Apple TV+ Offers Highest Quality 4K Streaming, Averaging Up to 29Mbps

G

Gary T

Well-known member
Flatpanelshd has tested Apple TV+ and found they are offering highest data rates of any streaming provider. See has the highest data rates at "29 Mb/s average video bitrate and 41 Mb/s video peak". This is higher than Netflix's typical data rate of 16mbs so it looks like there is a new reigning champ.

I haven't been impressed with most streaming data rates so I think this is welcome news that will hopefully be the harbinger of things to come! Nothing like a little competition to force everyone else upgrade their infrastructure.


https://www.macrumors.com/2019/11/04/apple-tv-highest-4k-streaming-quality/

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/flatforums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=12779
 
I'd be happier about this if it was also true of all their iTunes streaming movies.

On a flipped perspective, isn't it annoying how they'll make sure they crank up the bitrate of "the morning show" - but if you stream the 4K HDR of Revenant or Blade Runner 2049, you get a lower bitrate for those visual gems than you do for their own TV content?
 
Gary T said:
Flatpanelshd has tested Apple TV+ and found they are offering highest data rates of any streaming provider. See has the highest data rates at "29 Mb/s average video bitrate and 41 Mb/s video peak". This is higher than Netflix's typical data rate of 16mbs so it looks like there is a new reigning champ.

I haven't been impressed with most streaming data rates so I think this is welcome news that will hopefully be the harbinger of things to come! Nothing like a little competition to force everyone else upgrade their infrastructure.


https://www.macrumors.com/2019/11/04/apple-tv-highest-4k-streaming-quality/

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/flatforums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=12779
Click to expand...

Who cares if the content sucks? 99% of users likely don’t care about this at all. Personally I don’t really have an issue with the quality of Netflix. Plus just listing bitrates is almost pointless and doesn’t paint the full picture of what we will actually see. Finally there is no guarantee it will stay at that level and this is likely Apple trying to make it seem special since they don’t have very much content yet.
 
DLD said:
PS The Morning Show is getting poor reviews.
Click to expand...

Don't know about that. 8.2 on IMDB (for whatever that's worth) and I personally find it excellent.

I wonder if some of the knee jerk reactions have to do with the topic itself, or the general men-women dynamic?
 
AndreeOnline said:
Don't know about that. 8.2 on IMDB (for whatever that's worth) and I personally find it excellent.

I wonder if some of the knee jerk reactions have to do with the topic itself, or the general men-women dynamic?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen the show myself but it has a 59% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes (fans 95% but under 1,000 grades so far)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_morning_show/s01

Apple has allegedly plunked down $300M to produce 20 episodes ($15M/per). Apple has oodles of cash, naturally, but I doubt that these budgets are sustainable. However, it does show some major jousting for the pole positions (or positions behind Netflix, as it were). Disney+ has scheduled to start on the 12th and there're already Netflix, Hulu, YouTube and Amazon Prime. HBO Max and Peacock (NBC Universal) are opening for business in 2020. That's a crowded field with Amazon, YouTube and Apple having the richest parents. The field should shake out within 3-5 years (my prediction is on Hulu getting swallowed first).
 
DLD said:
I haven't seen the show myself but it has a 59% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes (fans 95% but under 1,000 grades so far)... Apple has allegedly plunked down $300M to produce 20 episodes ($15M/per).
Click to expand...

It's a curious thing, the critics ratings.

My feeling is that users/fans rate the show for the entertainment it provides—more for what it is, while critics struggle a bit with its themes. A few reviews I've read gave me a feeling that the verdict lined up pretty well with how accurately TMS reflected that reviewer's feelings about #metoo.

I think #metoo can be pretty polarising. As shouldn't even have to be mentioned: non consensual sex, or highly questionable "consensus" in a situation with little perceived choice is an absolute no-go. But as with all things in life, things aren't just black and white. There is a "scale", I guess. What about a consensual affair that ends in disappointment and words are thrown around?

If we distill everything down from least to most offensive to: [name of girl — #metoo — name of man].... who among casual news consumers is going to spend time to figure out what really happened? Are we even provided that information?

There is a scene in TMS where Steve Carell's character is approached on the street from a random person that screams to his face: "Rapist!!!!!"

We're only 3 episodes in, but as far as we know, that didn't happen. I find that raises interesting questions.

------------------

Budget: AppleTV+ series 'See' was reported of having a budget approaching that of 'Game of Thrones'. That has now been corrected by its makers: it's not even close. I'm not sure if the budgets that are being thrown around are correct. Might be, but in the case of 'See' it wasn't.
 
I agree on the critics vs. fans ratings in general but ... the sub-1,000 count probably means there were a lot of Jennifer Aniston + Friends fans casting their votes early.

PS. I was in the audience of the Beverly Garland Hotel in North Hollywood in August of 1994, when Les Moonves gave a quick presentatin, extolling the quality of a new Warner Brothers sitcom - that has not premiered on NBC yet! - called "Friends". They even showed a clip from the first episode. The execs had no idea what the show would become.
 
DLD said:
Apple has allegedly plunked down $300M to produce 20 episodes ($15M/per).
Click to expand...

WOW. Game Of Thrones numbers in the mid seasons were approximately half that per episode, and it had half the episodes per season.

Good for them for trying so hard, but, just like Disney+, it's going to be difficult to convince me to sign up: I'm already paying Netflix, HBO and AmazonPrime, and I usually find myself in a situation where somebody will recommend me a movie or show, I'll look for it at these platforms, and if it's not there I'll just forget about it and watch something else. The allure has to be really strong to convince me to add another subscription to the mix (GoT did that for HBO).
 
Disney+ is probably going to capture the Marvel fans, DC comics fans, and Star Wars fans. Those were brilliant acquisitions for setting up a streaming service with exclusive content, since they all have a lot of rabid fans...

And of course Disney would most likely follow that with making the PIXAR stuff Disney+ exclusive as well.
 
I had to know about the whole critic vs fan rating for myself (but I mean, I didn't have to know THAT bad) so I just watched the first episode of See and Morning Show.

Morning Show, maybe the 95% is all fans casting early, but I'll say it was objectively better than the critic scores would lead one to believe. I thought it'd be a turd, and maybe its boring with continued watching, but I was perfectly entertained and thought it was plenty well produced. I can see why viewers would be more than pleased.

See, on the other hand, I am totally with the critics. UGH. What an absolutely cringe worthy first episode. I felt it was a disaster, not because it was all bad - that would just be a joke. A disaster because I kept thinking "this could be a RIVETING BOOK". The concept is pretty rad, it just constantly felt cheesy to me. And it's very hard for me to get immersed in a blind world where everything and everyone looks like they had a team of makeup artists. I will say, though, that I was VERY impressed with the A/V component. The opening title sequence in Dolby Atmos was demo real worthy, and the visuals look straight out of The Revenant at some points.

//

Anyway I get Apple wants their content to appear optimal to viewers, and if they can increase the bitrate behind the scenes to make their stuff look/sound just a little better than the competition, it can in fact leave viewers with an impression that their stuff just looks and sounds better. I'm fine with that, but I'm also rubbed wrong on the fact that they are pumping the bitrates on their content and leaving movies that people purchased and own off iTunes that absolutely deserve a higher bitrate and at a lower data stream than their own content.
 
As for the business model, I still don't think AppleTV at least for the first 2-3 years is about Apple turning a profit from the service itself. It's totally the Amazon Prime model. Honestly, it doesn't even need to be great. There's plenty of people who will be content with this content at the price of free when bundled. And millennials will eat up some of this content - some of this is clearly aimed at these younger generations.

When Apple has a swath of services (music, TV, news, games, storage, etc.) they can simply value add at whim to remain competitive. Why include free headphones during their summer student discount period when they can include a year subscription to a service or two of choice? They can apologize to customers with services. They can bundle more services with iPhones on slower sales years, or if the competition from Samsung is extra fierce. IE imaginative 2020 scenario -- "Sure, the new iPhone got worse reviews than the new Galaxy and they're the same price... but the iPhone comes with a free year of TV and Arcade!".

I also imagine this will spur upgrades from less discriminating folk... I can hear the 25 year old techie now "I mean, I know I don't need to upgrade my iPhone again this year but it's like, I'm hooked on XYZ show and so it's basically $60 cheaper since the subscription is included and if I sell my old phone on Offer Up it's almost like I get to upgrade for free".
 
Samuel H said:
WOW. Game Of Thrones numbers in the mid seasons were approximately half that per episode, and it had half the episodes per season...
Click to expand...
GoT budget was mostly spent on production and VFX. The Morning Show's budget was allocated to stars. The problem for Apple is that they have relatively little inventory, unless they make deals to purchase or lease someone's libraries of films and TV shows. And, even there, most top programs have been airing on the US TV for several decades already and many of the younger fans don't have even the slightest interest in the 1970's-1990's fair. Yes, there are bundles with iPhone purchases and what not but, to me, it's slim pickings as of now.

filmguy123 said:
As for the business model, I still don't think AppleTV at least for the first 2-3 years is about Apple turning a profit from the service itself...
Click to expand...
Apple is sitting on something like quarter trillion of cash. They can ride the introduction phase out but, on the other hand, they can be too cautious with their funds. They need about a dozen good shows right now not to look like faux pretenders to the Netflix throne.

Netflix, btw, is spending $15B a year for new programming.
 
Last edited:
I have no doubt they'll find their legs.

And, once they stumble upon their "This is Us" or "Breaking Bad", the rest will be history
 
filmguy123 said:
I have no doubt they'll find their legs.

And, once they stumble upon their "This is Us" or "Breaking Bad", the rest will be history
Click to expand...
Apple was a stumbling, deeply troubled, company until Steve Jobs returned as a CEO in 1997 and began to introduce one wildly popular product after another.

Cook is no Jobs.
 
DLD said:
Apple was a stumbling, deeply troubled, company until Steve Jobs returned as a CEO in 1997 and began to introduce one wildly popular product after another.

Cook is no Jobs.
Click to expand...

Yep. When Steve Jobs was in-command, I believe Apple was a much stronger company all around, with what felt like more ground breaking products. I believe he pushed everybody harder and that made them more innovative. For the most part, and for lack of a better way to put it, he made $h!t happen and he didn't take it, either. I wonder what iPhone's and MBP's would be like today, if he was still here?
 
Jobs might be the greatest CEO of all time. When he took over in 1997, Apple's market cap was $2.3B. It's ~ $1.15T now.
 
DLD said:
Jobs might be the greatest CEO of all time. When he took over in 1997, Apple's market cap was $2.3B. It's ~ $1.15T now.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can give Jobs credit for all of the growth that's happened since 2011.

Jobs took over in 1996, Apple's market cap was $3B. When he stepped down in 2011, it was $347B. Today its 1.16T. So, while Jobs grew the company over 100x it's initial value, Cook took it from a third of a billion to well over a trillion dollar company. Also, a lot of Apple's growth during the Jobs years can be attributed to how well their supply chain was locked down and protected from the ebbs and flows of the commodities they need to make their products. Guess who was in charge of that as COO? Tim Cook.

Tim Cook doesn't get nearly the credit he deserves. The Apple turnaround needed both of them (and Jony Ive). Apple seems to have sort of lost its innovation way as of late, but how much of that is because of Cook and how much of it is what happens when you get to be a $1T market cap behemoth? Hard to tell.
 
Last edited:
jbregar said:
...Cook took it from a third of a billion to well over a trillion dollar company.
Click to expand...
(According to your numbers, the first word should be trillion too: one did 100x, the other one did 3x - not a fan of Jobs but if we're using numbers better use them right)
 
Tim Cook was basically Jobs' accountant. Apple's market cap has been rising and falling along with the general equity indices while iPhone has been losing its market share to the Chinese (Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo) and Samsung.

As to Apple TV, Cook's gingerly dipping his toes in. Being bold and brave is not his forte.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top