“However you look at it, when CEO Tim Cook showed off the new [Apple TV] hardware at the Sept. 9 event, it was long overdue,” Daniel B. Kline writes for The Motley Fool. “For the most part, the new Apple TV didn’t disappoint, but in one key area the company made a huge misstep.”
“The new box may deliver all of the features fans were hoping for — integrated voice search powered by Siri, an elegant new remote, and a new open environment with an app store — but it’s simply priced too high,” Kline writes. “There are Android phones and tablets as well as Windows-based laptops that match the Apple product line when it comes to mixing sleek design and high-end functionality. Those top-tier non-Apple phones, tablets, and laptops tend to be priced in line with iPads, iPhones, and MacBooks, making the Apple items a better deal because of brand reputation.”
MacDailyNews Take: Pure lie. No Android phone matches what Apple’s iPhone delivers in toto. Neither do crappy Windows laptops vs. Apple MacBooks, MacBook Airs, and MacBook Pros. Anyone who asserts otherwise is either a liar, an ignoramus, or, perhaps in Kline’s case, both.
Kline writes, “If you look at full retail pricing for the top-of-the-line Fire TV and the Roku 3, both boxes offer a similar experience to Apple for $50 less.”
MacDailyNews Take: No, they do not.
“Apple made a mistake here because its TV box just isn’t special enough to be priced so much higher than its nearest rivals,” Kline writes. “Had the company announced its in-the-works-but-may-not-happen TV service, then it would have had a unique package to offer customers that might justify the price tag.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Firstly, Apple’s over-the-top Internet TV service will arrive. Secondly, Apple is not interested in amassing market share numbers per se, which seems to be Kline’s sole basis for categorizing something as a “flop” or not. For example, Apple’s iPhone currently has 13.9% market share worldwide vs. Android’s 82.8% (IDC, August 2015), which would seem to be a “flop” in Kline’s book, toddlers’ picture book as it were. However, at last count, Apple’s iPhone owns 92% of smartphone industry’s profits.
Some flop.
Newsflash: Apple sells premium products at premium prices to premium customers.
Apple, is interested in those consumers who have the brain power necessary to recognize quality and be willing to pay for it. Those who can’t or won’t deserve their fate. Amazon, Roku, Google, and the rest can have fun fighting over Apple’s table scraps, dogs that they are.
If you can’t afford or see the value of an Apple TV, you’re not in the target market. Stop whining. Nobody cares. Developers aren’t interested in those who can’t muster at least $149 for an Apple TV. Neither are makers of gaming controllers. Neither are content providers. And, neither is Apple, who are running a business, not a charity. If you want an Apple TV, but you can’t afford it, either save up for one or trot on over to Amazon and settle for a crappy wannabe and all that doesn’t go with it. The choice is yours. It’s like an IQ test.
So, to recap: As with Macintosh, iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch, nothing has changed with Apple TV. Apple sells premium products at premium prices to premium customers and, when all is said and done, they will sell millions upon millions of Apple TV units worldwide.
SEE ALSO:
Apple TV and voice control: What Siri does that the others don’t – September 18, 2015
With the all-new Apple TV, Apple changes the game, yet again – September 14, 2015
What Apple got right in Apple TV’s user interface – and what needs work – September 11, 2015
New Apple TV has the potential to do for television what iPhone did for mobile phones – September 11, 2015
Apple preps to conquer living room with all-new Apple TV – September 11, 2015
Hands-on with the all-new Apple TV – September 10, 2015
Gruber: Apple TV will define how all TVs will work in a few years – September 10, 2015
I think $199 for the 64GB version is underpriced.😜🔜🔚
You are a tool
Thank you. I’m gland you find me so helpful.💥🎉👽
My glands thank you too.😜🔚
Your posts read like a Japanese school girl who struggles to express herself so she resorts to emoji and emoticons.
Try to create the future of media with style and grace rather than immature pictures.
I think you should do that yourself to begin with. Some like it some don’t and tolerance for others expressions and views is often a measure of maturity.
Well, I am kinda late in the game and didn’t know that both products were out.
Thanks for benching those 2 products for us. What a time saver you’ve been.
If the only real difference between AppleTV and any other product and service if price it is unlikely AppleTV will be successful. Siri alone is not reason enough for me to make a real difference. And apps? What about ’em? If one is nor interested in gaming what will apps actually do that cannot be done on iPhone, iPad, or any Mac?
Wow this writer writes through his ass! Has he/she ever looked or compared a Mac to a PC? I seriously doubt it.
Complete disregard of gaming capabilities. Does Roku or Fire have this? I didn’t think so.
FireTV does have gaming capabilities.
True, but I hear the experience has been clunky for many. Also, the Apple ecosystem is much larger than Amazon’s ecosystem, so there will be significantly more apps ported to the new Apple TV. Additionally, the new Apple TV’s remote will be able to track movement through the air. This means games which involve swinging a golf club, swinging a baseball bat, etc. will have enhanced gameplay. This wii like remote is not an out-of-the-box feature included with these competitors’ boxes. So, overall the Apple TV will be a fun gift this holiday. Remember, stretch before you do those crazy Apple TV dance moves with your grandkids; there is a chance you could wrench your back.
They both do. My kids were playing angry birds on a Roku a couple of years ago when gaming on the aTV was just a dream.
Actually, not true. You could play iPhone and iPad games on Apple TV by streaming them from the devices. . . And there are two player games.
On the Roku the gaming apps have always been native. No tablet nor phone required. That’s the difference.
From reviews I’ve read (full disclosure, I’m not a gamer), Roku games a pretty laggy.
Both FireTv and AppleTv are very good products. My home has four AppleTVs and three FireTVs. I will certainly be upgrading my AppleTVs and FireTVs next month when they are expected.
More expensive or not, the ‘extra’ $50 is the cost to be in the eco-system of Apple.
As a one off cost it isn’t significant
I agree with Kline only in the sense that I won’t upgrade my three Apple TVs until I see an Apple alternative to cable. In the short-run, the units may not sell as some expect because they aren’t accompanied by a viable alternative (replacement of) to horrible cable companies with bloated packages that cost a fortune to deliver a handful of demanded channels with a myriad of channels that the subscriber never watches and is supported by (or not) customer services teams trained in the bowels of hell. But when Apple does offer that alternative, the units will fly off shelves as if they have wings.
It’s pricer for sure. To believe the rumors, their internet service (depending on what they offer) sounds a bit pricey at 40 a month. Apple Music (much like all music streaming services) sounds mostly fair however higher hidden costs (you need at least 3 gig data plan (2 solely for music) to take full advantage of service (so usually add another 15 bucks a month). The Apple Watch is on the higher/est side of cost for smart watch market.
Apple has always, ALWAYS but more expensive then competitiors mostly because of product quaility (Brand name is only been a normally part of the price).
The question isn’t and has never been “Is the hardware/software worth the value that’s Apple is offering.” The question has always been “Is this VERSION worth paying this price for?” Anyone who bought the first version of the Mac Mini can understand this.
For example, Smartphones. No smartphone, regardless of brand, was worth spending the money before 2011. The 4s was the first phone on the market that was worth the cost to buy. After that, every other upgrade was a value buy for features and hardware.
So the question is, “Is this version of AppleTV worth the money to buy?”
My first instinct after reading the tech specs and features, is no. It feels more like the 4, than the 4s. That can change closer to the release date and more info hits the net. However, I do think it’s only, at worst, 1 upgrade away. (Stop being so cheap, drop some of your margins on hard drives and give me a little space!)
Fortunately for Kline, accuracy is not important for what he does. Otherwise he would be out of a job come the end of October.
Gen 4 still does not support input pass through from; antenna/satellite/cable box
WHERE IS THE 4K !!!!!!!!!
If Apple wants to be in the lead, ACT LIKE IT !!
I bet the 4k is baked in to the new AppleTV, but it won’t be activated until enough 4k content is loaded into the iTunes store. Obviously, Apple is not ignorant of 4k but it would look pointless if they couldn’t deliver any at the product launch.
The new Apple TV with VLC will make me very, very happy.
Biggest problem is (lack of) support. ATV 2 was wildly unstable for years (Google it). Apple, with $650 BILLION in the bank, ignored complaints for 3-4 years, yet somehow hopes they’ll be rewarded with new sales and repeat purchases.
You’d have to be nuts to have had an ATV2 and be queueing up for this new model.
I have two ATV2’s and they have been rock solid from day one. I think you better back off on the six vodkas, there numbing your brain into speaking gibberish.
Apple has only about $210 billion in the bank. $650 billion is its market cap, the total value of all of its outstanding common stock at the current stock market price. Get your facts straight.
Aren’t most of Apple new products viewed as flops by the general industry and news media? Does it really even matter? What really matter is whether consumers buy those Apple products or not. It’s easy for pundits to pre-judge every product and rate it based on specs or features but there are always other factors involved when it comes to actual sales. At a glance AppleTV easily falls short on hardware features. No microSD slot, no USB drive support, no 4K video, no optical audio out, no gigabit ethernet, etc. Apple is really cutting corners for reasons I can’t possibly understand. However, it simply doesn’t matter. I can buy a Fire TV and an AppleTV to get what I need. It’s not enough of a cost to break me if I can’t get everything I need in one product. What Apple is offering in AppleTV is worth it to me to pay for. Apple isn’t Amazon and that’s all there is to it.
I think what Apple is trying to do is to fire a warning shot in to the game console market. With Disney in the game now to release their games, it would be foolish for the other developers not to give the ATV a serious look. And if the do, watch out. Microsoft and Sony will still be at the top battling each other as usual for first place but Nintendo is going down. The rest of the casual gamers is going to jump the sinking ship and jump on the ATV. That $199 price point makes it very tempting.
Without BBC iPlayer and All4 support it’s as useless in the UK as the previous gen one. I’ll wait and see whether those are added. In the meantime I’ll stick with the Roku……which has both and a whole bunch of other UK providers Apple never bothered with.
I’m glad for competition in the arena. But Apple has pulled off another coup. We waited, a bit of a long time, for it. And it’s here.