# New Apple TV A15 bionic chip with HDR10+



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

New Apple TV 4K now packs A15 Bionic chip and HDR10+



> The new Apple TV 4K is available in two configurations: the Apple TV 4K with Wi-Fi, which offers 64 GB of storage and retails at $129, plus the Apple TV 4K with Wi-Fi + Ethernet, which offers 128 GB of storage and retails at $149. You can order both now on the Apple site with availability beginning Friday, November 4.


Lower price with more storage!


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

my Apple TV 4K original at this point is still kicking strong.. I just wish the damn new remote was cheaper lol


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

I have the original and a new one. The new remote is good except I hate the Siri button on the right side edge. Constantly pressing it when I don’t want to.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> New Apple TV 4K now packs A15 Bionic chip and HDR10+


Finally some love for those with Samsung TVs. I'm not sure how much HDR10+ streaming content there is but it will fill in the blanks where the TV apps are now outdated.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

I'll never complain about any streaming device upgrades, no matter how big or small, that involve strictly hardware/processing improvements. I'll gladly die on this hill when it comes to streaming; let your TV handle the picture, let a streaming device handle the streaming. TV apps are for the birds.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

B. Shoe said:


> TV apps are for the birds.


For many, TV apps are pretty great. It is those that suffer Samsung and LG TVs with their proprietary OSes that really need external streamers.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

harsh said:


> For many, TV apps are pretty great. It is those that suffer Samsung and LG TVs with their proprietary OSes that really need external streamers.


I've helped friends set up streaming and played around with in-set TV apps for what would be considered most popular household brands. If you're a casual streamer, I can somewhat agree. You're likely subscribed to cable/satellite, so streaming services are really more of a supplement. If you're a full-timer, no thanks. I'll recommend to anyone and everyone to spend the extra cash on a top-end streaming device every time.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

B. Shoe said:


> I'll recommend to anyone and everyone to spend the extra cash on a top-end streaming device every time.


Given that Apple has a 9% market share with all of their various ATV models, people don't appear to be listening to your recommendations. Their market share was 12% last year so they've taken a pretty significant hit. Whether that was the lack of new models or the fact that the ATV just isn't that special, we'll have to wait and see.

Roku (Android-based) and FireTV (Android-based) have a 40% share each and unless something changes soon, the ATV will be passed by the GoogleTV TVs and devices (currently 7%).


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

harsh said:


> Given that Apple has a 9% market share with all of their various ATV models, people don't appear to be listening to your recommendations. Their market share was 12% last year so they've taken a pretty significant hit. Whether that was the lack of new models or the fact that the ATV just isn't that special, we'll have to wait and see.
> 
> Roku (Android-based) and FireTV (Android-based) have a 40% share each and unless something changes soon, the ATV will be passed by the GoogleTV TVs and devices (currently 7%).


I'v had a Roku, Amazon devices, Chromecast, etc devices and I can assure you none of them come close to what you get with an Apple TV 4K streaming box. Yes it costs more. You get what you pay for. No one is going to change my mind on it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> No one is going to change my mind on it.


I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I'm just pointing out that 90% of the market is of a different mind.

The remote control is easily enough to turn me away from the Apple product. Remotes shouldn't be designed in such a way that they fit better between couch cushions than in your hand.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

harsh said:


> Given that Apple has a 9% market share with all of their various ATV models, people don't appear to be listening to your recommendations. Their market share was 12% last year so they've taken a pretty significant hit. Whether that was the lack of new models or the fact that the ATV just isn't that special, we'll have to wait and see.
> 
> Roku (Android-based) and FireTV (Android-based) have a 40% share each and unless something changes soon, the ATV will be passed by the GoogleTV TVs and devices (currently 7%).


I never said it specifically had to be the ATV. We live in the Apple ecosystem in our household, but I've gladly recommended Roku and FireTV devices to those that aren't interested in Apple products. All I ever recommend is to get the highest end model available for that brand. Like @b4pjoe said, you get what you pay for with this stuff.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

B. Shoe said:


> I never said it specifically had to be the ATV.


The same observations apply to the nVIDIA Shield TV except that the Shield TV has an arguably more practical remote.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

harsh said:


> The same observations apply to the nVIDIA Shield TV except that the Shield TV has an arguably more practical remote.


I have to ask...have you ever used an ATV and its remote or you just making that claim because of what you read online? Yes the remote is small. The newer remote is a bit thicker. I have never lost either of them in the couch.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

harsh said:


> The same observations apply to the nVIDIA Shield TV except that the Shield TV has an arguably more practical remote.


I'm unsure what you're trying to discuss or debate here. I agreed with you that TV apps are fine for casual streamers. I told you that I've recommended Roku and FireTV devices to others when you brought up Apple's market share. Now you've brought up nVIDIA devices out of nowhere.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> Yes the remote is small. The newer remote is a bit thicker.


I've used the original remote and as someone who wears XL gloves, it was a battle. A remote should be large enough that it doesn't squirt like a old bar of soap when you try to use it.

The new remote is still quite thin at 1/4" but it is a little less like a spent soap bar.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

B. Shoe said:


> Now you've brought up nVIDIA devices out of nowhere.


The Shield TV is Android's more-or-less equivalent of the ATV since you were talking about "premium" streamers being preferable.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

harsh said:


> Roku (Android-based) and FireTV (Android-based) have a 40% share each and unless something changes soon, the ATV will be passed by the GoogleTV TVs and devices (currently 7%).


Roku is not Android-based. It's its own thing.


----------



## Mike Lang (Nov 18, 2005)

Seems like a very small upgrade over the 2021 model.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

Mike Lang said:


> Seems like a very small upgrade over the 2021 model.


I think this is a bigger upgrade than the 2021 which was just basically a new remote. This has double the storage, the new remote (same as 2021), RAM from 3 gb to 4 gb, the A15 cpu, and HDR10+.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> I think this is a bigger upgrade than the 2021 which was just basically a new remote.


With respect to the cheaper model, that depends on how much value you place on an Ethernet jack and the Thread feature that allows the ATV to be part of a home automation network (Matter) that both disappeared from the cheaper model.

Whether or not the ATV product line really benefits from a SoC as powerful as the A15 remains to be seen given that most apps (especially games) will still need to be directed towards lesser processors.

2021 models brought additional frame rates, the Siri remote and a few practical niceties even if the drivetrain wasn't a leap forward.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

harsh said:


> I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I'm just pointing out that 90% of the market is of a different mind.
> 
> The remote control is easily enough to turn me away from the Apple product. Remotes shouldn't be designed in such a way that they fit better between couch cushions than in your hand.


I have had AppleTV 4K for years and have had zero issues with the new Siri remote in-hand or disappearing between couch cushions.

Except for HDR10+ there's almost zero reason why anyone not playing arcade games would need to upgrade from either the first or second generation AppleTV 4K units to the new one.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> I have the original and a new one. The new remote is good except I hate the Siri button on the right side edge. Constantly pressing it when I don’t want to.


Yup, that's the only thing I don't like about the remote. I don't know why they put the Mute button on the new remote, I never use it. They could have put the Siri button there.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

B. Shoe said:


> I'll never complain about any streaming device upgrades, no matter how big or small, that involve strictly hardware/processing improvements. I'll gladly die on this hill when it comes to streaming; let your TV handle the picture, let a streaming device handle the streaming. TV apps are for the birds.


I haven't used a TV app in years.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> I'v had a Roku, Amazon devices, Chromecast, etc devices and I can assure you none of them come close to what you get with an Apple TV 4K streaming box. Yes it costs more. You get what you pay for. No one is going to change my mind on it.


Simply the best streaming box. I've tried damn near every streamer and you cannot beat an ATV...at this moment.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

harsh said:


> I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I'm just pointing out that 90% of the market is of a different mind.
> 
> The remote control is easily enough to turn me away from the Apple product. Remotes shouldn't be designed in such a way that they fit better between couch cushions than in your hand.


You don't have an ATV? Once again, you're criticizing a device you know little about.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

harsh said:


> The same observations apply to the nVIDIA Shield TV except that the Shield TV has an arguably more practical remote.


Nope, I tried one a couple of years ago. Not as good as an ATV.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Lang said:


> Seems like a very small upgrade over the 2021 model.


Yeah, I haven't seen much difference in the newer models. I'm gonna buy the new one, it might be noticeably better from what I've read, especially with an upgraded remote.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> I think this is a bigger upgrade than the 2021 which was just basically a new remote. This has double the storage, the new remote (same as 2021), RAM from 3 gb to 4 gb, the A15 cpu, and HDR10+.


Yes, it does sound like the new one is gonna be a step up.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

Rich said:


> Yup, that's the only thing I don't like about the remote. I don't know why they put the Mute button on the new remote, I never use it. They could have put the Siri button there.


If you don’t use Siri you can turn it off in settings to disable that button. I do use Siri though so I have not disabled it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Rich said:


> I haven't used a TV app in years.


That may be more of an indictment of your TV than it is an endorsement of streaming boxes.


----------

