New Atari Console that Ataribox?

[Bill Loguidice]

I wish I had the internet that people have where they are able to worry about being able to stream in 4k. I have DSL, paying for 8Mbps and am lucky to to get 6Mbps most of the time, and sometimes once in a blue moon speed drops below that while trying to watch an HD movie on vudu and halfway through have to switch to SD, and honestly that really doesn't bother me too bad when that happens but yes it is definitely noticeable but bearable. But heck I have a 55" 1080p TV and I don't see a need for 4k, 1080p looks fine to me, and would be pointless for me to get a 4k TV unless I went with comcast for internet but then if I did that I might have trouble there because I heard they were starting to impose caps, and I do a lot of streaming now, and if I were doing it in 4k instead I'm sure I'd go over their caps.

 

1080p is definitely fine, but 4K HDR/Dolby Vision is a sight to behold. The secret is the improved color gamut beyond just the resolution bump. The catch, like in the early days of HD, is getting enough content in that format.

 

Anyway, for what it's worth, I became a cord cutter last month and stream all kinds of TV content now, in addition to all the other streaming and downloading that I normally do. I'm nowhere near in any danger of exceeding any potential cap with Comcast as far as I know, even hitting 1 - 2TB or so a month now. In fact, today, I broke off from Comcast completely (except for Internet service) by getting my own modem, which is a DOCSIS 3.1 modem, and allows me to get download speeds up to 1000 Mbps (I upgraded from the Blast service, which is pretty much the limit on DOCSIS 3.0). That should kick in some time tomorrow. It's still all much cheaper than what I was previously paying for triple play and all the equipment rentals.

 

Regardless, as someone who has been frustrated with Roku 4, Nvidia Shield TV, and today, an Apple TV 4k, I think there's definitely room for a better streaming box and related apps. I just don't think Atari in their present state is the company to do it, and again, certainly not if the box can't do 4K.

[+x=usr(1536)]

Regardless, as someone who has been frustrated with Roku 4, Nvidia Shield TV, and today, an Apple TV 4k, I think there's definitely room for a better streaming box and related apps. I just don't think Atari in their present state is the company to do it, and again, certainly not if the box can't do 4K.

Related to this: IMHO, we've hit (or are at least coming close to) the end of the Set-Top Box model as the one to follow for streaming content delivery. Most of the streaming services should be built into hardware that is directly attached to the display itself and integrated tightly with the display's controls, similar in concept (though not necessarily execution) to the intent behind the CableCARD.

 

What we're really talking about (and this applies to the Ataribox as well) is User Interface and User Experience (UX) as the value propositions; those are what made the iPod and iPhone dominate their respective markets. Let the display handle the TV-like functions associated with streaming content delivery, and have the console specialise in the gaming and other functions that wouldn't traditionally be a part of the display's functionality.

 

In effect, this is more or less the MSX approach - agree on a standard, implement your streaming apps under that standard, and abstract out the hardware part of those functions from the user. Granted, this would mean getting 50,000,000 TV and display manufacturers to agree on that standard and stick to it, itself something that is unlikely to happen unless it's driven by the content providers since it's ultimately in their best interests to have only one platform to have to develop for across multiple device manufacturers' hardware.

 

This could be done as a pluggable hardware module that basically just piggybacks off of the TV for power, network connectivity, and A/V output. Give it its own onboard storage and processing space for streaming apps, let it describe to the display what its capabilities are, and the display can handle the interactivity within apps. The user gets a more coherent interface and experience across apps, and external devices such as game consoles and Blu-Ray players can still be traditionally-connected to an HDMI input. In volume, the modules would cost pennies.

 

And while I'm dreaming, I'd also like a pony and a Maserati, and someone to train the pony to drive the Maserati. That said, specialisation and focus are Good Things. We won't know more until the Ataribox leaves the realm of vapourware, but from what has been announced so far it's sounding less and less like it has a real sense of what it is that it's trying to be. It should pick one thing and do it exceptionally well, not replicate chunks of the functionality of three other boxes plus computers and displays I already own.

[zzip]

I wish I had the internet that people have where they are able to worry about being able to stream in 4k. I have DSL, paying for 8Mbps and am lucky to to get 6Mbps most of the time, and sometimes once in a blue moon speed drops below that while trying to watch an HD movie on vudu and halfway through have to switch to SD, and honestly that really doesn't bother me too bad when that happens but yes it is definitely noticeable but bearable. But heck I have a 55" 1080p TV and I don't see a need for 4k, 1080p looks fine to me, and would be pointless for me to get a 4k TV unless I went with comcast for internet but then if I did that I might have trouble there because I heard they were starting to impose caps, and I do a lot of streaming now, and if I were doing it in 4k instead I'm sure I'd go over their caps.

IKR? 1080p still looks good, and I don't see why I should upgrade to 4K when it's going to strain my internet, force me to upgrade my console, and/or PC, my bluray, etc.

 

Worse, SD content looks terrible on HD, so I worry that HD content will look bad on 4K

[JBerel]

Well, the good news is I hear the Ataribox will come packed with an exclusive version of Terraria, and supports a super-fast upgradable micro SD solution that's really easy to use. It will be the most powerful console on the market, full of gaming style and be pretty much advanced.

 

So.................there's that.

 

[SignGuy81]

IKR? 1080p still looks good, and I don't see why I should upgrade to 4K when it's going to strain my internet, force me to upgrade my console, and/or PC, my bluray, etc.

 

Worse, SD content looks terrible on HD, so I worry that HD content will look bad on 4K

 

 

Somebody might have to correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know a 1080p picture would look the exact same on a 4k TV the same size because I believe it is exactly 4 times the pixels you have on a 1080p set, so basically every one pixel of the 1080p stream would just take up 4 of the pixels on the 4k TV which takes up the same amount of space as the one did on your 1080p TV(if same size screen).

 

There are other factors however that can screw with things such as overscan turned on from manufacture even on newer smart TVs, which blow up the image which cuts off parts around the image.

 

EDIT:

 

As far as SD content looking horrible on an HD TV(while I admit it is noticeable on mine) it isn't too bad on my TV, but it probably depends to on how good your TV upscales the video so opinions would probably vary on that.

Edited October 6, 2017 by SignGuy81

[Osgeld]

As far as SD content looking horrible on an HD TV(while I admit it is noticeable on mine) it isn't too bad on my TV, but it probably depends to on how good your TV upscales the video so opinions would probably vary on that.

 

also depends on the content, broadcast looks like butt, where as DVD or streaming in 480 sitting on my couch is just fine ... you can tell its not full HD, but its leaps and bounds better than the local news station

[+Nathan Strum]

SD on HDTV depends on a lot of factors, but the two biggest are: the source material, and the device doing the scaling.

 

Bad source material will almost never look good scaled up. You're just making noise, blurriness, artifacts, etc., larger - not improving anything. Garbage in, garbage out. But it's bigger garbage.

 

Scaling can be done by the content provider, by your playback device (cable box, Blu-ray player, AV receiver, streaming device), or your TV. And depending on the hardware and settings used, the quality can be all over the map.

 

My HDTV (a Sony) does a much better job of scaling SD than my Onkyo receiver does. But my PS3 does a better job of scaling DVDs than my HDTV. At work though, we have some Denon receivers that do an excellent job of scaling. We also use Gefen scalers, where we want absolute control over how SD is scaled up, and can't get it any other way. I looked a long time to find a good scaler, and most don't let you control the aspect ratio properly. The Gefen does - but it's not cheap.

[JBerel]

Ehem.....are you guys seriously debating the merits of picture quality for standard definition and high definition television signals on a 4k television in a forum topic about running 70's era videogames in 2018 on a cheap chinese box provided by a company that went defunct in the 80's? Seriously, I'm checking cuz i forgot. I thought this was a that ataribox topic, but now I'm totally confused. Ah hell, nevermind. As you were. And a one, and a two....

[Osgeld]

yes we are cause its not a flashback its marketed as a modern gaming system running modern games, thus its a point to be considered

 

thanks for your input, try to keep up

[leech]

Ehem.....are you guys seriously debating the merits of picture quality for standard definition and high definition television signals on a 4k television in a forum topic about running 70's era videogames in 2018 on a cheap chinese box provided by a company that went defunct in the 80's? Seriously, I'm checking cuz i forgot. I thought this was a that ataribox topic, but now I'm totally confused. Ah hell, nevermind. As you were. And a one, and a two....

Considering it has a HDMI output on it, and the company didn't go defunct in the 80s (mid 90s instead as far as hardware and ownership goes). Well yeah, we're talking about resolutions and such.

[vcoleiro1]

Here's a comment by the Atari Gameband team made on their Kickstarter comments section

 

 

FMTwo Game Inc. Creator 6 days ago

@johnny, & @everyone....well here's something to maybe lift your boredom: Feargal is involved in the Ataribox project, now wearing 2 hats because life....well....life's too short to not work 20 hours a day
....anyway a by-product of that is that PixelFurnace should be compatible with Ataribox (i.e. plug in your MicroSD and access your content on the TV!). We are providing support to the Atari team with the UX, so if you check out some of what's out there on Ataribox you'll see some similarity to what we disclosed on Pixelfurnace! More on that in our next update!!

[zzip]

Somebody might have to correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know a 1080p picture would look the exact same on a 4k TV the same size because I believe it is exactly 4 times the pixels you have on a 1080p set, so basically every one pixel of the 1080p stream would just take up 4 of the pixels on the 4k TV which takes up the same amount of space as the one did on your 1080p TV(if same size screen).

 

There are other factors however that can screw with things such as overscan turned on from manufacture even on newer smart TVs, which blow up the image which cuts off parts around the image.

I've noticed even when you scale it by a multiple, it looks worse than on a TV/monitor where you are displaying it at native resolution. Now maybe 4K pixels are small enough you wouldn't notice. But I don't want to shell out hundreds for a 4K set up only to be disappointed by how most of my content looks, when my past experience tells me that will likely be the case. There needs to be an explosion of 4K content first.

[zzip]

also depends on the content, broadcast looks like butt, where as DVD or streaming in 480 sitting on my couch is just fine ... you can tell its not full HD, but its leaps and bounds better than the local news station

This is true too. DVDs are acceptable, but not great on an HD set, but they looked "amazing" on our old TVs

 

YouTube compression and videos digitized from VCRs are also culprits in bad SD content.

[Bill Loguidice]

I've noticed even when you scale it by a multiple, it looks worse than on a TV/monitor where you are displaying it at native resolution. Now maybe 4K pixels are small enough you wouldn't notice. But I don't want to shell out hundreds for a 4K set up only to be disappointed by how most of my content looks, when my past experience tells me that will likely be the case. There needs to be an explosion of 4K content first.

 

1080p content looks fantastic on most good 4K sets. It's nothing at all like 480i SD content on 1080p, where you're starting from a low quality signal. From my experience, I can tell you that I notice no difference with 1080p content on my 4K set (versus a top tier 1080p set), and the 4K content that is either HDR- or Dolby Vision-enabled looks amazing. I stress though that if you get a 4K set, don't get one that doesn't at least support all current modes of HDR, if not also Dolby Vision. Then you really wouldn't be getting a great deal of benefit over a decent 1080p set.

 

And yes, right now, only select services like Netflix, Amazon, Vudu, iTunes, etc., have 4K and/or HDR content, and it's only a subset of their wider content. Same thing with gaming and PS4 Pro and Xbox One S/X. When it's supported by a particular title, it's fantastic, and when it isn't, it still looks great. And of course the former situation will only continue to improve.

 

I suspect the last 4K/HDR hold-outs will be regular TV broadcasts, regardless of source. With that said, since cord cutting I can say that my picture quality is still better with a good set-top box (Apple TV 4k is the latest one I have) than what I was getting with the Xfinity X1 cable box.

[leech]

I've noticed even when you scale it by a multiple, it looks worse than on a TV/monitor where you are displaying it at native resolution. Now maybe 4K pixels are small enough you wouldn't notice. But I don't want to shell out hundreds for a 4K set up only to be disappointed by how most of my content looks, when my past experience tells me that will likely be the case. There needs to be an explosion of 4K content first.

That shouldn't be the case. When they are perfectly divisible, they should look 'native'. like 800x600 looks perfect on a 1600x1200 resolution monitor. But 1024x768 on the same monitor will look blurry. This has always been an issue with anything outside of CRTs where they don't have a native resolution.

[leech]

I got an email stating that the Speaker Hats are now available.... http://atarilife.com/

[S1500]

Whoa the hat's patended!

[JBerel]

Wow! Only $140 bucks too. Normally you have to spend quite a bit more to look like a complete hipster dumb ass.

[zzip]

That shouldn't be the case. When they are perfectly divisible, they should look 'native'. like 800x600 looks perfect on a 1600x1200 resolution monitor. But 1024x768 on the same monitor will look blurry. This has always been an issue with anything outside of CRTs where they don't have a native resolution.

I know it should be the case, but from my past experience, it hasn't always been the case.

[+GoldLeader]

I got an email stating that the Speaker Hats are now available.... http://atarilife.com/

 

Be still my beating heart.

[leech]

The page even mentions the patented multiplayer hipster dumbass ability.

[S1500]

I'm predicting on Hackaday there will be someone making their own knockoff hat for $13, easily.

[leech]

I don't know why they'd go for speaker hats, clearly Speaker Shoes would have been a better design. This way midgets could hear the music too!

[Osgeld]

if they were smart they would have added a lcd screen and the functionality of the atari video music

[Flojomojo]

Snipped for the historians, since this stupid thing won't be on the market for long.