advertisement
Forums

The Forum is sponsored by 
 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the Tips and Deals forum
ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: MartyStickle
Date: September 09, 2015 03:37PM
So, if I'm not into gaming, why would I need the larger memory size?



Asheville, NC Area
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 03:49PM
To store more games. I have four year old, possibly older iOS games that are 500MB in size. Some are about 1GB. I read Apple TV apps are limited to 200MB, so I'm not particularly optimistic about the nature of gaming.

Even the older 360/PS3 will be a better box. Games are pretty cheap too. I can't begin to understand how a gaming box won't support expandable.storage unless you are going to download apps on the fly.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: mikebw
Date: September 09, 2015 03:55PM
I would go all in for the 64GB model, only $50 more. Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: jdc
Date: September 09, 2015 03:57PM
Hmm, 200 MB limit? Seems weird.

One of the videos the guy says "play asphalt 8" -- which I know to be at least 1 GB.





Edited 999 time(s). Last edit at 12:08PM by jdc.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 04:02PM
Quote
mikebw
I would go all in for the 64GB model, only $50 more. Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

Wait, they didn't? It was rumored Apple was going to use the A9 chip so I just assumed they had. Went from limited and probably too expensive to don't buy for my needs. An iPod touch shouldn't be a better gaming box, but it is, and for not much more money.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Ombligo
Date: September 09, 2015 04:10PM
I'll stay with either Roku or a WD TV player.

Not only isn't there enough storage, you directly can't hook up an external drive. I would have to route everything through a computer to let it go wireless. I may as well just use the computer to do everything. It's a neat unit but once again Apple decided how I want to interface.

(yes, it has USB-C, but the specs say it is for support and upgrading only.)



“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

The German word for contraceptive is “Schwangerschaftsverhütungsmittel”. By the time you finished saying that, it’s too late
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: September 09, 2015 04:17PM
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

The A8 is probably more than up to the task for the ATV, and production of the A9 will need to keep up to the 'Phone production.






I am that Masked Man.

All you can do, is all you can do.

There’s trouble — it's time to play the sound of my people.

Your boos mean nothing to me, I've seen what you cheer for.

Insisting on your rights without acknowledging your responsibilities isn’t freedom, it’s adolescence.

I've been to the edge of the map, and there be monsters.

We are a government of laws, not men.

Everybody counts or nobody counts.

When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 04:18PM
Quote
mikebw
only $50 more.

Famous last words.


Quote
mikebw
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

So they can offer you an upgrade next spring ("AppleTV - now with the A9 chip!")



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: September 09, 2015 04:27PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
mikebw
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

So they can offer you an upgrade next spring ("AppleTV - now with the A9 chip!")

agree smiley

Pretty transparent. In four years they will release a 4K version with the A9X, at which point the chip will be costing them $1 each.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: MartyStickle
Date: September 09, 2015 04:33PM
So again, If I'm not into gaming, why is the larger unit needed?



Asheville, NC Area



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 04:34PM by MartyStickle.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 04:35PM
Quote
MartyStickle
So again, If I'm not into gaming, why is the larger unit needed?

Asked and answered? smiling smiley
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 04:43PM
Quote
RAMd®d
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

The A8 is probably more than up to the task for the ATV

It's a helluva damn sight better than the A5 that's in the entry-level AppleTV.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: michaelb
Date: September 09, 2015 04:44PM
I don't have an answer to your question, but I will get the $150 unless there is some compelling reason to pay more. That is 33% more, so not insignificant. Really looking forward to upgrading my ATV.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: MartyStickle
Date: September 09, 2015 04:47PM
Well, I guess the question is, how much space would be needed by a decent collection of apps. I have a feeling for what's required for an iOS device (certainly more than 16 meg), but it's unclear how much space the ATV apps will require. Of course, the point that it's only $50 difference does make sense. What's going to be stored on the device? It's not like you're going to put your photo library or music on it, right?


Quote
silvarios
Quote
MartyStickle
So again, If I'm not into gaming, why is the larger unit needed?

Asked and answered? smiling smiley



Asheville, NC Area
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Bernie
Date: September 09, 2015 05:00PM
I will wait for a refurb.




Staunton, Virginia
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: pdq
Date: September 09, 2015 05:34PM
Quote
mikebw
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

Here's my conspiracy theory. The new ATV was designed on a schedule to be introduced at the WWDC last May (thus the conference logo with the ATV outline):



...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 05:52PM
Quote
MartyStickle
Well, I guess the question is, how much space would be needed by a decent collection of apps. I have a feeling for what's required for an iOS device (certainly more than 16 meg), but it's unclear how much space the ATV apps will require. Of course, the point that it's only $50 difference does make sense. What's going to be stored on the device? It's not like you're going to put your photo library or music on it, right?

Probably not storing local media, guessing it will stream from the WAN or the LAN. Apps should be 200MB or less so you should have a decent amount of space for a selection of apps.

I'm pretty underwhelmed.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 05:56PM
Quote
pdq
Quote
mikebw
Wonder why they didn't use the A9 chip as in the new iDevices?

Here's my conspiracy theory. The new ATV was designed on a schedule to be introduced at the WWDC last May (thus the conference logo with the ATV outline):



...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.

That makes sense.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 06:17PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
pdq
...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.

That makes sense.

There's no Sling TV or Sony Vue like package here, right? So Apple was planning on more, didn't get it, and then shipped a year old design? That's actually more disappointing. Sad Panda sad smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 06:18PM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 06:39PM
Quote
silvarios
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
pdq
...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.

That makes sense.

There's no Sling TV or Sony Vue like package here, right? So Apple was planning on more, didn't get it, and then shipped a year old design? That's actually more disappointing. Sad Panda sad smiley

"A year old design" is stretching it. More like three months, given that the device was originally supposed to debut in June of this year.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 07:05PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
silvarios
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
pdq
...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.

That makes sense.

There's no Sling TV or Sony Vue like package here, right? So Apple was planning on more, didn't get it, and then shipped a year old design? That's actually more disappointing. Sad Panda sad smiley

"A year old design" is stretching it. More like three months, given that the device was originally supposed to debut in June of this year.

Okay, three months old at least. Then again, that's a year old chip, so…

The iPod touch (same chipset) with screen, camera, and more sensors is only $100 more than the Apple TV (given the same storage amount). Seems like taking out all those parts and adding the A9, wouldn't see much of an increase in price and shouldn't require a major redesign. No? I just don't get why Apple is designing their brand new TV box around a year old chip. Apple could have easily launched the development platform for the new Apple TV at WWDC and still had the A9 box ready to go for the holiday buying period, no?

I just can't imagine buying something supposed to be a gaming box with a year old chip. I've tried this before with Apple. Bought a second gen iPod touch when the third gen touches hit the seen (this is when the touch and iPhone were more or less still at parity). I was left behind in a year from a practical support standpoint (iOS 4 was a disaster on those devices and I didn't even get all the iOS 4 features).

I keep hoping for a real gaming option from one of these mobile companies, but they keep disappointing me. I'm at the point where the console companies have irritated me enough I plan on never buying another box from the big boys. I'm thinking Steam and GoG on a PC (personal computer, not necessarily a Windows box) is the way to go these days, but I'll keep my eyes open.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 07:07PM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 07:43PM
Quote
silvarios
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
silvarios
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
pdq
...but there was some last minute blow up with the networks or other media folks that led them to hold off the intro until now. The delay was not enough time to engineer the A9 into it, so they stuck with the A8.

That makes sense.

There's no Sling TV or Sony Vue like package here, right? So Apple was planning on more, didn't get it, and then shipped a year old design? That's actually more disappointing. Sad Panda sad smiley

"A year old design" is stretching it. More like three months, given that the device was originally supposed to debut in June of this year.

Okay, three months old at least. Then again, that's a year old chip, so…

The iPod touch (same chipset) with screen, camera, and more sensors is only $100 more than the Apple TV (given the same storage amount). Seems like taking out all those parts and adding the A9, wouldn't see much of an increase in price and shouldn't require a major redesign. No? I just don't get why Apple is designing their brand new TV box around a year old chip. Apple could have easily launched the development platform for the new Apple TV at WWDC and still had the A9 box ready to go for the holiday buying period, no?

Nathan, I am neither an electronics engineer nor an Apple employee; I take it by your questions that neither are you. Among other things, that means that neither of us is qualified to speak to why Apple released the new AppleTV with the A8 processor instead of the A9. While the theory posited above by pdq makes the most sense of any I've heard, the fact remains that no one outside of Apple knows the answer to this question. Thus, your regrettable tendency in this thread to answer your own questions with other questions to "make" your point is, at best, speculative and, at worst, specious. Cut it out.



It is what it is.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 07:47PM by N-OS X-tasy!.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 08:17PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Nathan, I am neither an electronics engineer nor an Apple employee; I take it by your questions that neither are you. Among other things, that means that neither of us is qualified to speak to why Apple released the new AppleTV with the A8 processor instead of the A9. While the theory posited above by pdq makes the most sense of any I've heard, the fact remains that no one outside of Apple knows the answer to this question.

So very true. I still don't understand why Apple wouldn't want the big kahuna for a game machine. People keep gaming consoles for a long time. The PS3 has been a platform for nearly a decade as an example. This Apple TV will be nearing upgrade time in a couple years without a little more oomph. Then again, 200MB app limitations might be the key why the little guy doesn't need the latest and greatest (gaming is an afterthought, general purpose apps are the real big thing). Also worth noting, maybe the A8 is nearly the same performance for apps at 1920x1080 pixels? Would love to see some benchmarks to try to figure out relative performance comparisons.

And no, just taking a company at their word doesn't cut it. Companies do things for all types of reasons. Often just to differentiate products in the marketplace or to maintain profit margins. As always, I'll wait for non corporate PR reports to explain the details. I want to see how gaming stacks up between Fire TV, Apple TV, PS3, PS4, etc.

Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Thus, your regrettable tendency in this thread to answer your own questions with other questions to "make" your point is, at best, speculative and, at worst, specious. Cut it out.

I'm sorry, I respectfully decline to stop asking questions, answering them, and furthering discussions. That's the whole point of a discussion. I offer something, you offer something, someone else offers something. When in doubt, phrase something as a question to garner responses, no? <-- See, that's an invitation to disagree or agree. Keeps things civil and interesting.

If you have a personal problem PM me. I'll likely respond.

P.s. Sorry for furthering the derail.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 08:37PM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Bimwad
Date: September 09, 2015 09:08PM
The ATV has never had the latest and greatest hardware, so it's little surprise the new one has an A8 instead of an A9.

The 1st generation had a Pentium M, the 2nd, an A4 that first appeared about seven months earlier in the iPad, the 3rd gens an A5 with one core disabled.

Cutting edge hardware it's not. Suited to its task, certainly.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 09:12PM
Quote
Bimwad
Cutting edge hardware it's not. Suited to its task, certainly.

But now Apple is pitching the Apple TV as a gaming system. Is a year old chipset the best option for a gaming console? 200MB app limits the best option? The old systems made sense. Specs were clearly decent for the task on hand. Now, with general purpose apps and games I'm genuinely curious to see how the system performs.

Anyone find any guesstimates for the cost of the new A9? The A8 with modem (in the phone was estimate at just under $60). Maybe $40 for the A8 itself? Probably less a year later.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 09:36PM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Bimwad
Date: September 09, 2015 09:26PM
Quote
silvarios
But now Apple is pitching the Apple TV as a gaming system. Is a year old chipset the best option for a gaming console? 200MB app limits the best option? The old systems made sense. Specs were clearly decent for the task on hand. Now, with general purpose apps and games I'm genuinely curious to see how the system performs.

I haven't watched any of today's presentation (nor do I intend to), but how strong was the pitch?

Can you name any games that struggle with the A8, now, or within the next year? Free of any power conservation requirements, is the A8 in the ATV 4 running at the same speed as that in the iPhone? Does it have enhancement tweaks, despite remaining on the previous platform?

Arguing specs is fun, but it's all theoretical. If it will run the most demanding games available, it's good enough, unless some developer is planning to unload their equivalent of Crysis for iOS.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: decay
Date: September 09, 2015 10:02PM
how big are the largest iOS apps for iPad or iPhone?



---
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: September 09, 2015 10:15PM
Quote
silvarios
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Thus, your regrettable tendency in this thread to answer your own questions with other questions to "make" your point is, at best, speculative and, at worst, specious. Cut it out.

I'm sorry, I respectfully decline to stop asking questions, answering them, and furthering discussions. That's the whole point of a discussion. I offer something, you offer something, someone else offers something. When in doubt, phrase something as a question to garner responses, no? <-- See, that's an invitation to disagree or agree. Keeps things civil and interesting.

Legitimate questions? Always welcome. The problem, Nathan, arises when you couch your anti-Apple rhetoric in the form of "questions" supported by "facts" which, in reality, you have no idea are true or not. Everything you state in the post I replied to is total speculation on your part, yet somehow, based on this "evidence," you arrive at the conclusion that the new AppleTV is not good enough -- practically obsolete the day it is announced, in fact -- and then play coy when someone calls you on it. That's problematic.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 10:56PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Legitimate questions? Always welcome. The problem, Nathan, arises when you couch your anti-Apple rhetoric in the form of "questions" supported by "facts" which, in reality, you have no idea are true or not.

Practically every version of Dragon Quest on iOS is worse than the original games, we are talking 15 year old and older systems. I always assumed that's sloppy porting, but it makes me wonder. The best made for iOS 3D RPGs are basically PS2 quality in the graphics department. I want an Apple TV that rivals a PS3 or 360 in graphics, but with a 200MB limit on apps and a chipset already a year old…I'm just worried this isn't the right device…yet. It's getting there, but I want more. I want Roku style power use, but PS3 capable games. I'm being greedy as a consumer, but hey, it's my money.

Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Everything you state in the post I replied to is total speculation on your part, yet somehow, based on this "evidence," you arrive at the conclusion that the new AppleTV is not good enough -- practically obsolete the day it is announced, in fact -- and then play coy when someone calls you on it. That's problematic.

You know what's problematic? The inability for people on this board to treat threads as islands and not bring their crap from thread to thread. You don't want to discuss? Great! Then step aside. You want to disagree? Great! Then engage? You want to make this about me instead of your inability to continue a discussion. That's not really my problem.

Edit: I don't mean to be harsh, but as someone who has owned a bunch of different streaming boxes and game consoles, including Apple devices, I'm not sure why being objective is that hard to take. When the PS4 and Xbox One came out, plenty of people dug into the minutiae. Pros and cons and that sort of thing. Lot of people worried about various aspects of the system and how they would hold up as the years rolled by. If Apple wants to play in that league, they need to be held up to the same standards. Just look at the teeth gnashing with the specs on the Wii and Wii U. People weren't wrong, but there were still some great games to get launched anyway, even if both systems struggled to keep up with the competition.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2015 11:13PM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 11:27PM
Quote
decay
how big are the largest iOS apps for iPad or iPhone?

A couple GBs maybe? Think the limit is 4GB. Garageband is 911MB. Soul Calibur (a port of the 17 year old Dreamcast game) is 225 MB. Lunar Silver Star Story Touch is 623MB (port of an even older PS1 game). Real Racing 3 is 855MB. Need for Speed™ Most Wanted is 637MB. Chaos Rings is 733 MB. Monument Valley, which is pretty simple all things considered, but the art assets in the game push it to 275 MB.

While there are a lot of games that will work and even more apps, there's a lot of stuff that won't work. Which is weird given the size of the storage included.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 09, 2015 11:30PM
Quote
Bimwad
Can you name any games that struggle with the A8, now, or within the next year? Free of any power conservation requirements, is the A8 in the ATV 4 running at the same speed as that in the iPhone? Does it have enhancement tweaks, despite remaining on the previous platform?

Arguing specs is fun, but it's all theoretical. If it will run the most demanding games available, it's good enough, unless some developer is planning to unload their equivalent of Crysis for iOS.

True, true. I'm still pushing for the holy grail of last gen console graphics in a package using Roku amounts of power. I don't need yet another "it will play Angry Birds okay and that's about it" set top box.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: bhaveshp
Date: September 09, 2015 11:49PM
Apple is not positioning the new Apple TV to compete against the full blown console systems, so they've positioned the device at a much lower price point for the much larger "casual" gamer market ala the Wii. I'm guessing it is probably close to the PS3 in performance, but of course much more power efficient.

The choice of using an A8 chip vs A9 obvious: purely monetary, maintaining profit margins. Why would they put their most cutting edge chip in a $149 product vs a $649 product?

The 200mb App size limitation is a challenge to developers, but Apple has told them to design their apps to keep users engaged while the Apps download resources. Given this is a streaming box, downloading graphics, levels etc. over broadband is a reasonable tradeoff vs Apps for cellular mobile devices.

Me, I'll be saving $50 for now and will get the 4k A9 equipped version in 2 years.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: jdc
Date: September 10, 2015 01:56AM
Call of Duty/Strike Team is 1.02 GB

Asphalt 8 is 1.22 GB

Transistor is 1.84 GB





Edited 999 time(s). Last edit at 12:08PM by jdc.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 10, 2015 02:19AM
Quote
jdc
Call of Duty/Strike Team is 1.02 GB

Asphalt 8 is 1.22 GB

Transistor is 1.84 GB

Whoa! You found some big ones.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 10, 2015 02:28AM
Quote
bhaveshp
Apple is not positioning the new Apple TV to compete against the full blown console systems, so they've positioned the device at a much lower price point for the much larger "casual" gamer market ala the Wii. I'm guessing it is probably close to the PS3 in performance, but of course much more power efficient.

Definitely an interesting point, but what is generally ignored with the Wii was the fact the biggest sellers tended to be the hardcore Mario, Zelda, Smash Brothers, etc. type games. Even Skylanders.

Quote
bhaveshp
The choice of using an A8 chip vs A9 obvious: purely monetary, maintaining profit margins. Why would they put their most cutting edge chip in a $149 product vs a $649 product?

Yeah, makes sense. Pretty much a given for market differentiation and profit margins. Still, a man can dream, right? smiling smiley

Quote
bhaveshp
The 200mb App size limitation is a challenge to developers, but Apple has told them to design their apps to keep users engaged while the Apps download resources. Given this is a streaming box, downloading graphics, levels etc. over broadband is a reasonable tradeoff vs Apps for cellular mobile devices.

Me, I'll be saving $50 for now and will get the 4k A9 equipped version in 2 years.

I ripped a Sega CD came that's nearly 25 years old and it wouldn't fit under the limitations of the current Apple TV. That's bonkers! Shoot, the game, Sonic CD, is 278 MB as an iOS port! So no dice without a revamp for the Apple TV. Yet, it will run on an old 8GB iPhone. Seems crazy to me.

What frustrates me is the Apple TV could be a legitimate game console option, but it doesn't seem like it quite makes the mark. Here's another question, since the Apple TV potentially requires completely new builds of current apps, does that mean we have to buy them again? Kind of like when developers make one iPad app and one iPhone/iPod touch app as opposed to a single universal app.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: bhaveshp
Date: September 10, 2015 03:44AM
MG Siegler has a great write up on Apple TV gaming (written two days ago!):
[500ish.com]

Worth a read.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: RAMd®d
Date: September 10, 2015 04:27AM
The choice of using an A8 chip vs A9 obvious: purely monetary, maintaining profit margins. Why would they put their most cutting edge chip in a $149 product vs a $649 product?

And in a $149 product that doesn't need the most cutting edge chip in the first place.

Apple will be selling a *lot* more iPhones than ATVs.

The ATV isn't a game console. It's a streaming device that will play games. Those demoed look pretty good though not geared for adults. The A8 is more than enough for the ATV. There's no need to waste the A9 with it's built-in M9 on the ATV. It makes no sense whatsoever to divide the output of them between the two devices.


You know what's problematic? The inability for people on this board to treat threads as islands and not bring their crap from thread to thread.

Well if that ain't the Mistress of Irony bitch-slapping you in the face.






I am that Masked Man.

All you can do, is all you can do.

There’s trouble — it's time to play the sound of my people.

Your boos mean nothing to me, I've seen what you cheer for.

Insisting on your rights without acknowledging your responsibilities isn’t freedom, it’s adolescence.

I've been to the edge of the map, and there be monsters.

We are a government of laws, not men.

Everybody counts or nobody counts.

When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 10, 2015 07:42AM
Quote
RAMd®d
You know what's problematic? The inability for people on this board to treat threads as islands and not bring their crap from thread to thread.

Well if that ain't the Mistress of Irony bitch-slapping you in the face.

Can you pick a single time I've started a post the way you are doing now? Or do you see post after post asking people to respond to the topic on hand and stop bringing past grudges into every thread. If you have a personal problem why not PM? Not civil enough?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: sekker
Date: September 10, 2015 07:56AM
Lots of great discussion!

I think Apple wants to keeps its margins on hardware, so the new Apple TV CPU doesn't use the cutting-edge fab plants that it needs for the iPhone. That's fine by me.

The A8 chip is still plenty fast for many things, especially when it's not driving 4k video.

If the remote is as good as the reports, you will just keep the remote and replace the ATV box when you want to upgrade. It's going to be interesting to see how much of the $149 is the ATV brick, how much is the glass-trackpad, rechargeable battery-loaded remote.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: silvarios
Date: September 10, 2015 08:34AM
Quote
RAMd®d
The choice of using an A8 chip vs A9 obvious: purely monetary, maintaining profit margins. Why would they put their most cutting edge chip in a $149 product vs a $649 product?

And in a $149 product that doesn't need the most cutting edge chip in the first place.

Apple will be selling a *lot* more iPhones than ATVs.

The ATV isn't a game console. It's a streaming device that will play games. Those demoed look pretty good though not geared for adults. The A8 is more than enough for the ATV. There's no need to waste the A9 with it's built-in M9 on the ATV. It makes no sense whatsoever to divide the output of them between the two devices.

If the system isn't meant for gaming, why even bring it up? Not you bring it up, or me, or someone else trying to figure out its capabilities. I mean, why does Apple even mention it? I don't need a checkbox feature. I really wanted a low power game console that takes gaming seriously. One that can leverage the existing iOS games I already own. This system can't do that even though it is many times more powerful than the old iOS devices which were current when I bought these games. With all the pieces already in place, I just want Apple to go all in on this platform. As a very disappointed two time Apple TV owner, I keep thinking the next box might be the one. I skipped the 3 because it only added 1080p support initially and now the new box is more expensive, curiously crippled when it comes to apps (for now, maybe Apple will ease up the restrictions in the near future), but with a price increase and the possibility of repurchasing my apps, the subset of those that will be compatible anyway, I'm a little disappointed. Then again, at least now, the potential for a fully blown Apple TV platform is finally being realized. I'm just impatient because I've been on the hunt for a fully realized Apple TV for nearly a decade now (eight years or so).

I have multiple boxes that say they can do games, going back to the days of DVD players. Remember games like Dragon's Lair being ported to DVD players???? Roku has been pushing the idea for a while now. Even the Fire TV. The problem is that none of these systems seem to take the concept seriously, it's always a tacked on feature that doesn't seem to be fully exploited. Fire TV is still probably closest, but I don't think you can move apps to the external USB drive (not without root anyway, please chime in if I missed an easy stock option). Your existing Amazon app store games (and regular apps) are all available. You can add a game controller and go to town (if only the built-in storage was greater or you could install apps to an external drive easily). These systems are fast enough to do real gaming. Even pretty cutting edge 3D graphics stuff, not just AngryBirds, Monument Valley, and the like, but full fledged last gen console quality games. It would be lovely to put one of these guys in my living room and make it my gaming system. I'm kind of burnt out on the stupid that is current console gaming (locked save files is uber annoying).

You make an interesting point about the M9 not being needed. With the box being built around Siri and the M9 being all about Siri integration, wouldn't that be a great fit? I do recognize that Apple clearly realizes where their bread is buttered. The iPhone outsells all other Apple devices combined. Pricing comes into play clearly, but I'd take a gaming model of the new Apple TV for $200 starting price. I prefer the media only model to start at $100 (like Fire TV, Roku 3, and similar), but I'm not opposed to the $150 price on principle.

Again, I'm a little disappointed because at first blush, I though this thing might be the almost perfect living room box, now I'm more confused than anything. I'm device agnostic so Apple TV, Roku, Fire TV, Chromecast, etc. I've used a ton of them, owned a slightly less but still copious amount of them, and am always on the look out for something in this space. I game and do media (LAN and WAN). I don't mind digital only distribution when it has a sane user agreement (Apple isn't perfect here, but are better than the traditional gaming consoles by far and generally at least on par compared to Amazon, Roku, Google, etc). I'm the perfect customer for such a device.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2015 08:56AM by silvarios.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: ATV $150 or $200?
Posted by: Robert M
Date: September 10, 2015 03:39PM
Hi everyone,

I read this thread and I think the answer to Marty's question has been lost in all the shuffle. The storage in the AppleTV isn't just for games and such. Two of the biggest rumors have been that Apple is going to offer a TV service and make the AppleTV the central hub for HomeKit devices.

To me, that extra storage could be used for games (and related user files), maybe DVR recordings from Apple's own TV service (when Apple gets it moving), recordings from HomeKit connected cams and such. Storage for non-game app related data.

Lots of possibilities and none of it necessarily needs a tremendous amount of horsepower.

Robert
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 194
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020