I'm happy that they ditched the old, confusing 'touch' Siri remote for a traditional four button (up/down/left/right) one. The old Siri remote was pretty frustrating. I know some people love it, but there's so many ways it didn't. work well:
1. You breath on the thing, and it does something. It's extremely sensitive
2. It's really hard to fast fwd/rewind just a little bit. Its good at scrubbing through a whole movie, but try to go back 30 seconds with it, it's nearly impossible. Even worse, if you accidentally touch it, the movie goes fwd/back, and you try to scrub precisely to where you were - pretty frustrating.
3. You're not touching the thing you're interacting with, and unlike a touchpad, you don't see a cursor you're moving. It's supposed to be 'like' you're touching the screen itself.
4. Most people who aren't somewhat tech savvy just will give up (I set my dad up with our roku elsewhere for this reason). They expect physical buttons and to be able to 'click' through channels. It's not even apparent until you use it for a while part of the remote is a touchpad, as it's all black
It's like the remote was built for savvy iPhone users, not people that want to just watch TV.
Apple TV has other usablity problems, but that was a big one for me that would make me question getting another one.
The original touch AppleTV remote was probably ill-considered, but the accelerant of its demise was Apple ceasing to care if third-parties used native UIKit controls on AppleTV in a chase to get all of the channels and services to port their SmartTV applications over.
For example, the original YouTube app on the AppleTV 4th generation was great. Navigating was a breeze with the native scroll momentum and sensitivity, now playing gestures worked as expected, et all.
After a year or so the app started falling behind in features to the LG/Samsung/SmartTV/Console apps, which presumingly use a shared web/javascript base. They (I assume) decided maintaining a separate codebase for AppleTV was a waste and went to work on porting the SmartTV app to the AppleTV.
Now navigating the app using the AppleTV touch remote is complete mayhem, frustrating and unpredictable in every sense. Gestures that work on other platforms such as long press to add to playlist are absent, and the video player doesn't use the native gestures such as drag down for audio options or skip ahead/behind with tap on edge.
The new remote is Apple giving up and saying that HDMI-CEC and 4-way DPad controls have won.
Is this also why the Youtube AppleTV app went from twelve thumbnails on a screen to three full ones, some cut-off ones, and a whole bunch of gray space? I'd say my YouTube usage is down 90% with that change, and will be cancelling Premium this billing cycle as a result. What were they thinking!?
The old remote also has a d-pad but it’s implemented through edge detection on the touch surface (you have to tap/click on the very edges of the surface)... the new remote just makes that easier to accomplish (and adds a mute button, thank god.)
> Most people who aren't somewhat tech savvy just will give up
Ugh. I hated the thing 'cause it was non-intuitive to learn initially and required a level of precision in operation that's just ridiculous relative to its primary function. When my aging mother (RIP) moved in with me, she could not use it at all due to declining fine motor control.
Now every TV I own has a Roku built-in and I can't imagine ever going back. All I want my TVs to do is launch Plex and Sling and let the kids hook up whichever gaming console is trendy. They get the job done with remotes that are simple, intuitive, cheap to replace, and I don't have to tutor anyone in how to use the damned things.
The Roku remotes really are fantastic - especially the built-in headphone jack. My only complaint is that they really eat batteries, especially when using that headphone jack, but at least they're still sticking with standard AAs that I can just keep in a charger nearby instead of having to dock the thing or plug it in.
I'm always a little surprised when people talk about the Apple TV remote, since I always just use my phone as the remote, and assume that everyone else would too; you always have your phone and often don't have the remote on-hand.
Using a real remote (Apple remotes don’t count) is so much better. There are some things a smartphone is better for, such as entering in passwords. But for regular usage there’s no comparison.
Besides, if I just wanted to use my smartphone I would simply stick to my chrome cast devices. If I’m gonna be using the phone to control my entertainment center then the chrome cast provides by far the best interface because you have access to the entire app.
I forgot all about text inputs! With the actual remote, You have to fumble with that letter-at-a-time selector. I’m even more surprised anyone bothers with the physical remote.
You can use a physical remote without looking at it and that's very hard to do with a smartphone. You also have to constantly unlock it to get back to the remote app if it shuts down. I love the Roku remote, it works so well and the physical buttons are very satisfying.
Actually it goes straight back to the Apple TV remote without having to unlock. Not sure what the time limit is but it works after the device has gone to sleep and otherwise locked itself.
For me a touch screen as a remote is even worse than the terrible Apple TV remote. I like being able to pick it up and use it without looking at it (and without lighting up the dark room if we’re watching a movie or something).
I use my phone often too, but you cannot control the volume from your phone so you need another remote too. My Samsung TV remote works pretty well as the Apple TV remote though too. The DirecTV remote control was also programmable and worked OK. They both just lack the Home button but you can use the Back button enough times to do without it.
My phone controls the volume, when the remote app is up on the phone the volume buttons on the phone actually change my receivers volume through HDMI from the Apple tv.
This depends on HDMI-CEC and volume control support amongst manufacturers is varying. My fancy LG OLED doesn't support volume control over CEC (but it has HomeKit support which works).
First, let me just say that it never even occurred to me that my iPhone volume would control the TV so I just never even tried it. I would have expected volume buttons to appear in the remote app.
That said, I just tried it and it does not seem to work for me in my setup. I just have a Samsung TV with the Apple TV connected. No other "AV system". The volume buttons do not seem to do anything with the TV. Now that I know it works in some situations I will start digging around.
The Apple TV remote controls the volume of the TV fine but I seem to recall that I programmed it for the power and volume of my TV when I set it up.
I have a specific annoyance about that: I have an Apple TV HD that I bought second hand that had no remote; it's connected to a monitor so there's no TV remote or HDMI-CEC or anything of the sort; when using AirPods with the Apple TV the only means I have to adjust volume is that iOS App, the universal remote I have for otherwise controlling the Apple TV can't adjust it. Oh well. I'm thinking about buying that new remote and taking one of the other siri remotes I already have and putting it on that one.
For me, using both the "built-in" remote app on the control panel and the "real" remote app launched as a proper app, the volume is controlled simply with the iPhone's volume buttons. I'm not sure how it could get any more ergonomic.
It's a better experience for sure, but loading the app takes time, and it often (for me) takes a couple tries to pair with your apple tv. Also, you can't adjust the tv volume.
If you have CEC or ARC setup, then you can adjust the volume by tapping on the buttons on the Lock Screen or using the iPhone volume buttons when the remote open.
I'm not sure what remote your are using, but the one built into the iPhones pull down menu is instant for me.
I'm not totally sure how it works (the only connection between my ATV and my AV system is HDMI) but adjusting the volume --- on my receiver --- works fine from the Apple TV iPhone remote.
I'm pretty certain that the ATV remote beams good old fashioned infrared signals to change the volume on your TV/soundbar/receiver directly without involving the ATV itself.
The Apple TV remote doesn't emit infrared. The Apple TV does that itself! (This means that "learned" remote commands work even if you're controlling the Apple TV with your phone, or with a Bluetooth controller.)
I find that hard to believe, but I'm willing to be wrong. My Apple TV HD is in a cabinet with solid sides and doors (3/4" MDF). The television is wall mounted above it, outside the cabinet, and maybe 12" behind the Apple TV. And yet the Siri Remote controls the volume on the TV. I'm pretty sure it's using IR from the remote to the television to control the television's volume. I guess there's some small chance the volume is being controlled with HDMI ARC, although I've never been able to get my iPhone to control the volume on the television.
Unfortunately I can't find any definitive source on the internet to confirm exactly what's going on.
I think this is right, because I had to teach my remote how to talk to my tv. Super odd, since every other box I've had has just been able to do this over HDMI.
I have two Sony TVs, one from 2016 and one from 2020, and they both work fine to control volume from the remote. One goes to a set of Homepods and the other on the TV itself.
I think if one is going to always use their phone, then they probably bought a Chromecast at 1/4 the price. Unless they have a really strong attachment to the Apple ecosystem.
Or they have kids and the Apple TV remote is quickly lost or broken as it is both small and fragile!
I have multiple of both Apple TV and Chromecast and they both have their benefits. The babysitter can control the Apple TV with their phone. With the Chromecast they need their own Netflix/Prime. Not nearly as good. For my own personal use Chromecast is best.
Edit: and of course on my newer TV’s most services are available as apps.
What? I have an iPhone and an Apple TV, I use my phone as the remote 99% of the time, mostly because I always have my phone on me. I bought an Apple TV because it’s the only device that doesn’t sell user data, nothing to do with how it is controlled. The touch remote is pretty crap for actual use, nice to see they’re going back to buttons.
I generally want any member of the viewing party to be able to hit the pause button when they want to say something or step away for a moment. I also like being able to instantly hit a button in the dark purely with muscle memory. A TV remote on the coffee table really can’t be beat.
How can I give guests control of my TV via their phones? As far as I know, that can’t be done automatically with iPhones, let alone people who don’t have iPhones.
They launch the Remote app on their phone, select the TV from the local network (if you don't banish them to a guest network), and pair with the code, same as you adding your phone.
I use a Logitech harmony the last 12 years (different models) and hate to use my phone other than entering text. I tried multiple times to use my iPhone but hate it so much. Also my Harmony has macros to switch to different activities. There is an app for the phone as well. But that gets really frustrating. At least for me.
Honestly, the old remote as-is is one of my least favorite remotes ever because of 1) the issues with accidental touches and 2) when you pick it up, you never know which way it should be pointed without looking.
But add a little silicon sleeve that solves both issues, and it quickly became my favorite.
The little cord at the bottom quickly allows me to tell which end is "up". And the silicone at the edges of the touchpad prevent almost all accidental touches.
That touch remote truly is the worst thing apple has made in a while (the round hockey puck mouse being the absolute worst).
In addition to all your points... it just isn't that durable. All our normal TV remotes made it through our daughters "stick everything in her mouth" phase completely unscathed. Both our "touch" remotes now constantly act weird and flakey. I refuse to spend money to replace them because they are so awful.
I'm very glad to see that these remotes are going away. Like you, that pile of shit remote is a deal breaker for any future AppleTV purchase.
> Prone to dust getting into the gap between the touchpad and the case so edge presses become even more inconsistent
Yup. All the time. Especially if you use those sleeves people talk about. And you have to use those sleeves because otherwise you don't know if you picked it up in the right direction.
Seriously. That remote is the worst pile of trash. I hate it every time I use it. Good riddance.
Honestly, I love the remote, it’s so much better than every other remote I’ve used. I will admit that 2 is small issue (you can just say “go back 30 seconds” into the mic), but not enough for me to write the thing off. For most things I’d prefer to navigate with swipes than repeated click click click of buttons, like other remotes.
It does lack the Apple TV button, though. Which, meh, long press Menu and hit the Apple TV icon from the home screen. Before today's announcement, that was made up for by the fact that the old Apple remote inexplicably lacked a mute button, which the button remote has. It makes me wonder how stuff like the old remote gets out the door sometimes.
I'm updating, but that is because my son also uses it as a console with Apple Arcade, so the extra horsepower is appreciated.
The old AppleTV 4K will be relegated to the spare TV. Which will please my son greatly as now he doesn't get locked out of using the AppleTV if my wife and I are watching something through Plex on the main TV.
You just need sub-millimeter precision, on a slippery glass remote made for babies with small hands, and then to time it so you touch the trackpad then click it such that you activate the skip back/skip forward function, but not so long that a cursor appears on the timeline. It's really fun, kind of like if your bank required you to do a little dance every time you wanted to buy something.
It’s probably your physical button. My button will audibly click when I have my thumb on the far left or right edge, but won’t actually trigger unless I press very firmly after hearing the click. Pressing the button with my thumb in the middle works reliably as expected. Apple support wouldn’t do anything about this except offer to sell me a replacement remote.
Maybe half the time it works right, and it seems to depend on app as well.
The voice commands were nice "forward 60 seconds" but for some reason it seemed to have a bug where "forward two minutes" almost NEVER worked right on YoutubeTV. You could say almost any other time interval, but not 2 minutes.
I agree. Glass was a horrible design choice for a remote. I'm glad they are moving to aluminum.
In my house, we have two 4K TV remotes with broken glass. Not safe, and the worse part is the replacement cost of the remote is typical Apple pricing ($$$). Apple managed to create a remote where getting a case was reasonable.
I know I'm probably in the minority, but as someone with little kids the Siri remote was just great
Instead of them running up and touching the TV screen to tell me which episode they wanted to watch, I could fling over to the big thumbnail and wiggle it around with my finger on the trackpad. They could easily see what was "focused" and what I was referring to on the screen
As the kids grew older they got used to just asking Siri through the remote to search for shows they wanted to watch, something they couldn't do when they were too young to type and spell
It is initially harder to use than the discrete button remote, and I agree that it's tough to scrub very fine intervals. Though you can use Siri button to "go back 25 seconds" or "what did she say?" — which goes back ~15 seconds and also turns on subtitles temporarily
This new remote looks like a good combination of trackpad + clicky buttons though
It's utterly and inconsistent in use between apps. SOMETIMES clicking on the far right or far left side of the touchpad SOMETIMES jumps forward 15 seconds and sometimes pauses. And it's different between apps AND different each time you try it.
If you have an iPhone I absolutely love the Apple TV remote app. Feels like the remote design was made for the phone. I wish other apps or console also let you use your phone to type or control
I agree wholeheartedly, the only downside I would see is that volume cannot be controlled through the iPhone app if you're controlling the volume through the TV. When I have a bluetooth speaker paired to apple TV, i'm able to control that volume using the rocker switches on my phone, it's the weirdest thing.
It feels like magic to have my TV turn on by a touch of my phone, and to also be able to control the TV when the kids think they are sneaky by not giving me back the remote.
My sound bar uses ARC connected to my TV. This means the physical Apple TV remote can turn the volume up and down. Same applies when using the Remote app. The volume rocker on my phone controls the sound bar volume.
Annoyingly, this does not apply to screen mirroring to the AppleTV.
I built a raspberry pi IR blaster to solve this very problem. I have shortcuts on the home screen that talk to the pi when I want to control the TV volume from my iPhone.
For scrubbing though if you put your finger on the left or right side of the touchpad you will see a little arrow circle on the progress bar. You can then push the pad to scrub.
As a current AppleTV 4K owner, I have no idea how any of this is different from the previous version. I don't any any discernible difference. I already have HDR, Dolby Atmos, etc.
What I really want is the ability to make my remote control beep so I can find it. That's literally the only feature that I want at this point.
>What I really want is the ability to make my remote control beep so I can find it. That's literally the only feature that I want at this point.
Yes. I am trying to Find out if the new Remote has the AirTag feature built in. But since they didn't announce it I am guessing not. Sigh. I thought it was the best use case for AirTag or Precision Location.
Edit: Search through the spec and nothing mentioned. God Damn it WHY! Add the $29 to the price of Apple TV 4K or Remote if they really cared about money.
Now that the Remote can Finally turn on the TV. Apple TV is taking the centre stage of TV experience with a single remote. All we need next is a Dump TV or even a "Monitor" so to speak. And Apple courting current TV Station to put out an App for their current livestream content. Essentially replacing Over the Air Broadcast with Broadcast via IP. Then All your "TV" experience can happen on Apple TV.
Then someday may be they could allow Apple TV to be a Router so there is one less devices in my living room. And they could also act as a mesh system.
Apple made a huge error not buying Eero and making AppleTV and HomePod devices into zero effort mesh points. They got out of the router business just a couple years too early since it was fully commoditized at the time, but the mesh revolution was just around the corner with a whole new market to conqueror.
Letting Amazon get Eero is one of the few consumer facing misses Apple has made in the last few years (the keyboard debacle being the other)
> Then someday may be they could allow Apple TV to be a Router so there is one less devices in my living room. And they could also act as a mesh system.
This is a great idea! Also, it would be awesome if Apple offered a version of Apple TV as a sound bar. Ideally it would be sound bar/router/tvOS.
> And Apple courting current TV Station to put out an App for their current livestream content. Essentially replacing Over the Air Broadcast with Broadcast via IP.
This is already a reality in Finland.
I haven't owned an antenna cable for over 5 years. All my TV comes directly through the internet from each channel's own app. Most provide live TV or at least make digital releases available at the same time as the live broadcast. (Not that I watch "live" TV anymore, since I don't do sports - which IMO are the only thing where being live actually matters)
My LG TV is just a large monitor for me. The only use it gets is when I need to adjust volume for my consoles or turn the TV on/off. With the new ATV remote it'll be relegated to a fancy console volume controller =)
>Add the $29 to the price of Apple TV 4K or Remote if they really cared about money.
I'm very happy with my Roku. It has a remote finder/beeper, and was dirt cheap. I looked at Apple TV, but didn't see what it had to offer that would justify $180-$200.
Not for a device that rarely operates even close to its performance constraints. If you're using it for games? Sure, but I think that's still a very... let's call it "niche" market for the Apple TV. For people just using it to watch television and movies? Unnoticeable.
It'll likely be more power efficient but I'm not sure that's going to be very noticeable.
I just use our TV remote. Our TV is 10 years old but the arrow/back/play control keys still work fine to control the Apple TV over CEC. I don't even know where our Apple TV remote is. For anything more fancy (text input) I use the remote on my phone (which automatically pops up on the Lock Screen)
This is what I want to know. I actually greatly dislike the touch pad on the current remote. I am constantly swiping too fast (flying by my desired target), or my upward/downward swipes are not working as desired. Not to mention every time I pick up the remote, the touch pad thinks I'm swiping causing my movie to fast forward/rewind.
We have a house rule that if you use the remote, it stays on the coffee table and then goes back to a spot next to the TV when done. Otherwise the couch eats the remote.
Real question - does the Apple TV support multiple remotes?
I've sort of addressed that problem with my FireTV by adding a remote. This way there's still a remote around that I can use while hunting for the one that I misplaced. I have not had a situation where I misplaced both remotes... yet...
There's a iOS app that can be used as a remote. Not sure about another physical remote. They're just paired like anything else so I would assume it's possible
To be honest I don't think it will really be that noticeable. It will be faster, but only slightly. The original 4k had an A10X, the new one has an A12. The A10X was the A10 with beefed up GPU, so on that front they are probably pretty close. The A12 will probably win out on general processing tasks.
I thought the "Bionic" referred only to the a12x or a12z variants. It makes sense as a place to put their unused stock left over from their old ipad lineup and as a way to get those "console" graphics.
It should probably be a decent improvement. Here's an A12 (iPhone XS) vs plain ol' A10 (iPhone 7): https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-re... Now, the A10X had a doubled-up GPU, but even taking that into account it still looks like a fairly big gap on the more demanding tests.
If you have an iOS device you can control your AppleTV from the TV Remote. I didn't notice this until recently and I never use the physical remote now. When you are prompted to type you can use your iOS device to type in text. Very handy.
You can also control your AppleTV via Siri, but that's a bit more hit/miss depending on what you ask of course.
I'm not sure. My Apple TV with A10X will often hang and generally the UI feels like its frame dropping every now and then. I would really like it to be smoother like my phone...
Apple has this bizarre blind-spot where they will not ever launch anything if it doesn't have 100% UX, when sometimes, actually a 98% UX is pretty damn useful. I mean, the remote has a touch pad!
I'm not arguing they should have no lower limit on UX quality (lke Android), it's just, it should be slightly, slightly lower.
And just to avoid any third party apps solving this problems for users, they simply refuse to allow real local browser Apple TV apps to their appstore.
And every time someone points it out, another one points out that it was a conscious decision meant to push you to keep your mouse unplugged. Plus, charging it for a few minutes gives you hours of battery life again.
Nah it's garbage, I want to put something on the TV on its own and I want to use my phone for other stuff, not be forced to have the same thing on both screens.
What content is available over 60fps? I don't think they ever released The Hobbit in 48fps, and that's the only movie I'm aware of that was filmed with higher fps.
And still no support for spatial audio with AirPods Pro?
I continue to be mystified why spatial audio only works for watching movies on iOS devices. I know the official explanation is that the host device needs an accelerometer and gyroscope... but Apple TV's tend to stay still, you know.
It baffles me why you can get amazing spatial audio watching a movie on a tiny screen... or regular stereo audio watching a movie on an amazing huge TV... but not together.
(And if you haven't tried spatial audio with content that supports it, you should -- it really is stunning, kind of like the difference in going from black-and-white movies to color movies, only for your ears.)
Taking a random guess, I think it’s because the location of the AppleTV doesn’t help identify the location of the actual screen. There would need to be some awkward configuration step (redone every time the AppleTV or screen moves) that Apple just wouldn’t ask its customers to do.
You don't really need an awkward configuration step, though, because you can rely on the fact that users are usually looking at the screen. Just take the median orientation of the earbuds over time, and you're configured.
You can also rely on the fact that the user is almost certainly looking directly at the screen every time they navigate the UX with the remote.
When I use spatial audio on my 2019 ipad it works like that. If I move my head to the side for a while, it "reorients", and now the audio comes from a point in the air next to the ipad.
Oh, I love this line of thought! However, I'd switch it to be multi-modal, i.e. not just "median orientation of earbuds over time", but also ___.
Specifically, one more example, people need to use their AirPods with a TV because the rest of the household needs quiet. However, there are typically speakers already set up "correctly" oriented (especially with surround sound).
The AppleTV and AirPods could automatically communicate through the individual speakers (at frequencies we can't hear), to correlate the user's location/orientation in relation with the "optimal sitting spot, based on audio".
In my testing with spatial audio, the effect doesn't seem to change with distance, so I think direction is all it relies on.
I could be wrong though, it might be doing something subtle. But even if it were, it would still be fine to fall back to a default distance of 2m or something.
I wonder if a U1 UWB chip be precise enough to detect if if the ATV has moved. Using 1 HomePod mini as a reference point, and more precision with more HomePods.
The location of the screen could be learned with some "Apple Magic," i.e. an AR setup process using an iPhone
All they need is a "look at your TV" step. User looks at TV, ATV saves AirPod gyro orientation and you are done. The iPhone/iPad need their orientation because the screen can move at any point...TV's usually don't.
I’m guessing because the vast majority of the market with a 4K Apple TV is not watching in stereo, but in surround with something like Dolby Atmos.
Edit: For those unfamiliar, spatial audio is a post processing effect that attempts to simulate surround, whereas most home theaters are going to be watching material that has discreet location and channel data, meaning a much more realistic surround stage.
A lot of people watch TV/movies at night with headphones instead of speakers, in order not to wake up the kids, grandparents, someone who works early, etc. Especially when you want to fully experience those big loud action sequences without making the house actually rumble.
This is for people when they aren't using their speakers at all.
Edit in response to your edit: I think you may be misunderstanding Apple's spatial audio feature. It's not simulating surround out of stereo audio, it's simulating a sound stage out of the discreet location and channel data you're talking about. It requires surround sound input, it won't operate on stereo input. The surround stage is shockingly realistic if you try it.
It’s still post processing to create a sound stage to a stereo signal. Nothing wrong with that, but for instance if I’m watching a movie on an iPhone or something, I’m assuming I can’t get the true audio experience of the film.
When it’s a movie I really am into, then I’m going to watch it in full surround, with discreet speakers. 7.1 to stereo headphones is always a compromise whether it’s Apple spatial audio, or Dolby Atmos for Headphones.
And absolutely I get your point, that it’s great for watching it at night. I’m just guessing their market for 4K Apple TV is more home theater people.
Usually when I’m watching at night with headphones I’ll be on the iPad.
Again it’s not that I don’t see the use case, I just wouldn’t call it “baffling” since the market is a little different.
> It’s still post processing to create a sound stage to a stereo signal
Your ears are a 'stereo signal' and they work fine for recognizing the sound stage coming out of a 7.1 system. The Airpods are just presenting the same audio information directly to your ears.
Besides, there is a massive difference between Dolby for headphones and spatial audio - standard surround headphones will not give you a fixed sound stage as you move your head. I think you're underestimating the effect, if you haven't tried them.
I haven’t done the research, but I’m guessing Apple has. And my guess is that the market share using AirPods on iOS vastly outstrips those who use it on AppleTV.
Again I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be a nice feature; but I just wouldn’t say it’s baffling. Apple is a fairly smart company... I’m sure they did some sort of cost benefit analysis and decided against it.
Of the households I’ve visited with Apple TV, I’d estimate half have surround (and that’s out of a mostly techy set of people). My impression is that many customers are not interested in setting up a receiver with a dozen wires plugged into it, and soundbars are a growing segment of the market. They “just work”.
> I’m guessing because the vast majority of the market with a 4K Apple TV is not watching in stereo, but in surround with something like Dolby Atmos
I bet a chunk of money it is the exact opposite. I bet for the majority of the market the fanciest thing they have is a soundbar and maybe a subwoofer.
I honestly think the "home theater" market is pretty niche. It requires living conditions that most people simply don't have. You gotta have the right room shape for starters. Virtually every house I visit doesn't have a room that is easy to set surround sound up in.
I mean for Atmos you specifically need speakers placed above the listener. Not to mention a bunch of other speakers everywhere.
I dunno... almost nobody is living an a place amenable to such things. And even if they are, they need to get consent from their significant other to pull it off.
So yeah. I bet maybe 5% of the market has Atmos or any kind of surround sound. 15% tops.
Even 7.1 speakers simulate input when it comes to positional surround like Dolby Atmos, albeit without the need to do HRTF wizardry/gimmicks.
Plus, the distinguishing feature of the Apple spatial audio implementation is that it has head tracking so that locations correspond to the listening position even when you turn your head. (I think there are Audeze headsets that can do a version of this with PC.)
It's unclear if what they announced includes support for the AirPod-type spatial audio or if it only means they are extending Spatial Audio branding to include the virtual surround feature of the new iMac's speaker array.
Yeah that's the feature that would have sold me both a new Apple TV as well as a new pair of AirPods. As it is now, our current Apple TV and my current Audio Technica BT earbuds work fine.
The entire advantage of Apple is supposed to be that they're one company and all of their products work together, but that's becoming less and less true over time. AirPods and HomePods barely work with Macs compared to how they work with iOS devices. Apple has boasted about how you can fit all of their products on a conference room table, yet they don't actually work together well. What else are they doing with their time?
I recently came over to "Apple"-world after years of listening to all the fanatics/ambassadeurs who proclaims "it just works". I've been using an Apple AIO computer (model Imac 5k) for a couple of years as a web browser, but recently I started the switch from Android eco system and first I bought the "pro" model of their wireless headset just to find out that they worked pretty decently (albeit, overly expensive) as bluetooth headset even to my Sony phone, then I bought the their mobile phone ("12 pro") and also their smartwatch ("series 6").
After I switched from Android I did a reset to my headset and paired it with all my Apple devices. Success rate of switching sound between computer, phone and watch against the headset varies alot. Sometimes it just works but almost half of the times I have to fiddle with sound output in computer to select the "airpods pro" or in the phone to select the bluetooth headset.
Not to mention that even directly in the phone I had troubles to answer in Hangouts with sound output/input redirected to the headset, even though it says "Airpods pro" beneath the bluetooth symbol to show it is actively connected to de device. Also in the computer there are several occassions where the "wheel" is spinning, in the attempt to connect to the headset.
This thing "it just works" feels like a fraud to me, I can't remember since Android 2.x (I never had the 3.x, only 4.x, 5.x, 6.x, 8.x, 9.x and 10.x) that I had sound/connection issues like this.
Although I have not had a bluetooth headset linked between my Linux computers and Android phones, I have shared multipoint bluetooth headsets between two different android phones and switched over without these kind of obstacles I now have.
I agree there is lot to improve. My issues have been mostly with having the Airpod Pro sit in the case for 1-day+ and then take and find out it hasn't charge one of the pods. Case had charged, but it didn't somehow charge the pod.
However my experience with pairing/connect/disconnect has been better than any other brand I have tried. Taking it from the case to trigger the connect has been absolutely ground breaking. I don't particularly care for the Small size, lack of a neck strap or any of those fancy features.
Strange enough, I've had differences in charge level for both "pods" - like 10% difference if I remember correctly, at one or two times. But never that it became an issue for me leaving one pod without power. I'm impressed with the battery times, due to them always beeing charged by the case. That is a neat functionality that works good for me. I just wished that the connect was a seamless experience for me too.
About size, big plus for portability. A tiny minus for the fitting. I would absolutely not trust them during mobility such as running or biking. In that sense my wireless sleep "headphones" from Bose are way better fit with a "wing"/spring on the rear side to secure them.
I had hoped for spatial audio in an updated AppleTV, as I finally want to be able to use that great feature of the Airpods Max. It is strange that Apple creates devices like the Airpods Max and then not support them with their hardware.
The automatic color calibration looks be really nice. Most TVs are not well calibrated by default. I wish it would let you export the results to change the settings for all connected devices, but that’s probably too TV specific.
Go to the press release above, scroll down until the end, and refer to footnote 2. It is about calibration - it requires an iPhone with FaceID, IOS/tvOS 14.5 and is available as well for the 1st generation Apple TV 4K.
Looking at the description on the website, it looks like this is going to be a non-starter for us projector users, sadly, as you have to point your camera at the screen within an inch or so from the surface. Hopefully there's some manual calibration option too.
TV nowadays do a lot of "image enhancement" as they call it. Things like contrast and saturation boost to make TVs look "better" at the store.
Calibrating a screen that dynamically messes with the colors seems impossible. Maybe Apple will ask the user to set the screen in a more passive mode to deal with that?
This is by far the least “Apple” product IMO. I hate that I can’t remove stock apps and I hate that I’m being sold to every second I’m in the UI. It’s so blatant. I paid for the box - I just want to use it for AirPlay and a small selection of apps I download, that’s all. Yet Apple treats it as a giant digital billboard in our living rooms.
I use AppleTV exclusively, how do you feel you are being sold to? I am guessing it is in the Apple TV app? That is the only place I can think of where I see something like this but it does not seem drastically different from Netflix promoting shows to watch.
I mainly use other apps and do not feel like I am seeing ads or anything that are coming from AppleTV.
I use a roku and never feel this way. The only thing I could think of as an "ad" is on the screensaver, there are movies that float by, but I'm almost never looking at the screensaver anyway.
I had to turn off banner ads on my Roku-enabled TV... creepy stuff like "I see you are watching <movie>, try it on <app> for the best experience".
This was while I was watching on an actual physical AppleTV, ads were from the Roku software in the TV.
FWIW the AppleTV "ads" I don't even process as ads, but my @#$@$# Fire Stick 4k pops up ads in the screensaver, and when I press "play" to resume my content, it starts playing some crap related to the ad. It's AWFUL.
Try using a Fire stick, it inserts literal ads. Same with my LG "smart" TV,it inserts ads down the side of its menu. The Apple TV is by far the lowest offender in this department.
I bought an appletv because it doesn’t pop up ads like other streamers. Only search functionality is where I have issues where it prioritizes apple content over other providers It seems to be a recent change too because search used to work when first got it.
It depends which apps you have in the menu bar. Disney, Netflix, Apple, & Plex, they show continue playing shortcuts. Amazon Prime shows promo ads, so I moved it to the right so I never see them.
I frequently travel, and bring my AppleTV with me to hook up to hotel TVs.
It would be great if they made a way to support Web logins for WiFi.
At the moment, I do t see a big change between this version and the one I own. If they added that feature, I’d buy it in a heartbeat so I could stop spoofing my AppleTV’s MAC on my laptop just to login to the hotel web portals.
I know people who plug the hotel ethernet into their own travel router to circumvent the captive portal. Though now you have to travel with another device
Honestly speaking, the problem with Apple TV is that chips like A12 are such a overkill for TV box use cases. I recently purchased a $30 Roku and find it has almost 99% of the features that an Apple TV would have (including airplay2).
Yes, Apple TV would have better color, visual quality, etc, but that's way into the realm of dismissed return for the investment IMHO.
I recently moved my Apple TV to another room (for Fitness+ use) so we started relying upon a Chromecast with Google TV.
What a downgrade. It made me remember how horrid AV components often were, where multi-second delays, slow loading, horrid transitions, etc, were just normal. The Chromecast Google TV device has a 4 core, 1.9Ghz device, yet it seems extremely underpowered.
Having a beefy processor in an AV device is hugely beneficial. I don't want lag. I want everything to work effortlessly.
The Nvidia Shield basically uses the same SoC as the Nintendo Switch. Yet somehow even though the chip is powerful enough to run 3D games, Android TV can't manage smooth 2D animations on it. As I said in another comment I switched to using the apps on my LG TV. That sluggishness was a huge reason why.
It's possible it's not powerful enough for a 4K tv if that's what you have. The Switch does 720p, or 1080p when docked. 4X the resolution is a big difference.
Not in 2D it isn't. Sliding some 2D textures around a 4k screen should be easy for any GPU from the last 2 decades. Problem is likely the apps do silly things like (I'm guessing) load 8k textures and draw them in a tiny box, and then try to load 100 of these boxes at once every time you thpe a character in the search box. Just guessing based on blog post deconstructions of modern games and apps I've seen.
My experience with streaming sticks or other micro devices is that they get super hot and degrade over time pretty quickly. A small brick like Roku Ultra is much more durable. Bonus points for having an ethernet port. I'm also a fan of the Roku remote with the headphone jack built in and TV volume controls.
Depends on how you're leveraging their ecosystem. If you have HomeKit cameras, your Apple TV might also be running 24/7 realtime object detection for 5 simultaneous 1080p video streams.
And your ROI is way off. The new auto-calibration feature brings an otherwise cost-prohibitive service into the consumer mainstream. Even if you happen to have one of the few higher end TVs that supports AutoCal, you still need $150 calibration software plus a $250 colorimeter. If your TV doesn't support it, then you have to either pay a professional even more to manually calibrate your TV or buy a dedicated 3D LUT box for hundreds more.
Sure. There are a handful of cameras that support a feature called HomeKit Secure Video (HSV). If you buy an HSV camera and you have an AppleTV, you can configure the camera to detect people, pets, and vehicles, set activity zones, and some other features. All the processing is done securely using the ATV's CPU, and anything you choose to record and save is encrypted and stored in iCloud. You do have to have a paid iCloud account to record the streams.
This is a super slick feature that not only "just works," but AFAIK it's the only security system with object detection AI that doesn't do it on the vendor's servers. This saves incredible amount of upload bandwidth, since you are only storing the segments of video that trigger detection. Plus, no one else has the decryption key to your video.
Also, IIUC the HomePod and maybe even HomePod mini can act as HSV hubs as well.
The AppleTV works as a sort of hub for HomeKit. They run some of the automation I have for different smart plugs. I assume it can do what OP said for HomeKit cameras. I use homebridge to enable HomeKit on devices that don’t support it so I’m not about native object detection.
Wireless Xbox controllers work fine with Apple TV. The bigger problem is that the games simply are not designed with a TV and console controller in mind. Even the Apple Arcade titles, which are generally very polished on iPhone and iPad, are pretty janky with a controller, and nearly unusable with the Apple TV Siri Remote (even though they claim to be designed for these input devices).
But yes, it's very frustrating to me that the Apple TV doesn't have a rich gaming ecosystem. I'm pretty sure the hardware is powerful enough to deliver great performance and modern graphics for everything except the most photorealistic and flashy triple-A titles. Given that they offer Apple Arcade on the Apple TV, it's one of those surprising corners of the Apple ecosystem where you feel like a second-class citizen.
This is the classic chicken-egg problem inherent in starting up a new game platform. Why invest in your game's controller experience and compromise the touch experience when billions of players have touch and a negligible amount have controllers?
The only way to bootstrap the ecosystem is to prime the pump with large investments from the platform holder. Pay devs directly to add support. Give hardware to users way below cost.
Yep, I don’t fault the game devs at all! I would expect Apple to use the Arcade program (plus their infinite cash) to incentivize devs to really polish the Apple TV experience.
It’s also kind of half assed for Apple surprisingly, specifically some games from Apple Arcade are downright unplayable on my before-last gen ATV. To a point where it feels like a scam that Apple didn’t simply exclude some titles from the older ATVs, it’s just bad user experience. I remember one 3d game was super puxellated due to upscaling and like 10fps :/. Why even allow users to get this game on aging hardware?
Now I wonder if it’s worth upgrading for AA. I hate mobile games but there are a few good ports of pc games. And if i could play a good rogue game on my tv for smaller 20-30min sessions I’m sold.
I’m still going to upgrade because you can feel even simple apps like twitch tv are laggy on before-last gen.
That's true, but Apple already has a rich and successful game ecosystem on iPhones which are roughly the same hardware as the Apple TV. They have all the ingredients, and they've even made a visible attempt by offering Apple Arcade on the Apple TV. Wireless console controllers also work on Apple TV. It's just clear that the resources and effort haven't been made to get their Arcade developers to do the extra work to really make their titles work well on big TVs with console controllers.
I had an Apple TV 4K and a couple of compatible gamepads, and I loved some of the early tvOS games! Rayman, Icycle (!!), Alto's Adventure, Badlands...
Then I tried Apple Arcade and it's just terrible. First, performance for all the 3D-heavy games is exactly what you would expect on a 4K screen with an iPhone 7 GPU. The iPhone XR GPU won't solve that.
But I'm also convinced that Apple fundamentally doesn't get games. A lot of the content was just interactive storytelling. With a few notable exceptions, I felt like a suit who never owned a console or Steam account had picked games for me based purely on the marketing materials.
I've heard an insider rumor that there was a plan years ago to make an Apple TV that would compete directly with the PS4. It was shelved because the person in charge of the App Store simply hated games and believed that music is the only art form worthy of respect.
This led to that person demanding the limited set of Bluetooth channels be allocated in such a way that sufficiently responsive game controllers would be impossible. And, thus the concept was shelved.
That person was later moved to be in charge of Apple Music.
With a smart TV I actually don't see any reason to use Apple or Google's solutions. I stopped using my Nvidia Shield when I realized that the experience from my LG C9 was as good or better. Even has support for AirPlay.
Of course in some years it's likely to stop receiving updates and fall behind, but I can wait until that happens to look into an external box again.
I'm not sure. My Apple TV with A10X will hang and generally the UI feels like its frame dropping every now and then. I would really like it to be smoother like my phone...
I thibk the problem is, app developers tend to write inefficient apps, so Apple is just throwing hardware at the problem, to keep their edge in terms of apparent UI speed.
What I really want to see is the AppleTV turn into a video conferencing system. Almost everything is there now. Just need the camera (rumor was some Home Pod device may have one?)
Something that might be being overlooked - it looks like this supports pairing Xbox One controllers that use Xbox Wireless! This is a different standard than Bluetooth and should enable everyone who has Xbox controllers to easily use them in Apple Arcade. Impressive!
That is a bit misleading: a lot of Xbox One wireless controllers work with Bluetooth, it seems Microsoft switched this during the production run. I have one at home for use with my PC, I don't own an Xbox, and it works without any receiver. My old 360 controller needs the wireless receiver though, that is the old protocol (or maybe not the same protocol? Not sure...)
In the beginning, the Bluetooth versions of the controllers weren't sold with the console, and they were specialty, mostly for PC gamers. There's still a fair number of controllers out there that can only connect via Xbox Wireless.
If the new Apple TV can actually pair with those, that's a big deal.
All Xbox controllers from the release of the Xbox One S (2016) and later have Bluetooth included. I'm pretty sure the ATV doesn't have any support for the MS-specific protocol, just the Bluetooth functionality.
How do I know which I have? I just bought an XBox One controller to use with my gaming PC, but I'm not much of a gamer (hence why I never had one before). It came with a dongle which I assume is RF, which I prefer to Bluetooth on Windows. I'm wondering if my controller ALSO supports bluetooth? Or if it's either/or?
All of them work with the MS-specific protocol, but only some work with Bluetooth. The top of the controllers look different https://i.imgur.com/i9490os.png
I'm currently playing Shadow of the Tomb Raider on my M1 Mac using an Xbox One S controller. It fully vibrates and requires no setup at all. Apple introduced this pairing of Xbox and PS4 controllers very recently for all its devices. Its great. Shadow of the Tomb Raider, not so much. I can't get more than a steady 30 FPS.
I don't know if this was already a feature previously since I don't really keep tabs on the Apple TV, but I find it incredibly cool that you can use your iPhone to color calibrate the TV. This is the level of product integration I wish every company had, but recently I've only seen this with Apple. Granted I don't know how well the feature works in reality.
Interestingly, the tech specs for the new Apple TV lists Thread in the Ports and Connectivity section. Looks like they're getting more serious about home automation/IoT.
I'd really love it if I could access the Apple TV while it's not being used. It's very powerful. It could run a home VPN, or accelerated image/video encoding (of which it can do VERY FAST). The reality is that it's a very powerful box that largely just sits there.
Exactly. I have an iPad Pro that is compatible with Checkrain. Being able to SSH into it and do stuff is a useful godsend. I've no idea why Apple won't let users actually use their devices -- and I write this on a rooted Android phone.
Good point. But, given frankly how many developers I know with Apple products, I suspect it may well be higher than you think. The main thing I like is flexibility: I have a home-built Kodi PVR with a TV tuner on a raspberry pi 4 in a neat little box. It works brilliantly, and also doubles as an adblocking nameserver, always-on reverse tunnel so I can access files stored at home remotely despite many layers of NAT, etc. There's no reason Apple's products couldn't do this.
But the main thing with Apple is that they manage the scope for life’s little bugs to creep into their UX by aggressively minimizing the number of things they attempt to do.
Think about how many times you unlock your phone, open the keyboard, open an app, etc, versus how many times you need to do something power-user-ish like running an adblocking nameserver, or any kind of server. They should spend money and brain-time optimizing the first things, first.
The latter is still important and cool but shouldn’t be doing it at all if they can’t slot it neatly into their smooth user experience.
As an investor I also don’t want them risking their super valuable brand and spending money developing fringe applications. You can buy a $50 RPi for that!
For me it's the simple irritation that if I have an AppleTV autoplaying my sleepytime music to my room, or the radio to the kitchen in the morning, and someone else starts using it to watch TV, it replaces all those audio streams. C'mon, you can't tell me it is unable to do more than one thing at a time.
Putting that much power in a TV box doesn't make any sense to me. If it was for Apple Arcade, then they need to ship an actual controller by default. Apple is half-assing it with more and more products because people keep buying them anyway.
When I try it I end up summoning Beelzebub, Siri is screaming obscenities at me, we’ve skipped the episode we were watching, and my partner is crying with laughter
They finally reworked the atrocity that was the old remote, great news. Just yesterday I had another issue in which I couldn’t tell which button I was pressing.
> the first streaming player to be both Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos certified
Is this true? Through my `ChromeCast with Google TV`, I can get Dolby Vision (as my TV tells me) and Dolby Atmos (as my speakers tell me). I am reliably able to get these very noticeable formats via HBO Max. Or does this just mean they went the extra step to get some sort of official certification?
For some reason, the current crop of streaming devices all fail the use case of: 2 people want to watch a movie on headphones, without waking the kids. The current solution to this is airpods, where each person gets either the left or right ear. If there's one thing a premium device that costs twice what everything else does could do to differentiate itself, it would be supporting bluetooth pairing to multiple headphones at once.
This is the Unix philosophy though. If you want to split the bluetooth output to two downstream devices, you need a bluetooth repeater with two outputs.
I'm wondering how long it will take to get Mac OS Big Sur running in these new Apple TVs. The Apple Transition kit had an A12Z, Wikipedia says it is a "binned" version of A12 Bionic, therefore both chips have the same ARMv8.3 instruction set. I'm not sure of the performance but theoretically it should be possible to have 200 dollars ARM Macs running with this hardware.
I think the bigger problem would be getting access to the boot chain, I very rarely see anything like jailbreaks for these devices (though, I have seen it).
Yup - a remote with actual directional buttons was my biggest desire, so I’m really happy. I hate the touch scrolling of the previous Apple TV remote with a passion. It was so imprecise.
God I am happy to not be in an in industry anywhere near Apple’s core competencies. I am a Sony apologist but the ecosystem apple is building around my life - and my home - is almost too convenient to not give into
The new remote is a welcome change. If it's backwards compatible I might end up buying just to replace the current one which is very inaccurate for navigating.
Apple TV is the worst apple product i've ever owned.
Last year, they released a software update that broke YouTube support for like 5-6 months, and once they "fixed" it, they immediately announced it would be removed 3 months later.
You can still revert the software update, and YouTube works if you do that.
But I'd rather have my money back and buy a different product instead. I consider "YouTube support" kind of critical for any Smart TV accessory.
I called Apple Support about it, and they literally said "if you want your money back you'll have to sue us" and hanged up.
Apparently Apple shipped an "update" that partially broke the Youtube app "Pause" feature [1], Apple did not want to revert the patch and decided to wait on Google fixing the Youtube app [1], finally 4 months later apple fixed the issue [1], one month later Google announces that it discontinues the App, 3 months later the app is discontinued.
If you downgrade your Apple TV today, the youtube app still works (I did that a couple of times when it stopped working, but the Apple TV would update itself overnight... until I gave up..).
I bought an Apple TV mainly because it was advertised as being able to play youtube. Apple introduced an update that broke the Youtube App.
I can't really blame Google here. Apple breaks their app, Apple didn't want to fix it, Google got all the burn from users, fixing the App is probably out of their hands if this was a bug introduced by Apple, ... probably not worth it for them.
Either way, I bought this device because it supported Youtube, and now it doesn't because Apple introduced an update that broke youtube.
AFAICT this is all Apple's fault and I wish we would have an EU law that would prevent hardware manufacturers from shipping updates that break their products so that customers are forced to buy new ones.
Apple TV is the best apple product I've ever owned. The UI is simple and works well. Airplay consistently outperforms every other 'casting' system I have tried. I have tried all the major brands of smart TV as well as every major brand of set top box.
I have also installed many for clients. Not one client has called me and asked me how to do something on their Apple TV. However, I have received many calls asking for help with Roku devices.
Have you found something that you like better than the Apple TV?
HDR isn't an added feature (the previous version of the box already supported 4K HDR); it's the high-framerate support (with HDR) that's the added feature.
I find it astounding that Apple ceded control of Wi-Fi routers to companies much less trustworthy than Apple, but they insist on making overpriced TV boxes and smart speakers that nobody is buying.
I'm probably in a tiny minority but I really want my Windows HTPC with a fairly high end GPU to fill the role these devices do.
Somehow we're in a situation where Microsoft refuses to support Dolby Vision while streaming movies through the web browser have poor multi-channel audio support as well as what appears to be a lower bit rate in comparison to android/app based TVs or devices.
Even though my PC can run circles around my 2018 TV's android cpu/gpu, they always look better in the Amazon/iTunes app on the android TV or a Roku than they do my web browser.
I don't get the state of Windows / Browser support for videos, it's like they're purposefully making the PC experience inferior to sell a few more of these things.
Hollywood doesn't want people using PCs as a primary media device because they'd have to compete with pirate streaming services, so they want to push people to invest in more locked-down devices and ecosystems. One way to do that is limiting resolution, bitrate, and features for desktop users so that casual Netflix users are nudged to switch to an industry-approved streaming box that can't access unauthorized services.
I still dont understand why the Apple TV 4K couldn't act as a simple router. It had all the hardware required for it. It sits in the living room or wherever there is a TV which could act as a Mesh Network.
You thoroughly missed my point. Apple could be innovating in so many ways if they had control of the router (home VPN, control nexus for smart home devices), an area which they have an advantage (trust in updates, security, privacy). I think ceding that ground to less trustworthy companies in TP-Link, Eero, and Ubiquiti is dumb.
>As for Apple TVs, I own five.
Then you have a greater incentive to defend a substandard product so you don't feel foolish.
Apple TV is substandard? Maybe you don’t like it or prefer something else, but “substandard”?
I do hope they branch into routers though, not sure there’s a lot of money to be made there, but would be nice to see as a consumer. Maybe if they sell an ultra-premium, very secure router.
The chip/SOC choice is perplexing: why only the A12 and not the more powerful A12X/A12Z? It would seem more future proof for graphics intensive workloads.
Super disappointed they won't completely redesign the remote. I've never been so frustrated with a piece of hardware.
- It's so small/light/slippery that it slides towards where you're sitting on the couch. Inevitably this means you'll press one of the buttons with your leg unless you put it away on a coffee table after every use.
- Unless you use Siri or your phone, text input is literally swiping back and forth across a single array of characters. You can swipe in any direction on the remote... why would they make text a single row instead of a keyboard layout?
- There's no "back" button. With TV you are often switching back and forth between two shows, a feature virtually every TV remote has had for 20+ years. I get the remote is supposed to be general purpose, but this is such a common interaction.
edit: for some reason the submission link brought me to an old marketing page. I refreshed and looks like they did indeed redesign the remote, sucks I had to waste time writing my rant. :D
Weird, not sure what went wrong (bad caching?) but the submission link definitely took me to a previous TV4K marketing page. I refreshed and am seeing the new remote now, very happy to see that.
It’s not necessarily a substitute for a dedicated back button, but hitting the “Menu” button typically takes you to the previous step (unlike the TV icon, which takes you to the Apple TV watch page)
1. You breath on the thing, and it does something. It's extremely sensitive
2. It's really hard to fast fwd/rewind just a little bit. Its good at scrubbing through a whole movie, but try to go back 30 seconds with it, it's nearly impossible. Even worse, if you accidentally touch it, the movie goes fwd/back, and you try to scrub precisely to where you were - pretty frustrating.
3. You're not touching the thing you're interacting with, and unlike a touchpad, you don't see a cursor you're moving. It's supposed to be 'like' you're touching the screen itself.
4. Most people who aren't somewhat tech savvy just will give up (I set my dad up with our roku elsewhere for this reason). They expect physical buttons and to be able to 'click' through channels. It's not even apparent until you use it for a while part of the remote is a touchpad, as it's all black
It's like the remote was built for savvy iPhone users, not people that want to just watch TV.
Apple TV has other usablity problems, but that was a big one for me that would make me question getting another one.