Remix.run Logo
▲ avdwrks 7 hours ago

I bought one earlier this year right before they announced the $70 price increase. Going from $130 to $200 to $300 in the same year is crazy.

▲dstroot 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

At $130 it was an impulse buy and well worth it. Given a new price and features, I don’t see myself upgrading.

▲Maxion 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah I think this is the price for my soul, I'll keep using the data mining LG TV. Perhaps I ought to just throw it on a vlan that i turn off whenever i dont watch the tv.

▲clickety_clack 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Interestingly, Apple just released a “home collection” of LG products. I wonder how private they’re going to be.

▲Brendinooo 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

For what it's worth, depending on when you bought it, if $130 was an impulse buy in the year you bought it (and your financial situation is similar), a sizable chunk of that price difference is just inflation.

For example, a $130 impulse buy in 2015 is a ~$184 impulse buy in 2026.

▲hurfdurf 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Apple TV 4K 3rd Gen was $129 (4GB/64GB) resp. $179 (4GB/128GB) up until four months ago.

▲Brendinooo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yup, that's why I said "depending on when you bought it"

▲mdasen 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Go back a year and 8GB of RAM would cost around $30. Today, it's going to be $120. Apple really wanted to increase the amount of RAM from 4GB to 8GB to support on-device Siri AI, but RAM isn't cheap at the moment.

The move to the A19 also meant that they couldn't go with LPDDR4X RAM and instead had to use more expensive LPDDR5X (IIRC).

It is crazy. I expect the new Apple TV to be a flop because $300 is just a lot. The problem is that Apple is a little boxed in on this device. Apple wants to re-use the A19, but that locks them into expensive DDR5 RAM. They want to push Siri AI, but that locks them into 8GB RAM. Unlike the iPhone, there aren't as many other opportunities with the App Store, Apple Pay, search engine placement revenue, etc.

Storage has also gone up a lot and Apple is no longer selling a 64GB model. Most streaming sticks have 4-16GB of storage and it's usually really slow/cheap storage. The new Apple TV has 128GB of storage and the price for that has probably gone from around $25 to $50.

You say that it's fine from "$200 to $300", but that's not really true. It's gone from $250 to $300 when you look at the 128GB model. I still think it's crazy that it went from $150 to $300 in the same year, but the outgoing 128GB model was already $250 after the price hikes earlier this year.

The problem is that Apple didn't want to reign in their product for the current market and I somewhat get that. What's the point of a new Apple TV if it's just "we updated the processor." For me, the point would be AV1 and VP9 decoding, but Apple wanted to push Siri AI.

Other high-end TV devices have also seen big increases in price. The Fire TV Cube went from being $110-140 to now $200 - and with the Fire TV Cube you're getting Cortex-A73 processor cores from 2016, 2GB LPDDR4X, and 16GB storage. At least Apple is giving you 8GB LPDDR5X and 128GB of storage and a processor that is way better.

The Google TV Streamer is $150 now with 4GB RAM and 16GB storage, but with LPDDR4 RAM and Cortex-A55 cores - and it's still $150.

A Roku Ultra is 2GB RAM and 4GB storage with Cortex-A55 cores and costs $150.

I think we're seeing that there's still some really old stock out there that's cheap, but we're seeing the prices climb on competitors too. Google raised its price 50%. Amazon has raised its price 40-80%. Apple raised its price 54-67% on the same-model and launched the newer model with double the RAM, more expensive RAM, a processor that's 4 years newer, etc.

I think it's likely that Google, Roku, and Amazon simply don't upgrade their streaming devices during this parts shortage. I think a lot of people will be fine with a 12nm Cortex-A55 based TV streamer with limited RAM and storage (and slow RAM and storage). I love how fast my Apple TV is. It's amazing the difference in UI lag. But I think most companies aren't going to prioritize that premium experience, especially during a parts shortage.

▲signal11 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> the outgoing 128GB model was already $250 after the price hikes earlier this year

This is a great point, a lot of the press coverage missed this.

Not having a cheaper alternative (eg a stick) was curious though. The baseline price of $300 might cause sticker shock.

▲moepstar 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Ok, but what do you actually use the storage for on an Apple TV?

I still don’t quite know why i actually got a 64GB 4K first gen ATV when, in practice, a 32GB would’ve sufficed?

Do people really play games on these? Install that many apps on them?

▲Brendinooo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is the kind of analysis I was hoping to get when I posted my original comment, thanks so much for this info.

▲compounding_it 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

apple probably was losing money on the old Apple TV with old 4gb ram and 64gb storage in low volumes anyway and they probably would have to pay even more going forward. the upgrade seems to make sense from supply chain standpoint to standardise storage and chips across devices.

If anything apple is probably bring value to new buyers of Apple TV in this market. At 299$ you are getting hardware that will last quite some time as opposed to a 200$ device that might cost maybe 250$ in six months and give you lot less hardware capabilities.

▲mingus88 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Apples services division broke records for revenue so there’s a way to look at the TV hardware as a kind of loss leader for subscriptions

But everything is way more expensive than it was a year ago. Nothing escapes this inflation we are going through

▲bigyabai 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Apple's service division breakdown does not paint AppleTV+ in a favorable light whatsoever: https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/apple-tv-plus-streamin...

If they're selling AppleTV at a loss to stimulate AppleTV+ subscriptions, then they're hemorrhaging money on two fronts. Without their App Store monopoly, Apple's annual service revenue would undoubtedly be a crater.

▲FireBeyond 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I was going to say “to be fair”, but it’s still ridiculous but my understanding is that the 130 one was wireless only and the higher one and new one are Ethernet too (not that a NIC adds that cost…)