Apple’s tactic of making advance review models available to selected publications, and setting an embargo on publication, means it’s able to control the flow of reviews so that they all get maximum attention.

On Tuesday, it was the iPhone 8 (including our review). Yesterday, the Apple Watch Series 3 (our review). And today it’s the turn of the Apple TV 4K.

The bottom-line of most reviews is that it’s an expensive device compared to alternatives like Chromecast, Fire TV and Roku, and only makes sense if two things are true …

First, to justify an Apple TV at all over competitor devices, you need to be deeply embedded into the Apple ecosystem. Second, you either need to have a 4K TV already or plan to buy one soon. Otherwise, you’re better off with the cheaper 1080p version, upgrading to the latest model when you finally make the switch to 4K.

Associated Press

Associated Press says exactly that.

BuzzFeed

In any case, Apple TV — with or without 4K — will be most useful if you’re already tied into Apple’s system with iDevices and iTunes. Given that rival devices are cheaper, what you’re buying isn’t the device, but an experience — integration and syncing with all your other Apple gadgets. For instance, 4K video taken on an iPhone will play easily on an Apple TV 4K.

If you’re in that camp and are thinking of buying a new TV in the next few years, there’s a good chance it will be 4K, so you might as well choose the 4K version of Apple TV now. But if it’s longer, a better Apple TV will likely be out by then. The non-4K version will do just fine for now.

Buzzfeed agrees.

CNET

And if you do have a 4K TV, Apple’s new model, is the most powerful — and expensive — streaming device you can buy.

It’s really only for those who want to buy content from the iTunes store, use an over-the-air tuner to watch broadcast TV (like ABC or NBC), or connect their Macs or iPhones via AirPlay. It’s also designed specifically for people who use Apple products. For example, you can turn your TV into an external monitor for your Mac with AirPlay, or use your iPhone to type in usernames and passwords so you don’t have to use the horrible on-screen keyboard. Android and Windows users don’t have these options and should consider other streamers.

CNET says it’s the best product on the market, but others get close for much less money.

The Independent

The Bad: The Apple TV 4K is still expensive, and cheaper streaming devices from Roku and others offer similar image quality and capabilities. Up-conversion of non-4K/HDR video is confusing and doesn’t improve image quality.

The Bottom Line: Apple’s 4K HDR streamer combines peak picture with a high-end feel nothing else can match, but it costs too much for most people.

The Independent thinks the image quality makes it worth the price, even if a 4K TV is something you plan to buy later.

Mashable

If you think you’re going to upgrade to a 4K screen soon, then the newer model is definitely the one to go for. Until you’ve bought your new TV it’ll still be able to stream in your current resolution and it’ll wait, patiently, until you’re ready to upgrade, when it can reveal its full potential.

Mashable sees this one as strictly for Apple loyalists.

Stuff

Not that there aren’t benefits to buying into Apple’s premium. If you’ve already invested a lot of money into iTunes content, then it may be worth it to pay the extra cost upfront (especially if all those free 4K conversions come through).

And Apple’s Siri-powered universal search is still difficult to beat, especially considering how easy it is to find 4k and HDR content.

But whether that balances out the $179 price (or $199, if you want the 64GB version), is another matter. With so much competition coming in at significantly under the $100 mark, the “Apple tax” is harder to justify here. For all but the most dedicated Apple loyalists, the new Apple TV is likely to inspire buyer’s remorse.

Stuff did a head-to-head comparison with Sky Q for its British audience and says it depends on your content tastes.

TechRadar

No matter what it is at launch, we’d expect it to grow quickly, and at reasonable prices too. But the same could be said of the Sky Store 4K content. So what’s our advice?

If you’re into lots of content – movies, documentaries and sport – and want it at the best resolution possible, Sky Q is your best option. If you prefer to pick-and-choose your content and are looking largely for 4K movies, Apple TV 4K will probably work best for you, and save you money in the process.

TechRadar says it’s a good upgrade for existing Apple TV users with 4K TVs, but doesn’t yet earn its keep for a more general market.

Time

For: Dolby Vision support. tvOS interface is clean and simple. Plays well with other Apple devices. Remote is responsive.

Time thinks it’s gorgeous, overdue and expensive.

The Verge

The good: HDR support dramatically improves the viewing experience, easy setup and other useful features for iPhone owners, can search for 4K content with Siri.

The bad: Much more expensive than other 4K set-top boxes.

Who should buy: Apple fans willing to pay a premium for convenience.

The Verge thinks that Apple has the right ambition, but isn’t there yet, noting no Dolby Atmos support as yet, and no 4K video from YouTube.

What are your views? Worth the premium, or do you plan to stick to the 1080p version – or use a cheaper device? Let us know in the comments.

If you’re already invested in a huge iTunes movie library, or you buy so many movies that Apple’s cheaper pricing makes a big difference to you, you’re not going to be unhappy about buying an Apple TV 4K. It’ll be fine, and having your existing library get upgraded will be nice, although the HDR upscaler will occasionally make you sad.

I am very confident Apple is going to figure this TV thing out. It’s the only company that has the combination of power and care to actually do it. But the Apple TV 4K’s unrealized potential just makes it obvious that the future of TV is still pretty far away, and it’s simply too expensive to gamble on in the meantime.