Apple TV 4 coming in October for under $200, Apple TV 3 stays & gets new streaming service


Rough mockup of fourth Apple TV vs. third Apple TV by Michael Steeber

With the official debut of the next-generation Apple TV less than two weeks away, sources have provided additional details on Apple’s pricing, availability, and product lineup plans for its set-top devices. According to sources, the fourth-generation Apple TV will be priced below $200, and is on track to become available in October. Apple executives are apparently still finalizing the price of the revamped living room device, but the latest options call for a starting price point of either $149 or $199, both higher than the third-generation Apple TV

The new Apple TV will come at a premium price compared with the current model, which was originally priced at $99 from its launch in 2012, then was reduced to $69 this March. As the new box will be considerably more expensive than popular alternatives from Roku, Google and Amazon, Apple plans to keep the $69 third-generation device for sale as an entry level model within the Apple TV product line. The new Apple TV 4 will be very similar to the current model in appearance, but it will be thicker and slightly wider, sources say.

Apple’s next-generation Apple TV will include a number of new features to differentiate itself from the older version, including Siri support, a new remote control, an App Store with a Software Development Kit for developers, and a refreshed user interface. As soon as next year, Apple plans to release a cable-replacing streaming TV service that bundles multiple television channels for a price as low as $40 per month, but the new Apple TV will initially still require logins to cable networks to unlock content.

According to our sources, the software update that enables Apple’s cable-replacement service is currently planned to also become available for the third-generation Apple TV. However, the current model will not receive support for the upcoming App Store, nor will it be directly controllable by Siri. We will have more details on the new Apple TV’s gaming, Siri, and remote control functionality in the coming days.

Apple also plans to introduce the new iPhone 6S and iPhone 6S Plus at its September 9th event. As we have reported, the new smartphones will include Force Touch-capable displays, a new Rose Gold color option, 12 megapixel cameras with 4K video recording support, more efficient wireless chips from Qualcomm, faster A9 processors with double the RAM and better battery life, and improved front-facing cameras for FaceTime. Apple, however, will not be introducing a new 4-inch “iPhone 6c.”

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel


  1. errr… aint 200 bucks a bit too much? even if it has apps

    • D. Maki (@Ikam_Nitsud) - 7 years ago

      Yeah $199 is something I WILL NOT being buying. $150 is slightly pushing it also. I thought cause the current one dropped to $69 that the new one would take over the current ones original pricing but whatever. >_>

      • thejuanald - 7 years ago

        PMZanetti, once again proving to be a brainless follower.

    • mikhailt - 7 years ago

      Depends on what else it has, the amount of storage and so on.

      The best media box with 4k support right now is nVidia Shield TV, it goes for 200$ but it does have a game controller included but with 16GB of storage. 500GB Shield Pro goes for 300$.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      GOD NO!!! PLEASE be $199 at least! If it’s less than $199 then it will be a garbage upgrade. I’m embarrassed for idiots that want something great for less than $200 from Apple. It’s NOT going to happen. I pray that I have to pay at least $199 for this device, as I want it to be a game changing device, and not some cheap simple upgrade. Move the needle again Apple!

      • D. Maki (@Ikam_Nitsud) - 7 years ago

        I’ll say whatever I want to say! I’m getting tired of people like you that have this b$%^# fit whenever some expresses there opinion like the way I did. I hope they make one for under $199 now just to P*** you off.

      • epicflyingcat - 7 years ago

        The Chromecast was a game changing device because it was so cheap but has all the functionality of an Apple TV and then some. Most people don’t want to shell out $200 for a TV box because they simply aren’t necessary anymore.

      • Steve32 - 7 years ago

        Your mentality and its likes are why next base iPhone is going to rock an embarrassing 16GB storage.

      • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

        @epicflyingcat Um nothing about the chromecast made it a game changing device. It only does what every smart TV does and it slowly got that functionality over a long time. It’s a cheap crap smart TV box like all of the others, nothing great.

        Here’s what people don’t realize, and I don’t understand why: if you make a device with an incredibly cheap price point it is not going to be great, it is not going to change the world. In order to make that Apple TV something great, it absolutely has to be more than $99, it’s not possible to make the remote alone great, for $99. Stop being so cheap and strive for great things, instead of wanting this new revolutionary completely changed and amazing Apple TV to unrealistically cost $99, accept that it will be double that price most likely, and be happy that they made this thing great as opposed to just another box among so many that all do the same thing, and none change TV at all.

        @Steve um, actually that makes absolutely no sense at all. I want it to be expensive to be game changing, whereas storage starting at 16GB has absolutely nothing to do with that at all. I think storage should start at 32GB at least in iPhones now, but only this year, because this year is the year of 12MP pictures, and 4K video, which will take significant space. Having said that, I do think storage is too expensive at $100 per tier.

      • Pristina Alford - 7 years ago

        you are an idiot.

      • Ron Cardi (@ROYG_B) - 7 years ago

        “If it’s less than $199 then it will be a garbage upgrade. I’m embarrassed for idiots that want something great for less than $200 from Apple.”

        I wasn’t sure if your first comment was sarcastic but now it’s clear you were completely serious. Sorry but there’s nothing game changing about overpricing your product. I personally wouldn’t mind paying $200, but it has to be completely deserving of its price tag and as of now, it doesn’t look like that’s the case. Of course my opinion may change when the full details of the new Apple TV are announced, but at this time I can’t figure out what has you so up and excited. You seem like the type that would be satisfied with a cheap and low quality pair of pants so long as it costs you a lot of money… and yet you’re the one calling people idiots?

      • Listen you lot – you’re all idiots because o0smoothie0o says so, and if he says so then it must be true right?

    • Christopher Jacobs - 7 years ago

      $200 is expensive for a primary entertainment portal? I think $200 is right on the money for what it does – but I agree that $300 would be too much. It’s Apple… always a premium price, but I’m sure the $200 will be well spent. If not… bring it back. They do have a return policy.

  2. I’m excited to see what this can do. That said I just got cable TV back so it will need to really impress as money is tight these days but I have a weakness for this stuff.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      The streaming service won’t be unveiled until spring 2016 or more likely WWDC 2016.

      • You know this how? Rumor sites? Which means you don’t know at all.

      • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

        Yes, it’s my speculation based on rumors and history of what Apple does. Rumors say it isn’t launching so my guess is WWDC because that’s when Apple Music launched and they like to launch services there, I think.

  3. Timur Tripp - 7 years ago

    $199 for an TV, seriously? Might as well get a used Mac mini for that price…

    And thicker and wider? Not what I expected at all.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      Wow. Just wow. A macmini won’t be able to do virtually anything that this Apple TV will do. Unless the only thing you want is a place to stream your ripped DVDs then you will get next to nothing this offers.

      Thicker and wider? You’re really complaining about that? My god. People seriously don’t get it. The news of the price at $199 and thicker and wider are the best things in this article. IT NEEDS to be thicker and wider so it actually does something great, so it actually has great functionality. You clearly need to go buy a chromecast which is tiny and does nothing, because that is what you want.

      I want a new, much much better Apple TV and I’m so glad it is going to be thicker and wider and cost much more, because that all means that it is a GREAT device, and not some minorly improved smart tv box like every other one.

      • - 7 years ago

        Quit your logic-talking.

        Cheap bastards like some of the other commenters here want everything for nothing. Sorry-it doesn’t work that way.

      • Timur Tripp - 7 years ago

        “Unless the only thing you want is a place to stream your ripped DVDs then you will get next to nothing this offers.” LOL, do you even know what a Mac mini is capable of?

        The reason I was surprised to hear of it getting thicker and wider is due to the mobile hardware they’re putting in there. But I don’t really care, it’s simply not what I expected.

      • Jim Phong - 7 years ago

        Exactly. I hope Apple did more than what the rumors say. The new Apple TV 4 should be a $259-$299 device with an higher clocked A8X or A9X SoC at a 30Watt or 50Watt TDP along with 64GB SSD or 128GB SSD and an all new outstanding gamepad. Apple should turn the AppleTV in a fully capable console for high end gaming. iOS allows that. Apple SoC allows that too at an higher TDP it could do wonders… the A8X on iPad Air 2 with OpenGL ES and Metal APIs on the 8 PowerVR 7 GPUs is able to run games at sustained 60fps with all filters and effects and that is just a 5Watt average TDP.

      • Smigit - 7 years ago

        Being bigger doesn’t mean it does more. When they’ve shrunk iPhones or iPads, it hasn’t compromised performance or features. If you removed the display and battery from an iPhone then the rest of the internals takes up very little space. By all reports the Apple TV will use a similar chip and is iOS based. Obviously a phone doesn’t have to support external ports like HDMI which take up space, but at the same time they can improve the performance massively over the previous version without necessarily needing a larger enclosure.

        We’ll have to wait an see. Unless there’s some new hardware capabilities that require it, I’m not sure the device will have to be larger, although at the same time I’m not surprised to hear it’ll cost more, especially if half the rumours about the new remote are true.

  4. NQZ (@surgesoda) - 7 years ago

    This is going to be pretty embarrassing if the new iPhones support 4K video capture but the new Apple TV doesn’t…

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      You’re absolutely correct. To me, there are two major reasons why this needs to have 4K support. One, and the most obvious as you pointed out, is because the new iPhones can shoot 4K video, and this device is designed to work 100% seamlessly with all other Apple devices. I guarantee handoff will be a huge part of it, and everyone with a 4K TV will want to be able to view those 4K videos on it, seamlessly. The second thing is that it is getting an App Store, and in my opinion the intelligent thing to do would be to start that App Store off by giving developers the desire to design their apps for both 1080 and 4k resolutions, as opposed to only 1080 now, and then in a couple of years once the App Store is full of apps, add 4K support to a future Apple TV, and then developers will have to slowly update all of their apps… So my point is, start the App Store off with both resolutions.

  5. Cameron Scott - 7 years ago

    All Apple TV has to do is open up access to the iOS apps, update the UI for aesthetic as well as functional purposes, and allow access to apps like Plex and its perfect the way it is.

    For $200 I rather get an old mac mini and plug that into the television set.

    • - 7 years ago

      Yeah, that’s ALL it has to do. I’m sure “all” of that is cheap to come to design, cheap to test, and cheap to implement.

      That’s why every other STB/streaming device has has these exact same capabilities.

      Oh, wait….

      Go whine somewhere else.

    • An old Mac mini won’t be as fast as the new AppleTV. Repeat after me… APP STORE. APP STORE. Do you know what that means?

      If I had any say at Apple, I would never have dropped the price on the old ATV back in March. I’d have saved it for the launch of the new product IF the old one could be updated to support iOS and the app store. If not, it gets the axe and only the new one at $199 is available. I’d also try to get the new box under a different name.

      A decent set of hardware features with a revised UI that tosses the horrible tiles of the first boxes and adds the App store… Nintendo, Sony and MS better be worried long-term. No need to even mention anyone else making a streaming box, those would all be dead in the water.

  6. broblk - 7 years ago

    You get to watch only what Apple wants you to… in keeping with their walled garden approach /s

    • NQZ (@surgesoda) - 7 years ago

      Not entirely true, with AirPlay you can watch whatever you want — you may not be able to stream off of local storage but if you have an iPhone or an iPad you can stream pretty much anything you want to the TV…

  7. Rich Davis (@RichDavis9) - 7 years ago

    I think it will depend on what AppleTV 4th edition actually does. Didn’t some of these gaming developers say that the A8 (and forth coming A9) processors were gaming console level, especially with Metal? I have to admit that I haven’t used a gaming console in years, so i can’t verify how different they are, but if the A9, with a game that’s natively written and takes advantage of Metal, and they can produce a game that rivals an Xbox, Playstation, etc., then Apple could potentially put a dent in the gaming industry. The hard core gamers buy expensive PCs with high end graphics cards, high end i7’s and multiple large screen monitors rather than play with a gaming console. I guess we kind of have to wait and see what they come up with first.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      Here’s the thing, this new Apple TV could be great for gaming, but only if Apple designs their own gaming controller which can be purchased separately, or added to it at an increased price. The rumors suggest Apple wants their new remote control to be used for gaming on this, which is great for two reasons, because it ships in the box, and because it would work well for casual gaming. The problem is, you need a great, intelligently designed, ergonomic gaming controller for hardcore gaming, and a wii-style remote, while great for casual gaming, will never be good for hardcore gaming.

      So, in my opinion Apple should release this with the remote and it will be great for the casual gamers which is at least 90% of the customers that will buy it, but also give the option to purchase an apple designed gaming controller as well, for the hardcore games. Unless Apple does this, all you’ll ever see on its App Store are casual simple games, and that’s both a huge disappointment, and also a huge missed opportunity.

      MFi are garbage, and you can’t control a different display with a touchscreen you’re holding (hint: there is no tactile feel of the buttons). So anyone that thinks you should use an iPhone to control games on a TV screen, I just feel bad for you.

  8. chopingman - 7 years ago

    No 4k, no deal. :)

    • John Warren - 7 years ago

      I totally agree that if Apple releases a gaming controller a new Apple TV will take off like gangbusters. You’ll be able to play your games on multiple IOS devices.

      In fact if they make the game controller interface so it uses bluetooth to connect not only can you use it on Apple TV but you could also use in on iPads and iPhones. That could totally blow open the market for Apple in gaming.

  9. driverbenji - 7 years ago

    This sounds about right.

    For anyone that wants to complain about no app store on ATV3, please remember that it has a single-core A5 processor and is not designed for anything but streaming video. A single-core A5 is pretty much an A4 as the main difference between the A4 & A5 in other devices is the A4 is single core, the A5 added a second core and, with only one core in ATV3, it performs the same as an A4 would. So, if Apple were to open ATV3 up for apps, they would have to be 32-bit, which apple is getting rid of, (A7 and newer are 64-bit), and be able to work well with an A4 processor, so, going back to iPhone 4 and original iPad as far as performance and compatibility go. It’s just not feasible. ATV3 was not designed for gaming, nor for Siri, but for streaming video, audio and pics, that’s it.

  10. Robert Wood - 7 years ago

    Let me refresh your memory for IPOD Mini that you gave to your children because they ask with cute face and point to their friends have it. If I remember I paid for 3 kids(1 middle school, 2 high school) times $250 each. Those IPOD lasted for somewhere year and half. That’s it.

    This AppleTV which is set-top box doing number of things and typically lasts for several years and we use it lot. So, cost up-to $299 is acceptable/reasonable when consider longer life span and usage.

  11. Thomas Georgetown - 7 years ago

    I have an AppleTV, not the last version but the one before. I wanted to test the Roku so got one and am hooked to what it offers. Never did buy much from iTunes. I have Netflix, AcornTV and Amazon Prime so will have to stay with Roku no matter how tempting it would be to pay more than twice that to go back to Apple’s vision. :-) I don’t love my iMac and iPhone, though so not disparaging Apple as a company, just missing the mark on the TV, I would say.

    • Thomas Georgetown - 7 years ago

      That should read I do love my iMac and iPhone. :-)

    • bb1111116 - 7 years ago

      I got the latest Apple TV when the price dropped to $69. I looked at the Roku for $99 and didn’t see the need to get it. On Apple TV I stream Netlix, YouTube, Amazon Prime (through AirPlay) and several other channels including HBO Now. I don’t see how Apple is missing the mark with TV.

      • Because you have to use Airplay to stream anything that Apple doesn’t want on their device.

        Airplay doesn’t always work. Why should I have to have my mac/ipad/iphone on to watch a streaming service on my TV? That’s how they missed the mark.

  12. uniszuurmond - 7 years ago

    It’s the exchange rate that will kill this in South Africa. Our local set top devices with hard drive for digital recording come in at around $99, and our local streaming service comparable with Netflix at $7 a month. Apple needs to pull some magic out of their hat to make it work here…

  13. jonyappleseed - 7 years ago

    $199 is too much!!! $69 is too much!!! Apple needs to make the price -$49 and it needs to levitate and be made of solid gold otherwise count me out!!!

  14. macnificentseven48 - 7 years ago

    One would think that as many A8 chips Apple has sold in iPhones, consumers would get a break on price due to economy of scale if that’s the chip to be used in the new AppleTV. I guess it’s not going to happen that way. I’m already prepared to plunk down $149. The thing is if AppleTV supports all iOS games and apps, I say it was a bargain. That means it would even support browsers which would turn it practically into a mini-computer. Most of the Android HDMI sticks already support all of Google Play games and apps so Apple will be playing catch-up.

  15. Todd Northrop - 7 years ago

    If the new Apple TV can be the ultimate Plex client, then it’s all good. To be the ultimate Plex client, it needs to accept a WIRED Gigabit Ethernet connection, and it needs to be able to play high-bandwidth direct streams from Plex Server (NOT re-encoded streams). That means subtitle support for all popular formats too. 4K support would be nice, but my money is on Apple NOT delivering 4K.

  16. Bryan William - 7 years ago

    I’ll still have to have a cable subscription in order to be able to steam TV for 40+ a month? That makes a whole lot of sense…

  17. taoprophet420 - 7 years ago

    Really tired of all the 4K talk. Even with the prices of the sets rapidly falling there is barely any 4K content and that likely want change any time soon. I don’t see Apple TV supporting 4K u til 2017 when there is more comp tent and more people have updated to a 4K tv. With all the options on Amazon on $1000 and some under $700 for 4K sets we might see an actual Apple televisiin before see a 4K Apple TV.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      What about the fact that all iPhone 6s and 6s Plus users can create their own 4k content?

      • taoprophet420 - 7 years ago

        Still there is hardly any movies or streaming content for 4K. Vertically shot 4K movies shot on iPhone will be a vertical line in the center of your 4K TV, so it would Apple TV doing 4 k to support videos from the iPhone 6s would be less then optimal now.

    • Jon Ostrega - 7 years ago

      Netflix has some good 4K content. Not supporting 4K at this stage would be an embarrassment.

      • taoprophet420 - 7 years ago

        Four series,3 movies and 3 documentaries is hardly good 4K support.

    • Smigit - 7 years ago

      Sure, but wouldn’t it be better to have the device ready for playback of 4K than for it to not for what would likely be some arbitrary reason. There may not be a lot of content yet, everyone acknowledges that, but it wont hurt having it there. The Mac lineup has moved to 5K displays, so having the Apple TV support 4K would be a good way to help get more 4K content out there and onto iTunes specifically. Netflix and some other streaming apps already have some support for the format.

    • driverbenji - 7 years ago

      UHD 4K is still being standardized, adding HDR and wider color gamut, with HDR format wars currently going on, and HDMI 2 spec can barely handle 4K w/HDR, (and I think) without wider color gamut, I, personally wishing they would adopt DisplayPort connectivity instead (can be done via USB-C). UHD 4K is not ready. The average person (most of which will not be reading this) can’t tell the difference between 720p & 1080p. Resolution will not sell 4K, better color and dynamic range (HDR) will. Apple doesn’t jump on new tech, they reimagine it, they are innovators first, not first out with new tech.

      We might see a UHD blu-ray player or two by this holiday season, and maybe a few TVs that do HDR, but, content is still not there. Just because Netflix has a few shows in 4K does not mean there is tons of content waiting for us to stream, it just isn’t there. Most movies are still filmed on film, most effects are done in 2K, most movies in theaters are still 2K, as the masters are 2K. Just because movies theaters have projectors that can play 4K movies does not mean that all movies are 4K, in fact, most are 2K and shown in 2K (as far as I know they do not “upscale” in theaters). It’s just not realistic to think 4K is going to be adopted quickly, it will take a couple more years.

      • driverbenji - 7 years ago

        Oh, and, not to mention that most people in the US do not have, at this time, a fast enough internet connection to stream 4K content.

  18. taoprophet420 - 7 years ago

    I always have said the price would be $199 and maybe $149.

    Will it have built in Airport, so it can easier be the ultimate living room hub? Having it be its own wifi station would really help with HomeKit devices, with HomeKit, games and good apps, media streaming service, tight Siri integration to turn lights on and off, lock doors and search the Internet the new Apple TV can truly be the living room hub that may people have tried for and failed.

    You can’t say $199 is to high when you don’t know all the hardware and features of the device. If it does include Built in Airport with all tight HomeKit and Siri I think $199 is very reasonable.

    I just wonder if it will actually be called Apple TV with its feature set.

    • Jesse Nichols - 7 years ago

      I hadn’t considered that… But you NAILED it here. If the new Apple TV doubles as an AirPort (as well as the other mentioned improvements), it IMMEDIATELY becomes worth the $199 price tag to me.

  19. usmansaghir - 7 years ago

    I was planning on buying the new Apple tv. Converting $199 in to £s and adding VAT to it will bring it to around £150+. Abit too steep. Lets hope Apple have some more suprises this year. 😃

    • uniszuurmond - 7 years ago

      Try converting to ZAR! Over R3,000 exluding duties.

    • uniszuurmond - 7 years ago

      Put differently. In the UK, you only have to give up 55 Big Mac burgers to be able to afford this device. In South Africa, you have to give up more than double that amount of Big Mac burgers – 117 – to buy the same device. Terrible to live in a country with a worthless currency :-(

      • PhilBoogie - 7 years ago

        Food and wine is really cheap there though. It’s just CE that are expensive

  20. Apple plans to release a cable-replacing streaming TV service that bundles multiple television channels for a price as low as $40 per month …are you kidding me 40$/month is low?! I’m paying 40eur/month for 20/4 internet, 150+ programs and landline :|

    • Jesse Nichols - 7 years ago

      Well you’re lucky… Where I live in SC, USA, one is lucky to get 20/4 Internet by itself for less than $35.00 per month… Forget channels! Now, you can get a similar package for $40 per month… For the first 6 months… Then it jumps up to around $100 per month and your locked into a 2 year contract… I hate cable companies. Switched to Sling TV awhile back. It’s not *quite* as reliable as standard cable, but you can’t beat $20 / month.

      P.S. What’s a landline?

  21. rick gregory (@rickg) - 7 years ago

    “Apple plans to release a cable-replacing streaming TV service that bundles multiple television channels for a price as low as $40 per month, but the new Apple TV will initially still require logins to cable networks to unlock content.”

    If I have the cable subscription to view the streaming content why wouldn’t I just use the cable box?

    • Martin Richards - 7 years ago

      Look at my comment below this is ideal if you live in the States but no good for Europe we don’t get the best unfortunately.

  22. ikephelan - 7 years ago

    Ok so I went through and read most of the comments and instead of people just posting comments it turns into an argument about price point and quality. I think everybody wants a product that brings something new to the game I mean that is what brought apple back to the table as a major player. Now that being said I think we can all agree that we will all pay what we believe something is worth. Take the iPhone for example the newest generation is around $750.00 with the older version only being $100.00 less and I would say that anyone that can afford an iPhone has one so that proves we are willing to pay insane amounts of money for technology. So instead of arguing why don’t we all just agree that we will pay what ever we think the new Apple TV is worth and it does not matter if it is bigger or smaller just so long as it functions the way it is suppose to. I will buy the new Apple TV if it will replace my cable box and works just as well because I would much prefer to have a $40.00 cable bill and own the box then pay as much as $250.00 and have to mail the box back to the company every time I move or change companies. It all boils down to what does the product offer that the old one does not and what is the potential of the product compared to the old one. These are the questions we will all ask ourselves when deciding weather to purchase the new Apple TV. I will say this in closing as of now and according to this article the new Apple TV is not offering anything new when compared to the old one NO game changing technology was mentioned in this article.

  23. Martin Richards - 7 years ago

    Apple is setting up a streaming TV package in the future, mmmm thats great if you live in the states but no so great if you are in Europe I guess as we can’t get (and I wish I could) a decent TV Service like CBS etc. We are stuck with the BBC or Crappy overpriced SKY. Anyway this says it is not worth buying for us out of the USA. BUT now on the other hand if this were to allow internal streaming from an SMB Server the this new box would be the best thing in sliced bred. I use an older 2010 Mini Mac as my entertainment server streaming from my SMB Server and it works and sounds great especially if you use optical audio. So the only selling point for me really as we are unable to get the best TV services out there which I have to admit is American TV for me that is the best you can get, is allowing streaming from an SMB Server. So if anyone can please answer me and say this new Apple T.V. would do this you will make a person very happy and I would gladly pay unto £300 for this if I were honest.

  24. 200 dollars? Yeah ok.

  25. Barney Fife (@BOB_AFOS) - 7 years ago

    $200 and not 4K capable? Not worth a second look.

  26. A Nintendo Wii can do the same things as the appleTV and costs 60 bucks. Oops.

    • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

      I love your logic or rather, illogic. In no way is a Nintendo wii even comparable to this product, aside from possibly the remote, in that they both have a semi similar shape, and they both are used to play games. Good job though?

      • mahmudf2014 - 7 years ago

        There is Nvidia Shield with 4K capabilities and nvidia is asking the same price like apple will. It’s $200 and does everything you can imagine from 4k playback to playing good quality games and it even streams games from your computer. So tell me why would i buy Apple TV? And i’m a user of almost all Apple products. But this time it’s nonsense.

      • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

        They aren’t comparable sorry to tell you. Have fun with that though. Have fun with its intuitive and sleek GUI, UI, methods of input, it’s deep and secure homekit features, it’s Siri support, it’s ability to play Apple’s upcoming streaming service, it’s ability to log you in with Touch ID, and quickly switch to another family member’s settings when they Touch ID into it using the remote, have fun with its seamless use of handoff from all of your other Apple products, and have lots of fun with its App Store, which will be inundated with so much more content than an Nvidia Shield will ever possibly have.

        By the way, Apple hasn’t even unveiled it, so you may want to actually see what it does first. From what I’ve seen, people have really really poor imaginations and they need to see something because they can’t possibly imagine what it will do.

  27. modeyabsolom - 7 years ago

    Why people here so cheap? $199 for a device with these capabilities isn’t that much. I just hope the industrial design of TV4 is going to be better than just a fatter wider version of the current quite ugly plastic puck!

  28. Jesse Nichols - 7 years ago

    Reading this section… It’s clear to me why Apple took so long to release a FREE (when subsidized by a carrier) phone. The Apple base from 5 years ago wouldn’t even BLINK at spending $200 on a product of good quality.

    People are whining about spending $200 on an Apple product? Even crazier, they are whining about spending $150 on an Apple product? You realize that the original iPod SHUFFLE with 1GB of storage was $150… Right?

    People have gotten so greedy. They want to pay for hamburger and eat filet mignon. This device will probably be great. If not… It won’t sell! But, wow! You people are so cheap!

    • chrisl84 - 7 years ago

      I think they are “whining” about a product that Apple offers for 69 bucks getting tripled in price….people get use to price points.

      • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

        It doesn’t matter what they’re used to. DEAL with it. If they want to pay $69 then get the old one. If they want new great things then pay the price they ask, which isn’t at all overpriced.

      • chrisl84 - 7 years ago

        You telling me to deal with it? I haven’t said jack crap…I was explaining why some people are… you DEAL with it

      • o0smoothies0o - 7 years ago

        No that wasn’t directed at you, just anyone complaining.

    • thejuanald - 7 years ago

      People are complaining about a product that is once again priced 3-7 times higher than other products in this category with little to no advantage.

  29. scottwilkins - 7 years ago

    …wonders if this will be an “Apple Gaming Console” too… hmmmm….

  30. Zach Oxley - 7 years ago

    I just don’t know what everyone expected… Are you all really shocked? Firstly, it’s Apple. They know they can charge more for a device and people will still buy it. Secondly, if they still sell the lesser version of Apple TV for $69 after the next generation is released, wouldn’t you expect a hike in price? Especially considering the (expected) massive upgrade that the unit will undergo.

    Not saying I’ll for sure buy one, but I didn’t expect the thing to sell for under a hundred bucks.

  31. Michael Ashley - 7 years ago

    We are all getting awfully excited about rumors, aren’t we? As TechCrunch also reported (, the next generation Apple TV could be a real game changer. But we really won’t know until September 9. I do hope that we see an SDK for developers, and an opening for more services (hint: Amazon).

    I think it is fair to say that we all want the same thing… A unified experience without needing to switch from device to device. I personally am more excited about a $150-$200 stand alone device than Apple going after building an actual TV. However, this is a significant jump in price, which brings me full-circle to my first statement.

    To command such a price could only mean that the Apple TV 4 is something completely new. I don’t know about you all, but I’m really ready for a better living room experience. I have an Xfinity cable box that I only connect baseball and presidential debates. My current Apple TV is generation 2, so I imagine I am the perfect target demographic for an upgrade.

    Bring it on, Apple

  32. Stephen Midwinter - 7 years ago

    Are the people buying Apple TV price sensitive? Most I think are not! They already have iPhones and iPads and possibly Mac’s etc . The Apple TV is a good idea and if gaming is included then, great but I have found with mirroring the Apple TV 3 is too slow , too much lag, this must e resolved in any new gaming oriented Apple TV. Apple TV 3 owners WILL upgrade for sure and the Apple TV3 will be consigned to the Den :-) Good stuff , keep it up Apple.

  33. It is hilarious to me that people are bitching about $199. First we don’t know if that is true and even if it is so what. It will have apps, gaming, music, cable tv, greatly upgraded cpu, ram etc so $199 is totally realistic for that. Nothing else comes close. It is just asinine and ignorant to say $199 is too much for all that. It’s worth it to have the app store on there alone.

  34. Mike Cohen (@mike3k) - 7 years ago

    I’d buy it at any price if Amazon Prime Video was available on it.

  35. Joe Cranford (@jodeo) - 7 years ago

    Let me get this straight: What will be a gaming platform with potentially more games than XBox, Play Station, or Nintendo — plus all the video services, iTunes, Apple Music+Movie Store, and Air Play will be $200 or less? I reckon I’m OK with this (but, hey, I’m always happy to pay less if they want to charge less).