Apple Press Conference Thoughts

[harshness]

That strategy has worked out sooooo badly for them recently.... Lol

They haven't held back this much up to this point. As many have commented, the recent presentation was among Apple's most ho-hum ever.

UHD standards are cast in stone and have been for quite a while. To equip the box with hardware that isn't up to the heir-apparent standard is to give the competition a big head start. Why put yourself at a disadvantage?

Pundits have been insisting that Apple stock is headed for $200 but then they do something like this.

 

[harshness]

Quite honestly they have been doing 4K since the new Sportscenter Studio went online.

That only serves to make the talking heads more nervous.

 

[king3pj]

They haven't held back this much up to this point. As many have commented, the recent presentation was among Apple's most ho-hum ever.

UHD standards are cast in stone and have been for quite a while. To equip the box with hardware that isn't up to the heir-apparent standard is to give the competition a big head start. Why put yourself at a disadvantage?

Pundits have been insisting that Apple stock is headed for $200 but then they do something like this.

I just gave an example you quoted a few posts back where they did almost this exact same thing. They have held back like this before lots of times.

They released the Apple TV 2nd Gen as a 720p box when others on the market where 1080p. Hell, 1080p TVs in 2010 might have been more common than 4K TVs are right now.

They also didn't worry about dual core processors in their phones or giant screens for quite a while when all the high end Android phones were being released with both.

In general they always seem to go after user experience instead of the highest specs. That has been their philosophy for as long as I can remember.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

I just gave an example you quoted a few posts back where they did almost this exact same thing. They have held back like this before lots of times.

They released the Apple TV 2nd Gen as a 720p box when others on the market where 1080p. Hell, 1080p TVs in 2010 might have been more common than 4K TVs are right now.

They also didn't worry about dual core processors in their phones or giant screens for quite a while when all the high end Android phones were being released with both.

In general they always seem to go after user experience instead of the highest specs. That has been their philosophy for as long as I can remember.

Well, remember, those high end Android phones needed all the power they could get to deal with software that was rarely quite as optimized - and had to work on a plethora of devices. Whereas Apple has been able to eek every bit of performance out of far less CPU and ram. But for sure, they work on their own schedule and calendar.

 

[dangue]

Well, remember, those high end Android phones needed all the power they could get to deal with software that was rarely quite as optimized - and had to work on a plethora of devices. Whereas Apple has been able to eek every bit of performance out of far less CPU and ram. But for sure, they work on their own schedule and calendar.

Fair point with respect to processor and RAM (but honestly an octo-core phone- this thing isn't calculating lunar orbit insertions...). That aside, look at the other aspects of the phone: NFC, camera megapixels and screen resolution, Apple doesn't chase these. It makes additions at its own pace based on what it believes works. The 8 megapixel camera they've used the past few years has been consistently a top performer despite being "behind the times."

 

[Foxbat]

The cynic in me says the reason is something along the lines of "x% of homes have UHD/4K TVs" and until that number passes some point known only to Apple, the AppleTV will support the common resolution. In the meantime Apple can work on building up their 4K library of Movies and other content. Eventually the tipping point will be reached, at which point we AppleTV fans will have to pay over again for "one more thing..."

Plus, the App Store for the AppleTV need only support "normal" resolutions which until the iPad Pro came along, didn't exceed 2K. Since this generation is using the A8x chip and not the A9x from the iPad Pro, sloshing around 4x the pixels for the screen and supporting the Apps & OS may have been exceeding Apple's comfort level.

Plus, A8x chips are probably easier to come by than the A9/A9x chips for the coming year. The iPhone 6s/6s+ come first in the allocation hierarchy.

 

[mike123abc]

I was hoping Apple was going to announce 4k with the new AppleTV....

I was also hoping they would offer an upgrade program for previously purchased movies... Something along the lines of $5 to upgrade a movie from 2k to 4k for the ones you already own.

 

[king3pj]

I was hoping Apple was going to announce 4k with the new AppleTV....

I was also hoping they would offer an upgrade program for previously purchased movies... Something along the lines of $5 to upgrade a movie from 2k to 4k for the ones you already own.

Don't give them any ideas! You're right, they probably will charge you to upgrade but I hope they don't. Back in the day when I first started buying movies and TV from iTunes it was all 720p. As they started upgrading everything to 1080p they didnt charge us to get the better files.

At the time the choices were HD or SD though. Resolution wasn't really part of the description. I suspect that they will treat 4K as a separate product but it would be nice if previous HD owners could just have access to whatever resolution they want.

Looks like this is all hypothetical for at least a couple more years anyways though.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

I was hoping Apple was going to announce 4k with the new AppleTV....

I was also hoping they would offer an upgrade program for previously purchased movies... Something along the lines of $5 to upgrade a movie from 2k to 4k for the ones you already own.

Are they even selling 4k movies? When I had bought SD movies on iTunes years ago, they have all become HD movies via iCloud. No charge.

 

[tigerfan33]

I blame Roku
If Roku 4 with 4k streaming would have already happened we all would be wondering which 4k streaming device we wanted.

 

[tigerfan33]

Pundits have been insisting that Apple stock is headed for $200 but then they do something like this.

Please let me in on the secret stock that hasn't been burnt the last 5-6 weeks.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

Well I reserved a 64gb 6s at the Chicago Michigan Ave. store for the day I'm in Chicago. Still not 100% this is the best route but at least I have a place in line if I go for it. The Verizon option seems to really be a full 24 mo commitment on the same device.

 

[Bruce]

I was also hoping they would offer an upgrade program for previously purchased movies... Something along the lines of $5 to upgrade a movie from 2k to 4k for the ones you already own.

Has anyone done this for any format change except for Vudu/UltraViolet.

From VHS to Laserdisc to DVD to Blu-Ray never have I been offered a chance to upgrade for a small charge until Vudu came along with their d2d program, pay $5 to upgrade a DVD to a 1080P digital copy ( or $2.50 if you do 10 at a time), it saved me $$$ from upgrading certain DVDs to HD for $2.50 instead of paying the $15-20 for the BR.

As far as Apple TV goes I am waiting to see what TV apps are available and if Comcast ( or whoever your provider is) will allow access to it.

 

[mike123abc]

I did the same upgrade with VUDU converting a lot of my DVDs to Ultra Violet HD versions. Personally I thought it was a good deal for $2.50 to buy the HD streaming version of the DVD.

I would love Apple to automatically "upgrade" your itunes library to 4k. But, I have a feeling that the studios will now want new revenue.

I would also like a 3D option.

 

[Foxbat]

The only "Tech Update" upgrade I ever took advantage of was the HD-DVD to BluRay for "300", "Apollo 13", "A Christmas Story", "Troy", "Planet Earth", and a handful of others. I think it was $5 a title, and since the Box Set for "Earth" was $90, getting it on BluRay for $5 was a steal.

The HD-DVD player is now located in our Family's vacation home along with all the HD-DVDs I had collected (maybe 15) so it's mostly for rainy days. Since it also plays DVDs it isn't a bad device for the location.

Since 4K UHD disks are not even available to buy yet, I can see in another year that most questions regarding pricing and upgrading should be answered.

 

[harshness]

Well, remember, those high end Android phones needed all the power they could get to deal with software that was rarely quite as optimized - and had to work on a plethora of devices. Whereas Apple has been able to eek every bit of performance out of far less CPU and ram.

This failed theory went out with the six or seventh incarnation of the hardware combined with trying to keep everything compatible with the iPads.

 

[harshness]

Since 4K UHD disks are not even available to buy yet, I can see in another year that most questions regarding pricing and upgrading should be answered.

Since UHD Blu-ray discs aren't available yet, it seems important not to miss out on the one format that is widely available: streaming UHD.

 

[harshness]

Please let me in on the secret stock that hasn't been burnt the last 5-6 weeks.

The wonks have been claiming this for well over a year. With all of the leaks, the announcements seem to be more confirmation of the downside.

 

[tigerfan33]

But there isn't that much of it going on yet and much of it is hardwired. When UHD starts coming to (or perhaps more likely from) devices far too small to take advantage of it, the Wi-fi bandwidth is going to be jammed.

Let's see. Which is it? Not much content or widely available as your post above said??

 

[dangue]

The wonks have been claiming this for well over a year. With all of the leaks, the announcements seem to be more confirmation of the downside.

Wall Street is idiotic. The stock downturn since May makes zero sense when you realize that apple is projected to make $1 Billion per week this year. Find me a company that matches that and then explain to me how on earth Apple can logically have such a low P/E ratio. $200 is on the high side, but there's no doubt in my mind that $114 undervalues the stock. It's part of the reason I hold it in my portfolio.