, they're already dead.
How will Apple TV outrank other established players on the day of release? How many developers do you think Apple is sharing the SDK with right now / how many exclusive apps do you think Apple will launch with?
Apps are a non factor. Most of the apps people care about are already available on AppleTV (Netflix, HBO etc) and/or are decidely multiplatform (Plex etc).
Apple's selling point will be first and foremost their new interface.
With the official debut of the next-generation Apple TV less than two weeks away, sources have provided additional details on Apples pricing, availability, and product lineup plans for its set-top devices. According to sources, the fourth-generation Apple TV will be priced below $200, and is on track to become available in October. Apple executives are apparently still finalizing the price of the revamped living room device, but the latest options call for a starting price point of either $149 or $199, both higher than the third-generation Apple TV
"How will the iPhone outrank other established players on the day of release? How many developers do you think Apple is sharing the SDK with right now / how many exclusive apps do you think Apple will launch [the iPhone App Store] with?
Apps are a non factor. Most of the apps people care about are already available on the iPhone (Phone, SMS, Visual Voicemail).
Apple's selling point will be first and foremost their new interface."
You're selling the entire development community short with their ability to innovate and come up with new app categories and ideas, especially with a device and market that's relatively nascent and untapped.
Apple TV 4 coming in October for under $200, Apple TV 3 stays & gets new streaming service
$199 is a steep price point, even with the app store functionality.
Really now? People were saying the same thing about the Apple Watch last year, that Apple would just sweep in and have tons of great useful apps compared to Pebble, Android wear and Samsung. How did that turn out for them? Apple doesn't own excluive TV or Gaming IP; there won't be a killer app at launch
How will Apple TV outrank other established players on the day of release? How many developers do you think Apple is sharing the SDK with right now / how many exclusive apps do you think Apple will launch with?
Apps are a non factor. Most of the apps people care about are already available on AppleTV (Netflix, HBO etc) and/or are decidely multiplatform (Plex etc).
Apple's selling point will be first and foremost their new interface.
um, maybe you missed the original post I was replying to claimed Apple would have tons of apps besting other competing devices at launch. Here he is again:Where did I say anything about having a killer app at launch? Why do you think it's at all valuable to evaluate a product's success after less than a year on the market? Especially markets that are so young like smartwatches and home automation stuff.
Lots of Apple's current flagship products had mediocre 1st (and sometimes 2nd and even 3rd) generations. That's not the point. It doesn't need to be a smash hit day one. This is much more about getting a foot in the door as more and more home products get upgraded to "smart" devices.
Again, if you're limiting your view on this to just a "TV and 'maybe' gaming product", you're being narrow-minded about it IMO.
Early adopters and the vocal minority of power users on the internet care about tons of apps. The mainstream doesn't care about Plex or playing Angry Birds on their TV.New interface? Who would care about that? People have been asking for an App Store for years. How are Apps a non factor? It'll be one of the biggest selling points.
If it's being announced September and released in October they'll be a ton of apps day one.
um, maybe you missed the original post I was replying to claimed Apple would have tons of apps besting other competing devices at launch. Here he is again:
Early adopters and the vocal minority of power users on the internet care about tons of apps. The mainstream doesn't care about Plex or playing Angry Birds on their TV.
The interface, signified by the new remote and the better TV experience it enabes, will be what attracts the mainstream to the thing.
It's not like the Kindle Fire and Phone are seen huge success in apps either, yet the iPad and its app support are doing quite well. Again, wait and see how that looks once Apple enters the market and gets some traction. Are you really using Amazon as an example of strong first-party development, and the Android marketplace as a developer friendly and supported ecosystem?
I think you're holding onto a really narrow view of what's possible, here. Home automation and smart devices, the Internet of Things, etc are just really starting to take off. IMO your stance here would be like dismissing apps on smartphones right when the first gen iPhone was announced because "no one has gotten it to work so far".
Who are the current players for TV apps? Amazon and Roku? Apple TV will likely out rank those the day it's released.
What first party apps are only available on FireTV?
um, maybe you missed the original post I was replying to claimed Apple would have tons of apps besting other competing devices at launch
Look don't let bias tell you Android is not equally the platform iOS is in terms of developer interest.
But the comparison is Apple wouldn't have first party game development at all and they'd be pulling for the same pools of developers who are either building for something like Roku and FireTV or the few dipping a toe in with Shield.
I'd seriously doubt home automation. Not only has HomeKit been hit with setbacks getting out the door nobody is really supporting it. That and newer products like Echo are already challenging the idea that people really want to use mobile and wearables for home automation. Now Apple TV could conceivably have similar functionality via Siri, but if it's visual-centric I have strong doubts about the effectiveness. At least that would leave it somewhere in line with Windows 10 or Kinect in terms of how people use it.
You are being pretty narrow minded about the potential of apps.
I'd seriously doubt home automation. Not only has HomeKit been hit with setbacks getting out the door nobody is really supporting it. That and newer products like Echo are already challenging the idea that people really want to use mobile and wearables for home automation. Now Apple TV could conceivably have similar functionality via Siri, but if it's visual-centric I have strong doubts about the effectiveness. At least that would leave it somewhere in line with Windows 10 or Kinect in terms of how people use it.
I mean if HomeKit had taken off already, Apple had some killer exclusive video content, we saw some sort of life from TV apps, or Apple hadn't dragged on so badly to lose all their marketshare I'd see this different. But an angle doesn't immediately jump out for how they'll succeed other than patented "Apple Magic." Maybe that is enough?
I didn't even think of the ATV4 as a possible home kit hub. That sounds incredible
infiniteloop, is claiming that Apple is going to sell the device on the potental of apps to the mainstream
Why are you so sure about the potential of apps anyway? We've had the TV for decades and it seems to be mostly a passive medium. It's hard enough getting the mainstream to care about 'fun' TV apps (i.e. games) I'm struggling to see why people would care about apps instead of watching Netflix, ESPN, YouTube... First person to figure out a social network for the AppleTV probably makes 1 billion dollars though...
Things I want from the new Apple TV:
* "Siri scrub to 18:15" no more precision scrubbing failure in most shitty streaming back ends
* "Siri share the last 17 seconds with Becky"
* "Siri open a Twitter sideview showin my mentions"
Etc
I really like how Roku handles apps. Compare Roku Netflix to Apple TV netflix. Clear winner.
Go back in time to the launch of the App Store on the iPhone and replace "TV" with "Phone" and "Netflix, ESPN, YouTube" with "browsing the web in Safari and sending SMS".
Oh, and the first person who figured out a social network on the iPhone did make 1 billion dollars (Instagram).
You seem to be stuck on the idea that this is just a device that's tethered to a large television set and its only purpose is to broadcast content for consumption onto it. As if it's just a smartphone or tablet with a much, much bigger screen. That problem has already been solved. Leave that to the USB sticks.
The iPad has tons of apps but most most people just use it as a consumption device for Netflix, reading books, browsing the web.
The iPhone didn't get Whatsapp, Instagram, Uber, SnapChat etc on the day the App Store launched (and developers had over a year, plus 3 months with an SDK, to get ready for that launch).
The Apple Watch is a recent example that useful apps don't just magically appear once Apple gives developers an SDK. It's presumptuous to claim AppleTV apps are going to be a mainstream thing
Wasn't there also a rumor that Apple/Beats was working on a Sonos competitor to replace all your receivers?