The Apple TV set-top box hardware is expected to be updated this summer after 3 years since the last real refresh and a recent price drop from $99 to $69. While the last Apple TV upgrade boosted video output from 720p to 1080p, the rumored Apple TV 4 is not believed to support ultra high definition 4K video output featured on newer TV sets. Here’s why that’s no surprise and what I think it could mean for an actual Apple TV set:
Apple doesn’t do specs for the sake of specs. The iPhone has maintained an 8MP camera between several generations. The 8MP iSight camera debuted in 2011 with the iPhone 4S and remains on the newest iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus. Our photos today are noticeably better than our shots from four years ago, however, as Apple has improved in other areas like low light image capture and faster focusing. It’s no surprise that Apple will maintain 1080p video output from its set-top box for at least another cycle.
Speaking of iPhones, the best iPhone camera (found on the iPhone 6 Plus) only supports 1080p video recording. Apple added 1080p video recording to the iPhone 4S in October 2011 before the Apple TV 3 added 1080p video output in March 2012. Nothing mandates that the iPhone must first support a video capture resolution before the Apple TV supports it, but it’s clear Apple sees 1080p video as good enough for most consumers for now. Samsung’s Galaxy S5, as a comparison, shipped UHD video capture last year. When the iPhone adds 4K video recording, I would then expect the Apple TV to add 4K playback. 4K UHDTVs haven’t taken over the living room yet, though, so I’m not holding my breath for either.
More important than at what resolution the iPhone can capture video is what resolution iTunes delivers movies and TV shows. Apple timed the release of the Apple TV 3 with 1080p video output with the upgrade to iTunes from distributing only 720p media to selling 1080p content. At the time it was widely considered as one of those finally updates as 1080p HDTVs were very common and relatively affordable. The next Apple TV launching with 4K video output would be nice in terms of future proofing the hardware and best presenting the UHD content that is available, but Apple hasn’t jumped on the 4K train just yet.
Aside from iTunes, there’s also the rumored $30-$40 Web TV subscription service to consider. Even if Apple did begin offering a limited number of 4K movies and TV shows on iTunes, the rumored Web TV service would contrast as less premium. It might sit okay with consumers that content you buy is better quality resolution than content you access through a subscription, but the messaging would be muddled if the Web TV service is not 4K but is marketed next to a 4K set-top box.
If the next Apple TV did support 4K video output, what content could you actually watch? Netflix offers a limited collection of 4K media and it’s not hard to find excellent 4K footage on YouTube. Even if 4K content was more widely available and everyone had a UHDTV in the living room, the Apple TV’s support for 4K would be surprising without iTunes being a player.
Apple gave away upgrades from 720p to 1080p when iTunes started selling Full HD movies and TV shows. Will Apple do the same when 4K becomes available through iTunes? Even if so, Apple will want to position 4K content on iTunes as a premium media option. Giving 4K content away for free first through YouTube, a Google-owned service, would not make that pitch.
Finally, there’s the obvious reason cited in the report that the Apple TV 4 won’t be the Apple TV 4K: not enough people have UHDTVs for hardware that supports 4K video output to be warranted. Apple was late to the 1080p party, it won’t be early to the 4K affair.
Retina 5K iMac
Running with this idea, it’s not hard to imagine that Apple could be saving 4K adoption for its own UHDTV, not the set-top box (which is not a completely new idea). Ignoring whether or not Apple should enter the actual TV set business, Apple could use the transition from 1080p to 4K as a compelling upgrade reason. The upgrade from 720p to 1080p for most people was not dramatic and 3D was a flop.
4K could be a reason to actually update your TV set to an actual Apple TV, not just add a new Apple TV set-top box. Saving 4K support for the TV set (maybe even with some Retina marketing similar to iPhones, iPads, Macs, and the Apple Watch) would be fitting.
Looking at the Apple TV’s past update path and the current ecosystem of iOS devices and services, it’s no surprise that the next Apple TV won’t support 4K. Still, 4K adoption will remain an opportunity for future versions of the Apple TV and Apple’s iTunes Store. Could 4K be justification for Apple selling the whole TV set rather than just the box you connect in the future?
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
I wish there was more speculation here about Apple TV as a gaming console, and not just the resolution aspect of Apple TV. There’s so much opportunity for Apple here. They have the developer ecosystem. They just need to improve the hardware a bit.
While iDevices have made a lot of money for a lot of game developers, they’re hardly the talk of the town. Core gaming devices are still where it’s at for most gamers. I expect we will see a lot more iDevice gaming than ever before, but the game developers will need Apple’s help in getting the word out.
It would also help if Apple could get some A+ developers on board and crack open some of the long-standing franchises by the likes of Nintendo and Sega. Even if they just started with some ports to get the ball rolling, it would show the world that Apple TV can do what other consoles can do.
Exactly right. They don’t even need to make the hardware better really. Start it out with the A9X and 2GB of RAM which will be standard in the fall devices (iPhones will get A9, iPad Air 3 will get A9X probably). That, combined with Metal will be able to do at least PS3/Xbox 360 quality games I should think? The thing is, Microsoft and Sony only release new consoles every 5-7 years, but Apple could release a new TV every single year, with the latest A series chip, and progressively more RAM just as they will with all of the other devices. Is it going to compare to the PS4 and Xbox One anytime soon? Of course not, but it can get there slowly.
The absolute key to its success as a gaming device is an apple designed controller though. Third party controllers will never have the marketing or market penetration to drive customers to buy them, or even know they exist. The best game developers aren’t about to start pouring massive amounts of money into games for the App Store if they have to rely on the few people that will go out and purchase a third party controller, either. The most important part about gaming is a tactile controller. The great thing is, the controller would also be able to be used with any other Apple devices as well. The third parties should be allowed to make the controller attachments for iPhones and iPods, that is all.
There is definitely some sense to Apple not encouraging the buying of 4K TVs until they are selling 4K TVs…that is, if they have any intention of doing so whatosever.
The writing has been on the wall for a long time that (smart) people want DUMB TVs. The TV is a display device to which we connect content. It makes little to no sense to bake the content processing platform into the TV as it will only make it more difficult to upgrade. A TV isn’t something a household will update every year or two, but upgrading a $50 media playback device isn’t such a big deal.
Precisely.
i have to agree. i have no plans to upgrade beyond 2k for the foreseeable future. It took manufactures a long time to get 2k right the same seems also so with 4k. additionally i have never been a huge fan of ATV UX. just seems dated to me. i certainly would want to have display and playback devices separate.
People are still talking about a genuine Apple TV? Why won’t that idea just die? I think it would be a horrible idea. I think a connected box makes infinitely more sense. It allows for greater market penetration due to lower price, and Apple stands to make more off of their media than off their hardware if they can reach critical mass. It also provides a shorter upgrade cycle so people keep coming back for more. Who wants to buy a brand new 50″ (or greater) TV every two years?
Yup. The market for people who want to pay a premium for a smart display is… small. I would be happy to see Apple release a well designed UHDTV and then drop it a year or two later after it didn’t sell, just so that all the other brands producing crap-looking sets would up their game (competition is a great thing!) For a company that likes to shoot for ~30% margins on their products that “need” upgrading every 2-3 years, the TV world is not one to compete in. Most people – even those who can afford it – aren’t going to upgrade a TV set every year or two because of the commitment of taking the old one off the wall, boxing it up and getting rid of it somehow, and then mounting the new one.
While I’ll buy an AppleTV like box for every TV I own, I’ll never purchase a TV with “Smart” features built in if I can help it. Getting harder and harder, but I’ve steered every person whose come to me (going on 5 sales directly) to a the same good-picture-but-dumb-featured Samsung TV that I own myself.
You left out the two most important reasons why Apple isn’t about to introduce 4K support, and why they aren’t likely to do so in the foreseeable future: bandwidth limitations and negligible real world viewing benefits.
Even with today’s 1080p content, many users complain of spotty video quality with annoying buffering issues and degraded video quality due to overzealous compression by cable companies to conserve bandwidth. And that’s in addition to the issues many customers face with cable behemoths like Comcast imposing data caps and traffic shaping while simultaneously increasing rates. And all of the above are brewing under the specter of continuing threats to net neutrality and increasing consolidation of ISPs and cable companies.
Even if you ignore the bandwidth and content availability issues, there’s the question of whether 4K offers an appreciable quality difference for most users most of the time. In a blind test, I’d wager that most people could barely tell the difference (if at all) between 1080p and 4K video on a 50″ screen from 10 feet away, let alone on smaller screens and portable devices where an increasing amount of viewing time is spent. Most people do not own 70″+ TVs.
It’s really not hard to see the difference with 4k if the quality of it is good. If the cameras used were great. Watch the black list on Netflix in 4k (which is no where near full 4k data) and you’ll easily see the sharpness difference. It’s very clear.
I agree. I really don’t see 4k as a standard, this will take a whole generation to become a default. The infrastructure simply isn’t there, plus there’s no real market for 4k. 720 or 1080 is considered just fine by people. Just as DSL is fine for most, the rollout of fiber in Europe isn’t exactly considered a must-have. Many think the always-on benefit from DSL over dial-up was most wanted. 4k isn’t viewed in the same way.
Not sure about Apple own TV… There is a lot of differences in each country. America has streaming, France has boxes, etc. Create a TV is very complicated, and Apple likes to close his hardware, which is impossible for TV. For example, kid wants to play to his Xbox, he have to with Apple own TV hardware. Thus, HDMI, optical fiber, etc are a must. What is the advantage of Apple well?
I don’t believe Apple will make a TV yet. TV is great because it can be sold to everyone who currently has an HDTV. Far fewer people would purchase an Apple TV set. I also believe it doesn’t have 4k support for some of the reasons mentioned in the article, but also because I believe you don’t need to future proof a product which I believe will begin to see yearly or at the very least, biannual updates. If it’s true that this has an App Store then it essentially means it must have frequent updates in order to drive better apps and continue to keep integration with apple’s other products up to par. I believe this will be a new product category for Apple and I expect to see it up on the main page beside the Watch, iPhone, iPad, etc. it will get frequent updates with the latest A series chip, and it will drive better and better apps, specifically games.
I agree – but had a thought here that they might consider throwing a 4k/5k/8k TV in the mix in order to go through a high enough volume to get volume pricing for their iMacs. I can’t imagine that a few thousand 5k iMacs gives them enough leverage to get the display at any sort of bulk/volume price.
I believe if Apple made a TV it would be strictly an incredibly great display, nothing more. It would have whatever in it needed to produce the thinnest hardware with the best possible display, and then you’d have to connect it to someone else to get anything out of it. (Similar to the Cinema Display). You’d still buy an Apple TV to display content on it.
Something* else
There is one, I repeat, one reason the Apple TV is not supporting 4K… because Apple doesn’t yet offer any 4K content for sale/rent. That is it, period. Apple is not going to offer a feature that they themselves can’t use to make money while their competitors on their own platform could.
No, the other way around. Apple is not going to offer 4K content until they have sufficient products for sale and user base that can display it.
Nope. That’s a lot of writing just to get to an obvious NOPE.
I hope the hardware will be software upgradeable to 4K later on, otherwise they will be shipping a dead-in-the-water product.
A few other practical considerations:
1. Although it isn’t required to be compatible, an Apple TV unit should be consistent with and leverage the final specs of the Blu Ray Ultra standard. Those aren’t finalized or announced, but NAB is coming up and that would be a good opportunity to call the standard done and launch it. They may take longer than that to finish, but the CE manufacturers want to have it in shipping products on shelves in Q4.
2. Somewhat related, is chipset support for HDMI 2.0 and any minor revs due in the near future. You need a standard way to output advanced content, and DisplayPort in the living room isn’t it.
3. Chipset and stack support for Bluetooth 4.2. This will be a huge advance in the viability of Homekit and IoT applications, and increase the value of Apple TV.
Apple can be on the leading edge of these, but need products that are still mature enough that “it just works”. Apple’s advantage in owning the complete solution will be earlier time to market.
IMO
They should test the market with maybe 2 sizes 32in & 42in, then in a 2nd gen make larger models
Seems like everybody is focussed on 4k video. 4k video isn’t very interesting, the human eye can’t see al those details in a moving and changing image. Even if you freeze a frame you probably end up with a frame full of motion blur and/or defocused backgrounds. Al those amazing looking 4k demo shots aren’t typical movie shots. 4k for movies is mostly a marketing gimmick.
But for photo’s and other content that doesn’t move constantly, text, interface elements, 4k is an improvement and can be a nice addition. An Apple tv supporting 4k output, even without supporting 4k video, would be nice I think.