Why Does the Apple TV Still Exist? (sixcolors.com) 189
Apple commentator Jason Snell writes: Why does this product still exist, and is there anywhere for it to go next? Gruber and Thompson [two other columnists] suggest that perhaps the way forward is to lean into an identity as a low-end gaming console. Maybe amp up the processor power, bundle a controller, and try to use Apple Arcade to emphasize that this is a box that is for more than watching video. The thing is, that's really been the story of the Apple TV for the last few years, and so far as I can tell, it's basically gone nowhere. Apple isn't Nintendo or Sony or Microsoft when it comes to gaming. Apple's track record with gaming products isn't solid, to say the least. It's hard for me to see this succeeding -- but it doesn't mean Apple won't try. The other possibility that I've come up with is to merge the Apple TV with some other technologies in order to make something more than just a simple TV streamer. Gaming can be a part of that, yes, but there needs to be more.
Broader HomeKit support, perhaps with support for other wireless home standards, would help, as would a much more sophisticated set of home automations. And if Apple really wants to continue to play in the home-theater space, I've been saying for years that there's room for an Apple SoundBar, that could integrate the big sound of HomePod with the Apple TV software to create a solid music and video experience. Then there's the final possibility: No more Apple TV. Removing it simplifies Apple's product naming scheme (Apple TV is a hardware box, an app, and a streaming service, but not yet a dessert topping), and allows the company to focus on other things -- perhaps including other home-themed products that might be more up its alley. I don't think Apple is going to kill the Apple TV, even though I might recommend that it do so. If I had to predict a next step, I'd go with Gruber and Thompson: Apple TV Arcade, an updated, premium-priced box that will lean into games and other features that competing TV boxes don't offer. I'm not optimistic that it'll be successful, but it does seem like something Apple would try.
Broader HomeKit support, perhaps with support for other wireless home standards, would help, as would a much more sophisticated set of home automations. And if Apple really wants to continue to play in the home-theater space, I've been saying for years that there's room for an Apple SoundBar, that could integrate the big sound of HomePod with the Apple TV software to create a solid music and video experience. Then there's the final possibility: No more Apple TV. Removing it simplifies Apple's product naming scheme (Apple TV is a hardware box, an app, and a streaming service, but not yet a dessert topping), and allows the company to focus on other things -- perhaps including other home-themed products that might be more up its alley. I don't think Apple is going to kill the Apple TV, even though I might recommend that it do so. If I had to predict a next step, I'd go with Gruber and Thompson: Apple TV Arcade, an updated, premium-priced box that will lean into games and other features that competing TV boxes don't offer. I'm not optimistic that it'll be successful, but it does seem like something Apple would try.
It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: It exists because (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: It exists because (Score:5, Interesting)
It exists because of UI, Siri, and the remote. The TV built in apps suck by comparison, let alone the Smart Tv privacy issues. I use Apple TVs on all my TVs and donâ(TM)t connect the TVs themselves to the network, unless something is wrong and I try to firmware update. Just my $0.02
That's what I use Apple TV for: YouTube streaming through my mobile phone using the YouTube app, Netflix, Prime Video, a number of other streaming services including music because my TV is hooked up to a quality sound system and occasionally for low-end gaming where the sound system helps make the experience a bit more fun. On top of that the cable TV companies in my neck of the woods offer streaming apps for Apple TV so I don't have to keep a Cable TV box around. I just fire up the Cable TC app, log in once and Bob's your uncle, a couple of hundred TV channels to browse. Not that I watch cable TV much but others in my home do. Same for satellite TV providers, some of them have moved over to streaming foreign TV channels over the internet instead of selling you a big, expensive and neighbour annoying dish installation. I also know a bunch of people who use hacked versions of Apple TV for accessing and watching pirated media. Another plus about these types of boxes is that, if you don't give a shit about gaming, these TV boxes, Apple and other brands, tend to be somewhat cheaper than the gaming consoles he mentioned by virtue of not needing the expensive hardware you need for high end gaming. My Apple TV just fuses over a dozen sources of media together in one box, I get excellent update support (my Apple TV is at least 5 years old and still gets updates) and it's relatively cheap. Same goes for any number of similar products from other vendors than Apple. Anybody asking the question: "Why Does the Apple TV Still Exist?" is a high end console gamer who thinks everybody else is also a high end console gamer.
Re: It exists because (Score:4, Informative)
There are many other devices that do it better and cheaper - Roku owns most of this market.
AppleTV is much more limited and much more expensive than its direct competitors. I have several from different vendors and the AppleTV is the least useful and least usable even though I love my MacBooks and iPhones. Yes, a set top box is critical as the media delivery landscape fragments, but Apple is doing a very poor job of staying relevant in the hardware portion of this space.
Re: It exists because (Score:4, Informative)
As of a few months ago Roku has AirPlay support. It also has an Apple TV+ app, so you can get to Apple video content on the big screen via that.
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Informative)
Plex has abandoned non-4K Samsung TVs, despite them literally still being sold today....
Re: It exists because (Score:2)
Get a Roku and then you can use Plex with any TV
Re: (Score:3)
Which is a shame because plex used to be the system to go to when you wanted a home media server system. It did that one thing and it did it really well. Now they want to be the one stop shop for everything TV related.
Now they do podcasts, a very crappy live tv thing, movies on demand, and live news. They are trying to do everything and not doing any of it well. An now their home media center is starting to suffer.
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't speak for the others but the Firestick is more than capable and is always on sale at around £40. That's less than a quarter the price of the Apple TV for no gain that I can see.
I think if I was looking to spend the amount Apple are looking for and didn't want to just build my own I'd actually pay slightly more (or get a refurb) for a PS4, which has everything on it including TV+, Prime, Netflix, etc, etc, as well as 500GB storage and proper games.
As far as I'm concerned though, you can't beat
Re: It exists because (Score:2)
I can honestly say the appletv got the least playtime of all my devices including the chromecast which I find unsuitable for what i needed
Re: (Score:3)
The Fire Stick doesn't do casting well (or at all from an iDevice). Other than that it seems usable. But I do know people who on principle refuse to have any Amazon (or any Google) hardware in their home.
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm one of those. Never trust a company that secretly builds microphones into their devices to spy on you.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
That's correct.
Re: (Score:2)
The Fire Stick doesn't do casting well (or at all from an iDevice).
The problem is Apple here. They rely on their proprietary protocols (AirPlay and all). But you know that and still chose Apple. Enjoy the lock-in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Roku, ChromeCast and the like are full of ads, that's how they keep the cost down for these things in the first place. And they crash, regularly. I have a Roku, I have to restart it every few days by unplugging and plugging it back in, often the audio crashes with the only fix to unplug it and plug it back in, it's annoying as hell, digging deep into the menu to restart the device doesn't even "restart" it, it just reloads the UI and most of the content is 1080p upscaled to 4K.
On the other hand, the AppleTV
Re: It exists because (Score:2)
Sounds like you have a bad device. Both of my current ones have uptime over a year.
The upscaling from 1080 is an individual content provider problem of not delivering 4K. Itâ(TM)s not a Roku limitation.
Re: It exists because (Score:3)
Re:It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it sad that set-top boxes remain an essential part of the equation. Given periodic updates in codecs and the associated performance requirements, I don't want my giant TV to become trash as it becomes out of date. My ideal is a big dumb screen and a small, replaceable box that drives it. It also lets me keep my big dumb screen and replace the box if, e.g., Google and my TV manufacturer fight each other and the TV manufacturer removes the YouTube app (this happened with Amazon stuff a while ago, now over).
Finally, you can use set top boxes that don't spy on you and replace them when they do, since all smart TVs seem to. Hell, the only updates I ever hear of smart TVs getting is adding ads after you bought them.
Re:It exists because (Score:4, Interesting)
I just hooked up an old Dell Optiplex to my TV. Cost me $100 and does everything that a set top box does and more . The interface isn't great, and that's probably the only downside. But there isn't a media service that doesn't work on Windows. You can also play games and use it as a Plex server for the other devices in your house. When that machine dies, I'll probably spend a bit more and get something that can do some more modern gaming. Having an actual computer under your TV is way better than any media box.
Re: It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
My webOS LG Smart TV still does everything, at least on paper. The GUI is OK, it does multi tasking (fast switching between application without restarting them), and the wii-like remote allows easy navigation much better than the typical 4 arrows.
I still bought a FireStick and here is why:
1. The Netflix on the smart TV keeps crashing, and the only solution appears to be to factory reset the TV every couple of months. Entering all the settings again take me half an hour of pain (entering passwords without a
Re: (Score:3)
Bingo.
Also it probably runs on all the ARM chips they can't otherwise put in phones. All you need is a working h264/h265 decoder and enough working cpu core performance to run it.
Re: It exists because (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, a simple TV streamer is a good thing to have.
Re:It exists because (Score:4, Interesting)
Set-top streamers exist because so-called "smart TVs" are so horrifically stupid and poorly executed that there is still a thriving market for buying a low-cost piece of hardware to hang off the back of the TV to do what the "smart" TV should be able to do.
I'd much rather pay $100 - $200 to have a discrete component that actually gets updated, performs well, allows access to popular software, supports things like AC3 passthrough (extra points for additional surround sound codecs) to a home theater receiver, and doesn't incessantly show me ads and default to bullshit streaming channels I want to NEVER see and cannot remove.
Signed, the owner of two Nvidia SHIELD TV products and an Apple TV. As a prologue, I'd love it if the "smart" TV died. TV standards don't change as rapidly as software standards for video playback, so I'd rather invest in a TV that I can use *all* the features of for 5+ years, and swap out the playback component as they change / improve on a far more rapid schedule.
A TV that incorporates a video playback app that is slow AF out of the box, and never receives updates so that it eventually will not function is a completely useless "feature" and will eventually represent paid-for value that no longer exists. Kind of like the sweet blu-ray player I have that has a "blockbuster" streaming video app on it. Well done, Samsung.
Re: It exists because (Score:3)
Why not? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Why not? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I take it you fell for the smartTV instead of addon boxes like FireTV and Roku.
It's hard to find a consumer TV that is not some sort of smart TV; whether it s a roll your own by the manufacturer or licensed from Roku et. al. I simply turn off the smart features and use my Apple TV or firestick. I could buy a large monitoor but that would cost way more than a TV. Like you, I find the flexibility of a setbox worth the price. In addition, Apple TV is useful to connect to projectors/screens for presentations using Airplay.
Why Does the Apple TV Still Exist? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, exactly. It’s not as if every product needs to conquer the world.
By and large, people are going to consume streaming media. So the only question Apple needs ask is - “are we, as a company, better off with those people using our own offering or a competitor’s product?”
Because (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Because (Score:5, Informative)
This, basically.
Im invested in the Apple ecosystem, and Im also invested in Plex. So when Plex decides my 2020 Android TV is suddenly “unsupported” and the app breaks, I studied my options (switch to something other than Plex, buy an Android set top box, buy an Apple TV, continue to Chromecast everything) ultimately my choice was to buy an Apple TV.
Best decision I have made in a while for my home media setup. Loving it.
Re:Because (Score:5, Informative)
The same happened to me. About ten years ago I had a MythTV install, with PCI boards both for DTB and satellite, and I used to spend hours recompiling MythTV and applying patches. I also had to write a Linux kernel driver to support an homemade keyboard-equipped remote control. Then, when streaming became a reality, I started using Kodi on Raspberry Pi. After more years of updating plugins, recovering from botched updates, dealing with obscure configuration options, I realized that probably had spent more time fixing the software instead of using it. So I bought an Apple TV. Now if I want to watch a movie, I just needs to press "Play". I still use Kodi/OSMC occasionally, for some stuff, and I absolutely do not intend to disparage MythTV, Kodi or similar software. They are great, and I owe a lot to their authors, but there's a level of integration, simplicity and reliability that simply cannot be currently reached.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
After more years of updating plugins, recovering from botched updates, dealing with obscure configuration options, I realized that probably had spent more time fixing the software instead of using it.
Ha ha, this sounds just like my adventures with desktop Linux in the early 2000s. Eventually, I decided to just buy my first Mac.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, same here.
Re: (Score:2)
The same happened to me...
My story is similar. Although I wanted to use a MythTV setup, I ran Windows Media Center for the longest time, primarily because my cable company insists on adding the CCI CopyOnce flag to most of my channels and WMC was, for the longest time, the only thing that could use it. I set up my WMC box toward the end of Windows 7's service life, so plugins were a bit sparse...but I was able to get Plex and Netflix and Pandora to work, and there was exactly one version of PowerDVD that included a WMC plugin which
Re: (Score:2)
Wife forced me into Apple TV and I am pretty happy with it. Things I wish for still:
Remote beeper (activate from phone) to find remote
Multiple remote (his/hers) with login capability for apps to bypass the who is using step.
A magic app that gives me clean access to all my subscriptions and accounts. Hulu, free youtube, netflix, etc.
BT speaker option when she wants me in silent mode.
Re: Because (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I also love my Apple TV. I have a 3th generation, have had it seemingly always and it's still updated regularly. In de beginning it had a few kid's diseases but now it just works.
Re: (Score:2)
FIY, YouTube support for the 3rd generation Apple TV is coming to an end soon. I'm hoping Apple are close to releasing a new Apple TV with a new (better) remote.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, and I don't like it. But I can stream from my iPhone. That works a lot better than from the MacBook Pro.
Re: (Score:2)
You just described the Amazon Firestick which comes in at less than a quarter of the price, so I'm not really sure what justifies the price difference. Not that I'm dissing - buy whatever works for you - but I just don't see it myself unless you're desperate to view photos or something you have stuck in the Apple eco-system.
Re: Because (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
A small but growing number of people want nothing to do with Google or Amazon. I won't sign up for YouTube because of Google. As for Amazon... I stopped using them over two years ago.
Apple TV is a decent alternative to the others out there.
I have a Sony 50in TV that is supposed to be a 'SmartTV'. It isn't very smart then half the services have never worked from day 1. That didn't bother me because I didn't buy it for the so-called 'smart' bits. I have an Apple TV and a FreeSat (the UK free to air satellite
Re: (Score:2)
It exists because (Score:5, Insightful)
A better question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A better question (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct answer. This article is predicated on Jason Snell's ignorance, it deserves neither responses nor views.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's okay as long as you don't click on the article link, so that this idiot (Jason Snell) does not get page views.
Re: (Score:2)
That's okay as long as you don't click on the article link, so that this idiot (Jason Snell) does not get page views.
Click on what now? Sir, this is slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
I think he thinks that streaming devices shouldn't exist and every box under the TV should be an Xbox, PS5 or Nintendo.
Re: (Score:2)
Install a game console inside a trash, you say? Challenge accepted!
Re: A better question (Score:2)
take your Apple TV / Chromecast (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: take your Apple TV / Chromecast (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with a roll-your-own solution (e.g. GloDroid, Anbox, Androidx86) is lack of certified DRM to stream anything above 720p.
OTOH, my crappy NBN connection buffers regularly on 1080 youtube, so I'm in no hurry to upgrade to any 4K equipment!
Re: (Score:2)
You should try 240p, dude! It streams so fast it starts playing before I can even choose what to watch.
Ain’t nobody got time for that (Score:2)
Been there, done that for a while, even networked the Satellite dish so we could watch from it in multiple rooms using Kodi. Impressive.
But I realized that I don‘t have time for this. So we have 5 Apple TVs now in two locations. They work very well and are nicely integrated into everything Apple we use. ...) we have, while MQTT/Home-Assistant stuff still is the backend. It just works with all the iDevi
On top they are the invisible gateway to Apple Home for all the smart crap (shutters, sensors, light,
Re: (Score:2)
I paid £140 five years ago for my Apple TV 4. That's really not much money, and it's still got life in it. For your $5, you've spent a lot more of your personal time than me on it. Actually, I lie: I did try Kodi on it, until I realised it was sucking up a disproportionate amount of my time than it was deliverying in enterainment. Your RP also doesn't solve the problem of displaying our iPhones, iPads or Macs on the TV, so ante up some more.
And seriously: a naked, caseless circuit board hang
For those who only stream and prefer Apple (Score:5, Informative)
I don't watch broadcast TV and before I got my Apple TV my daily routine on my Samsung Smart TV was:
- Press power button on remote and wait several seconds
- Press "Smart Hub" button, wait for it to appear
- Navigate to desired streaming App, wait 10+ seconds for app to start
Now with the AppleTV, I don't need a TV remote at all anymore, I press the Menu button which wakes up both the AppleTV and TV itself. It's where I left off, possibly paused from where I was. It's got plenty of CPU power so is fast to start or switch apps as desired.
My wife and I also very regularly AirPlay Spotify from our iPhones to the AppleTV, it's a one tap process from the phone and automatically wakes up the Apple TV and TV.
And then there are the other arguments of Apple compared to other offerings. For example, Android (and Android TV) serve Google's advertising business, while Apple TV like other Apple products adheres to their policy of respecting user privacy while making the experience as easy as possible for users.
AirPlay aside, I'm sure there are other compelling options, but the AppleTV to me was affordable, supported AirPlay and I was confident that as a popular platform it would be well supported by media streaming services.
Re: For those who only stream and prefer Apple (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: For those who only stream and prefer Apple (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The article was about why people care for AppleTVs and I stated my own personal experience with why I'm happy with my AppleTV which I chose
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be hell-bent on hating Apple and using wild and pointless comparisons (as a rebuttal I'll say the Sony Discman sucks compared to the Bosch dishwasher when it comes time to wash the dishes), but for Apple users there's not point in comparing the Apple TV to other streaming devices because all those other devices lack features that only Apple can provide.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All those cheap Android based boxes are trash. They lag and have flaky hardware and good luck getting support or updates. I’m sorry that people who want a simple appliance that just works is upsetting to you.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty good (Score:5, Interesting)
I use AppleTV every day. The menu system is snappy, responsive, and extremely intuitive. I can access all my content, and stream from plex. Recently I hooked up a PS4 controller and started playing some games.
We have three AppleTVs and I advocate it for all friends and family. Even a friend who is die-hard against all Apple devices found a place in his heart to buy and use the AppleTV.
In my opinion, it is highly underestimated. If you decide to live in Apple's walled garden, it integrates very well across devices.
It makes it very easy for me to manage content.
Re:It's pretty good--Soundbar (Score:2)
I've been saying for years that there's room for an Apple SoundBar, that could integrate the big sound of HomePod with the Apple TV software to create a solid music and video experience.
You can do that now with the latest AppleTV 4K and one or two (for stereo) HomePods. See https://support.apple.com/en-u... [apple.com] I haven't done it because I have the older model, but the possibility may get me to upgrade. Apple TVs are cheap enough and I can use the old one somewhere else.
Don't know why it still exists.. (Score:2)
Don't know why it still exists but I use mine very day. I don't need to play games on it, I just want an easy way to get my streaming content.
Jobs thought Apple could sell a TV, but never did (Score:2)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2011/10/21/steve-jobs-on-tv-i-finally-cracked-it/?sh=3d7f265150be
What is this load of drivel? (Score:3)
If the writer wants a gaming console he should buy a gaming console. The Apple TV exists for the same reason many other small streaming boxes exist: To stream online content to a TV.
Seriously is the writer some basement dweller without a family or a TV in the livingroom? How did he get so out of touch with the world around him that he fails to realise not only is Apple TV an active product bundled to active Apple services, but that there are entire companies out there whose sole business model is based on these streamers (Roku).
Not everything needs to be a $300+ games console.
Pretty useful every day (Score:3)
Airplay to it is sometimes very useful
Easily access my photo slide shows in icloud
Podcasts synced through icloud
Nest camera feed from the baby room Apple tv+, netflix and spotify apps
I use Infuse Pro ($10/year, same license as on ipad and iphone) to play all my local network drive media. It plays everything without transcoding needed and serves it alm in a Netflix style GUI. Probably similar to Plex which I never tried.
A few other streaming news apps
I donâ(TM)t play games, Apple Arcade may be ok for casual gamers but itâ(TM)s not for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for mentioning infuse, I have been using it on iPad for a while but completely forgot that it is on Apple-TV, too.
APPLE TV = Air Play, Streamer, Plex, Cable Box (Score:2)
Apple TV is one of the most useful TV devices ever when compared to the Amazon Fire TV and Roku.
It's super fast, works great with AirPlay (send your phone screen to the TV to show a video clip or movie).
It plugs into the network so it isn't bogging down the wifi.
It works with plex, netflix, amazon, youtube, and can even double as a cable box (for those of you who still have cable).
It even pays games.
Some day it costs too much, but it is rock solid and works in the Apple ecosystem with Airplay.
So why am I do
Huh? (Score:2)
Subscription tool (Score:2)
I canceled Apple+ Free after buying an Air Pad.
1) Subscription lock-in
Now FREE subscribers will need to IRS report Apple paying them to to continue free
2) Tom Hank’s was great, as always, but its other offerings missed “relevancy”
3) Too few options on the platform to warrant paying
4) SteveJob
Because... (Score:2)
It exists because AirPlay exists (Score:2)
There are a million different devices out there to handle your native streaming needs, but there's nothing that provides as good an AirPlay experience as the AppleTV, which makes it a value-add for anyone who has a primarily Mac or iDevice household. For music needs, AirPlay speakers and sending iTunes output to 1 or more AppleTVs provides a great whole-house music experience.
By itself, AppleTV thus provides something more akin to a Chromecast, but for mac/iOS. I think the obvious step forward is to stop tr
OMG Enough already! (Score:3)
Having read more than a dozen threads it seems nobody in this forum has a damn clue what the article was trying to say and what an appleTV really is trying to be
first, lets set some ground-rules on understanding. There are 3 categories being compared here that are in no way apples to apples. Stop trying to justify why a Fuji apple is so much better and sweeter than a damn mandarin orange. Those 3 categories are 1) set-top boxes; 2) integrated devices like smart TVs, bluray players, etc; and 3) recast devices like chromecast. These different platforms have different limitations and functionalities.
secondly, lets establish a bit of credibility here. I have been trying out all these various devices since the days of TiVo which started as a VCR but grew a bit from there. In my current possession exists: Playstation3, Playstation4, Panasonic TCP-65VT15 'smart' tv, Sony BDP-S590 Bluray player, Roku 2, Roku 3, Roku Ultra, Roku 4k streaming stick, FireTV gen2, FireTV gen3, FireTV Cube, Fire TV Recast, Apple TV gen3, a Plex media server running on an embedded Atom C2558, Silcon Dust HDHomeRun EXTEND, Raspberry Pi3+, Raspberry Pi4 4gig, Raspberry Pi4 8gig, a Sonos CONNECT, and a Chromecast. In the past I have also owned a few TivoHD used with DishNetworks, and the first gen AppleTV which was litterally a Mac mini with a HDD and a different OS loaded on it
Now that we have that out of the way, I want to say "stop it already" when it comes to explaining how your apple TV is better than a Chromecast or a smartTV. Thats like trying to explain why your Bosch dishwasher is soooo much better than my Dyson vacuum cleaner. Its an apple and an orange. The point of the article is how is Apply trying to make the appleTV relevant as opposed to a Roku set-top box or a FireTV set-top box. When I say AppleTV I am referring to the set-top box, and not the app with the same name, and not the video service, again, with the same name. There are some advantages and disadvantages of each, but I must say that set-top boxes are a clear winner over integrated devices as I will explain the three basic categories.
Integrated Devices. These include most 'smart' devices like Smart TVs and Smart bluray players. These devices have a marketing appeal of being already 'ready' to watch popular streaming services like Hulu and Netflix but what the consumer quickly learns is that their choices are extremely limited and that unless they want to perpetually buy new TVs, their offerings will get outdated rather quickly. Did I mention I still have a Panasonic TCP-65VT25? This device is now 10 years old and its honestly not uncommon for an average consumer to get 10 years out of their television device. It doesnt help that plasma's true black can only be rivaled with the highest end QLED displays currently hitting market. During my 10 years of owning this device I have had to replace my set-top streaming boxes as services like hulu/netflix migrated toward h265 making their playback on the older devices anywhere from not great to downright unplayable. To be honest I have not even tried playing netflix or hulu on this TV in the last 5yrs and the last firmware update was November 2013, not that I expect the onboard chip to be a wiz at h.265 anyway. Not only will existing apps age out of support, but newer services like Movies Anywhere, Disney+, ESPN+, SlingTV, ATT TV, YoutubeTV (ok i think you get the idea) come to market you are left without any options.
Recast devices. These are devices that, by themselves, have zero functionality outside of a screensaver. They do not house the brains of the applications and sometimes require doubling up on bandwidth to display content. To use a device like chromecast you must have a separate device such as a smartphone handy that runs the actual application, or a PC with a web browser going to their site. Depending on how this site developer wrote their chromecast integration, you may find that you are having to stream the content from the internet to your PC, and then wireles
It isn't a gaming console (Score:2)
The argument against Apple TV, is that it sucks as a gaming console.
Sure you gaming console will do a good job as a TV Streamer, but for a lot of people that is overkill.
The Apple TV is one of Apples more slow and steady technologies. Which is good, because you can have one device and use it for years perfectly fine, get the latest apps, vs trying to find out that one of those streaming services may not support your console, they all seem to have an Apple TV port.
Yes it is a bit more expensive than most St
I buy my mom one of these every 2 years (Score:2)
Every time there's a medium upgrade with Apple TV, my mom puts this on her Christmas list. I also keep one around, and I barely watch TV (she watches it all the time- her generation's killer app, I guess, my timewaster has always been video games).
Apple TV:
1- Has a consistent user interface
2- Largely always works (I know it's the Apple meme but still)
3- Talks with all the other Apple toys easily and usefully.
4- Inexpensive and longlasting enough to have three of the things over various generations, one on
You're ignoring phone and tablet games (Score:3)
Yes, the PS5 and Xbox dominate 'gamer console' gaming, but you're forgetting that there are 10x more phones and tablets than there are consoles, and Apple is just as dominant in game sales in that market. What Apple is doing with Apple TV and Apple Arcade is expanding their strong position with phones and tablets out to adjacent markets, computers and TV gaming. It's not by accident that if you buy a game (or app or content) on any platform in the Apple ecosystem you tend to get it automatically across the whole exosystem, something that PS and MS tend not to do even between generations in the same platform. Remember, when you're writing a game to target, say, the iPad (a huge market) it is minimal extra work for developers to get the game to run on iPhone, Mac, and Apple TV, so from a developer perspective it's practically one huge game platform to sell into, with 10x the units in the field of PS5 or Xbox X.
Because all alternatives are garbage? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
and what gave you this impression? and how can you spin that so you don't look like a fool?
Re: Am I the only one? (Score:2)
That's easy. He's implying that it has dropped from all visibility in whatever circles he inhabits.
I didn't know it still existed either...but that's because I'm not in the slightest bit interested in Apple products. Any exposure I have to them is kind of accidental...usually just ads, and I don't ever recall seeing ads for Apple TV... only really iPhones.
It is interesting to see people giving positive reviews, especially when they're not otherwise tied up in the Apple ecosystem.
Re:I'm not sure how you missed it above (Score:4, Informative)
Apple TV is a private alternative to smart TVs, though. I have three Apple TVs connected to three smart TVs that I've "dumbed down" by blocking them in my Edge router. Smart TVs try to integrate me into the big world of privacy-invading personal data collection, and Apple TV doesn't. I trust Apple; I don't trust Vizio and Samsung.
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying all the websites forums in the world have no real purpose in a world where Facebook exists.
Apple TV is not just a product like all the others, it's one that's made to integrate well with my other Apple devices, a company that makes their profits on hardware and services, not in selling my personal information like Google, Twitter and Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes you are.