iCloud seen as further evidence of Apple television coming late 2012
Apple's newly unveiled iCloud service, which will make it easier to share content among multiple devices, is seen by one prominent analyst as even more evidence that the company is planning to release a high-definition television set as soon as late 2012.
Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray on Thursday reiterated his long-held stance that Apple is working on its own full-fledged television set, rather than just a set-top box like the current Apple TV. He said the forthcoming iCloud service would make an Apple-branded television even more plausible.
"Apple's iCloud service for media storage makes it easier to own multiple devices and share content among them," he said in a note to investors. "At first the only media iCloud will store is music and pictures, but we believe Apple may add movies and TV shows purchased or rented in iTunes to the iCloud service, which could be viewed on a TV."
In fact, last month it was said that Apple was in negotiations with movie and television studios, in an effort to allow customers to re-download purchased content on multiple devices. Currently, iCloud allows users to obtain music they have already purchased through the iTunes Store or App Store.
Munster also cited Apple's multiple television-related patents, which he said have continued to be published by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office as recently as May. He also restated his belief that Apple's prepayment for $3.9 billion in components could allow Apple to secure up to 50-inch LCD displays.
The latest note to investors comes quickly after a recent report claimed that Apple plans to release an iOS-powered high-definition television later this year. But Munster sees a successor to the current Apple TV set-top box more likely to arrive in late 2012.
He believes that as Apple moves toward the release of a rumored television set, the company may open up the existing iOS-powered $99 Apple TV to third-party developers. He sees an official App Store for the Apple TV debuting within the next year.
"The final step would be bringing the Apple TV software and the App Store to an Apple Television," he said. "Apple's expertise in software and apps would be a strong differentiator for the company in the television market."
Munster said that an Apple television could add $2.5 billion, or 2 percent, to Apple's revenue in 2012, growing to $4 billion, or 3 percent in 2013. By 2014, the analyst sees a supposed Apple television earning the company $6 billion.
Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray on Thursday reiterated his long-held stance that Apple is working on its own full-fledged television set, rather than just a set-top box like the current Apple TV. He said the forthcoming iCloud service would make an Apple-branded television even more plausible.
"Apple's iCloud service for media storage makes it easier to own multiple devices and share content among them," he said in a note to investors. "At first the only media iCloud will store is music and pictures, but we believe Apple may add movies and TV shows purchased or rented in iTunes to the iCloud service, which could be viewed on a TV."
In fact, last month it was said that Apple was in negotiations with movie and television studios, in an effort to allow customers to re-download purchased content on multiple devices. Currently, iCloud allows users to obtain music they have already purchased through the iTunes Store or App Store.
Munster also cited Apple's multiple television-related patents, which he said have continued to be published by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office as recently as May. He also restated his belief that Apple's prepayment for $3.9 billion in components could allow Apple to secure up to 50-inch LCD displays.
The latest note to investors comes quickly after a recent report claimed that Apple plans to release an iOS-powered high-definition television later this year. But Munster sees a successor to the current Apple TV set-top box more likely to arrive in late 2012.
He believes that as Apple moves toward the release of a rumored television set, the company may open up the existing iOS-powered $99 Apple TV to third-party developers. He sees an official App Store for the Apple TV debuting within the next year.
"The final step would be bringing the Apple TV software and the App Store to an Apple Television," he said. "Apple's expertise in software and apps would be a strong differentiator for the company in the television market."
Munster said that an Apple television could add $2.5 billion, or 2 percent, to Apple's revenue in 2012, growing to $4 billion, or 3 percent in 2013. By 2014, the analyst sees a supposed Apple television earning the company $6 billion.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct1_r_61sk8
It's just going to be a giant iPad or an enormous iPhone.
I wonder if there is a market for, like, a 20" iPad.
Honestly, I buy a TV for it's picture quality and nothing else. If I want to play games or watch TV, I'll use a dedicated device!
It's just going to be a giant iPad or an enormous iPhone.
Actually, it probably will be. I doubt there will be touch features. Who wants to get off the couch and tap the tv. But it certainly will run on an ios. Knowing apple, they will provide a limited amount input ports. Dude, go to the clud. It'll be a giant iPad with a simple remote included and actual ipad remote features for those who want to integrate.
But will it be 3-d?
I wonder if there is a market for, like, a 20" iPad.
Sure. There's a market for everything.
However, Apple doesn't mindlessly jump into every single market. They are very selective about where they place their efforts. You don't see 7" Apple netbooks on store shelves, do you?
For something like a 20" iPad, there's the issue of parts availability, pricing, demand. How many $3000 20" iPads do you think Apple could sell every month? Thousands? Is that enough to warrant making them?
My guess is there's a oversize iPad sitting in a lab in Cupertino. Remember, Apple prototypes hundreds if not thousands of designs and only a handful make it to market. Just because it can be built is not enough reason to make it a shipping product.
Please, some one answer me what an Apple-branded TV would do which my current HDTV and AppleTV couldn't do?
Honestly, I buy a TV for it's picture quality and nothing else. If I want to play games or watch TV, I'll use a dedicated device!
Apple has made an industry of combining devices either to make a more beautiful solution or a more seamless one. Look at an iMac, it's a computer built into the monitor. Isn't the logical extension an Apple HDTV that is an entertainment system built into a TV?
I'm not saying that such a device would be for everybody, but it potentially could win Apple another few million iOS users and further enrich their ecosystem.
This rumour is looking more realistic but I still contend that any Apple-branded TV will be more like the "Intel Inside" branding on other vendor's PCs. I can see Samsung, LG, et al. licensing Apple's internal or direct-attach AppleTV to their premium TVs.
I think that Apple may have prototyped the idea and in the course of that developed several tech ideas that of course they patented (as would any company) with no intention of using themselves. But in the end, the little black box is as far as they will go. Because in the end, the key is content. It's in redownloads of purchases, more rentals, subscriptions, getting companies like HBO to post their content day of airing not six months later and so on. Add to this a viable 'blu-ray' quality download format and you have a winner regardless of the hardware.
Do I think that perhaps at some point companies like Panasonic might come to Apple and ask about putting the little black box inside their tvs, sure. Might Apple say yes, perhaps. But I do not believe that Apple will ever start the conversation and we will never be ordering tvs from Apple.com or picking them up at our local Apple store.
The problem with Apple TV is that it is yet another device that needs to be connected to your home theater and adds yet another remote that you need to be manage. I know that in my system if I want to watch a movie on my Apple TV it takes me three remotes to get everything set up right. And all those iOS devices out there that support AirPlay have the same problem... if I send a movie from my iPad to my Apple TV I still have to use those three remotes to get everything set up right before I'll see it.
To get the level of integration that I think is needed, Apple really has two options. First, it could sell or somehow get itself embedded in cable set top boxes. This is never going to happen though because the cable companies would never allow it. Steve has even said so publicly. The second option is to somehow get inside the TV. The only way I think this is going to work is if they can partner with a large manufacturer like Samsung to embed iOS in all of their new sets. Samsung could make a really great partner if they could convince them to do this since most of their TV's are intenet enabled already. They even have their own rudimentary app store with apps like Netflix and Pandora. It could be a real win-win for both Apple and Samsung if they could pull it off. Even better would be if it was technically possible to upgrade the existing Samsung TV's to run iOS and the iTunes store!
That's the only scenario that I think makes sense. The TV is the razor and iOS is the delivery mechanism for the razor blades. Apple is all about the platform and the eco-system, not the product which is why I don't see them announcing their own Apple HDTV. Offering a few Apple branded sets manufactured by someone else doesn't make sense either since it doesn't get them the penetration into the living room that they need.
Please, some one answer me what an Apple-branded TV would do which my current HDTV and AppleTV couldn't do?
Honestly, I buy a TV for it's picture quality and nothing else. If I want to play games or watch TV, I'll use a dedicated device!
Can you currently play games on a 55 inch screen? Ever done it?
This rumour is looking more realistic but I still contend that any Apple-branded TV will be more like the "Intel Inside" branding on other vendor's PCs. I can see Samsung, LG, et al. licensing Apple's internal or direct-attach AppleTV to their premium TVs.
This makes more sense.
I'd still opt for an external AppleTV.
Appel Tv, works better, I think, for Apple. It is small, and cost a lot less to build than a full Tv. What can this Tv do that Apple Tv, content & programing wise, can not do?
The key to me is the integration and the simplicity of using a single remote. Right now if I want to watch a movie on my Apple TV I need the TV remote to switch inputs to the Apple TV, the amp remote to switch audio inputs, and finally the Apple TV remote to select my movie. It's a real pain.
Or consider the situation where you want to send a video to your TV from your iPad using AirPlay. Ideally, you would initiate AirPlay on your iPad and a little popup would be displayed on your TV asking you to accept the video. This would need to work no matter what source you are watching on your TV... e.g. cable box, dvd, video game, etc. Right now you can't do this because you would only see the popup if you had your TV set to the right input source.
Additionally, if Apple were to offer an app store you would want to be able to hit a button on your remote to pop up a list of available apps and switch between them no matter what TV source you are watching and without having to juggle a handful of remotes!
That's the problem as I see it and why I think Apple has described it as a hobby up until now. To get that kind of integration they either need to get inside a cable box or inside the TV.
Apple has made an industry of combining devices either to make a more beautiful solution or a more seamless one. Look at an iMac, it's a computer built into the monitor. Isn't the logical extension an Apple HDTV that is an entertainment system built into a TV?
I'm not saying that such a device would be for everybody, but it potentially could win Apple another few million iOS users and further enrich their ecosystem.
Monitors don't typically range in size the ways TVs do.
It would make more sense for Apple to continue to sell the AppleTV and possible license the tech to OEMs, then sell popular models in the Apple Store.
The key to me is the integration and the simplicity of using a single remote. Right now if I want to watch a movie on my Apple TV I need the TV remote to switch inputs to the Apple TV, the amp remote to switch audio inputs, and finally the Apple TV remote to select my movie. It's a real pain.
Or consider the situation where you want to send a video to your TV from your iPad using AirPlay. Ideally, you would initiate AirPlay on your iPad and a little popup would be displayed on your TV asking you to accept the video. This would need to work no matter what source you are watching on your TV... e.g. cable box, dvd, video game, etc. Right now you can't do this because you would only see the popup if you had your TV set to the right input source.
Additionally, if Apple were to offer an app store you would want to be able to hit a button on your remote to pop up a list of available apps and switch between them no matter what TV source you are watching and without having to juggle a handful of remotes!
That's the problem as I see it and why I think Apple has described it as a hobby up until now. To get that kind of integration they either need to get inside a cable box or inside the TV.
Couldn't Apple add an IR receiver or BT control to the AppleTV, allowing the use of universal remotes? Or you could by an add-on for the iPhone to allow it to be a universal remote.
I personally hate universal remotes, and all home theater setups have the remote problem.
For most people, the AppleTV doesn't add any more complication than a DVD player; you still need the TV remote and a DVD remote to watch anything anyway.