Apple suppliers will reportedly begin preparations for Apple television in Q1 2012
Apple's supply chain will begin preparing materials for an Apple-branded television set in the first quarter of next year in advance of a second or third quarter launch, a new report out of the Far East claims.
Taiwan industry publication DigiTimes reported on Tuesday that industry sources are claiming preparations for the much-rumored Apple HDTV will begin early next year. Apple is reportedly aiming to launch the device in either the second or third quarter of 2012.
"Instead of a form of set-top box (STB) like the Apple TV launched in 2006, Apple's new products will be full TV sets," the report noted sources as saying.
Supply chain insiders claimed that Apple would initially release 32- and 37-inch versions of the so-called "iTV." A separate report out of Japan early this month also suggested that the company was looking at an entry-level size of 32 inches, though it went on to state that Apple would release three different sizes, with the largest maxing out at 55 inches.
It should, however, be noted that DigiTimes has an inconsistent record when it comes to Apple-related predictions. The publication claims to have numerous sources within the Asian supply chain, but it has been inaccurate at times.
Meanwhile, reports out of Korea claim that supplier Samsung began producing chips for the device in November, while Sharp is rumored to produce the displays for the television set.
Although rumors of an Apple television have persisted for years, they gained credence earlier this year when biographer Walter Isaacson revealed that late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs told him he had "cracked" the secret to an Apple-style television interface.
Jefferies analyst Peter Misek told investors in late November that Sharp would begin production of the display for an Apple television set in February 2012 in preparation for a mid-2012 launch, a schedule that falls roughly in line with the timeline from Tuesday's report.
Taiwan industry publication DigiTimes reported on Tuesday that industry sources are claiming preparations for the much-rumored Apple HDTV will begin early next year. Apple is reportedly aiming to launch the device in either the second or third quarter of 2012.
"Instead of a form of set-top box (STB) like the Apple TV launched in 2006, Apple's new products will be full TV sets," the report noted sources as saying.
Supply chain insiders claimed that Apple would initially release 32- and 37-inch versions of the so-called "iTV." A separate report out of Japan early this month also suggested that the company was looking at an entry-level size of 32 inches, though it went on to state that Apple would release three different sizes, with the largest maxing out at 55 inches.
It should, however, be noted that DigiTimes has an inconsistent record when it comes to Apple-related predictions. The publication claims to have numerous sources within the Asian supply chain, but it has been inaccurate at times.
Meanwhile, reports out of Korea claim that supplier Samsung began producing chips for the device in November, while Sharp is rumored to produce the displays for the television set.
Although rumors of an Apple television have persisted for years, they gained credence earlier this year when biographer Walter Isaacson revealed that late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs told him he had "cracked" the secret to an Apple-style television interface.
Jefferies analyst Peter Misek told investors in late November that Sharp would begin production of the display for an Apple television set in February 2012 in preparation for a mid-2012 launch, a schedule that falls roughly in line with the timeline from Tuesday's report.
Comments
Imagine Samsung to Apple: you can't make thin, black, rectangular TV's.
it's pretty clear who depends on who... Now, I wonder if Samsung has any design patents on rectangular TV designs. (just take it to the Dusseldorf court).
Imagine Samsung to Apple: you can't make thin, black, rectangular TV's.
That'd be almost as ridiculous as Samsung saying to Apple, "Your iPhones can't use smileys".
:-)
Oh, hang on they already have.
Has it occurred to anyone that Apple can deliver a major blow to Samsung by outcompeting it on its own turf?
With a whole new set of state of the art ports and cables that connect to nothing that people already own !
what is not immediately clear (and never been so far) from all these rumours if it is actually a television with a tuner, that can broadcast over the air channels, just like all television sets do
It seems contrary to Apple's preferred one-system-fits-all principle, which has served them so well in simplifying their product lines. The device would need different tuners for each region. Even these things change over time such as the recent switches in some countries from analogue to digital terrestrial broadcasts, requiring ugly external boxes.
So, I too am wondering what this could actually look like.
It seems contrary to Apple's preferred one-system-fits-all principle, which has served them so well in simplifying their product lines. The device would need different tuners for each region. Even these things change over time such as the recent switches in some countries from analogue to digital terrestrial broadcasts, requiring ugly external boxes.
So, I too am wondering what this could actually look like.
well, all tv set manufacturers manage just fine with the problem, but that's not the point, what we see and read is lazy, sloppy reporting from journalists and analysts. If you call it a TV it must have a tuner, otherwise is not. It should be made clear from the outset so no to create false expectation from consumers that lead to disappointment once the product is launched. It has nothing to do with Apple, they haven't said a thing about it, but all to do with people reporting the rumours.
- embedded apple-tv with a6 cpu
- siri enabled
- no tuner support, iptv support
- itunes match extended to dvd/bluray
- full ipad game compatible, use iphone/ipad as game controller
This would allow apple to compete with both mediastreamers and game consoles, which would allow a decent amount of price premium.
If they would solely build a tv with a different remote (siri or physical) they would be in heavy competition within a low-margin market.
As others have suggested, tuner support would be too demanding, IPTV in my region has been steadily growing in usage.
It seems contrary to Apple's preferred one-system-fits-all principle, which has served them so well in simplifying their product lines. The device would need different tuners for each region. Even these things change over time such as the recent switches in some countries from analogue to digital terrestrial broadcasts, requiring ugly external boxes.
So, I too am wondering what this could actually look like.
It would be weird if you brought home a shiny new Apple TV.... and it didn't work as a TV.
However... lots of people have cable boxes, DVRs or satellite receivers. Any TV you buy still requires the use of a box from the service provider.
Maybe this new Apple TV will only have a bunch of HDMI ports... and finally an elegant interface to switch inputs.
What used to be listed as "HDMI1" on a normal TV... you can label as "DVR"
"HDMI2" is now labeled "DVD" or Blu-Ray"
There are no composite, S-video, or component inputs... but maybe a Mini Displayport.
And finally another input labeled
All of that sounds great... but if you still have to use the box below for most of your TV watching... what's the point?
What used to be listed as "HDMI1" on a normal TV... you can label as "DVR"
"HDMI2" is now labeled "DVD" or Blu-Ray"
Something all tvs in my house are able to do (!)
- LED TV with 1920x1080 resolution (quad-hd not yet any advantage, oled a bit too early, and only lg/samsung have these plans)
- embedded apple-tv with a6 cpu
- siri enabled
- no tuner support, iptv support
- itunes match extended to dvd/bluray
- full ipad game compatible, use iphone/ipad as game controller
This would allow apple to compete with both mediastreamers and game consoles, which would allow a decent amount of price premium.
If they would solely build a tv with a different remote (siri or physical) they would be in heavy competition within a low-margin market.
As others have suggested, tuner support would be too demanding, IPTV in my region has been steadily growing in usage.
Sorry, but Dupont and Sharp are the big OLED/Panel suppliers to third parties for Apple. Follow some other stocks for a change.
On the other hand, if Apple is innovative in terms of content delivery in a manner than makes sense cost-wise to the average consumer, that could fly. If that happens, I don`t imagine we`ll see an Apple TV here in Canada in 2012. Way too many regulatory hurdles to deal with for such a major change to happen in a matter of months. I think it more likely that such a change would come to the US and arrive on these shores roughly a year later.
I was planning on buying a new HD set in November 2012 but if this is the situation, I might just put off buying the new set until the Apple model is made available here in Canada. However, this only applies if the bottom line, over the long run, makes sense. If Apple gives me an alternative to paying as much as I do for my cable feed that saves me let's say $30 a month, for that I would gladly pay extra for an Apple set. Granted, we have two TVs in our household so that would mean having to replace two sets but even so, the idea of breaking free from the antiquated content delivery model offered by my cable provider is appealing.
Right now we have at least 40 stations, probably more, that we never go near. And in this day and age, to be paying a premium for HD content, seriously, how messed up is that. I wouldn't even mind a model in which a flat rate would allow for unlimited access to iTunes content. Add in some way of providing live feeds of items like sporting events and news coverage, plus serving up some ethnic content (i.e. international programming) each offered for an additional fee for those who want it, and you've got all the bases covered.
What I'm thinking is something like $30 a month for the unrestricted iTunes access, and $10 a month for any one of a sports package, news package, and international programming. Additionally, offer a rate of $50 a month for a pass that allows access to all of the above.
Tie the above into iCloud and you've got a compelling package. Initially there would be a cost to make the switch but if you save even maybe $20 a month, that's $240 a year and $2,400 over the 10-year span which would typically be the lifespan of the set. So let's say Apple offers a 32-inch set for $999, a 37-incher for $1,399 and a 42-incher for $1,699. Now that works, I think. If Apple were to go for higher price points, total fail.
By the way, if one didn't need all of the above and could save $30 a month (a lot of consumers fall into that category), that's $360 a year and that's $3,600 in 10 years. You could buy a 42-incher and a 32-incher for $2,698 and still wind up saving money. For that matter, set-top boxes are not cheap, not if one is looking at an HD PVR. If that functionality is built into the Apple units, that's another huge saving.
Come to think of it, done right, Apple could make this work even in tough economic times. We have ended up paying a lot to assemble the bits and pieces needed to watch a little TV. No set-top box, lower monthly fees, and a more rational organization of available content. Room for improvement over what we have today? More than a little.
One thing, though. Here in Canada service providers are starting to charge a premium for more bandwidth usage and I have to assume that whatever model Apple pursues, one is going to need a lot of Internet capacity to make it work. If those providers are allowed to charge excessively for more usage, those providers still get their pound of flesh and this goes nowhere.
If you call it a TV it must have a tuner, otherwise is not.
You are describing granddads TV, NOT the TV of the future.
It should, however, be noted that DigiTimes has an inconsistent record when it comes to Apple-related predictions. The publication claims to have numerous sources within the Asian supply chain, but it has been inaccurate at times.
That is incorrect. Digitimes does NOT have an inconsistent record. They're wrong all the time.
what is not immediately clear (and never been so far) from all these rumours if it is actually a television with a tuner, that can broadcast over the air channels, just like all television sets do
I assume you mean 'receive over the air channels' rather than broadcast them.
I don't know about you, but I haven't used the tuner in my TV since I bought the TV. Or the TV before that. In fact, I don't know any of my friends or family who uses a TV tuner. Everyone I know is on cable or dish. Even in a large city where there is more of a selection of over the air channels, I would venture that the overwhelming majority of people use cable or dish. Based on that, I would argue that a tuner is NOT necessary - as long as the device will handle cable or dish signals (which is a no-brainer - it's just one more hdmi input from the cable box). Now, where it gets interesting is if Apple were to incorporate the cable box inside the TV. That would eliminate one external device. I just don't see it, though.
It would be weird if you brought home a shiny new Apple TV.... and it didn't work as a TV.
However... lots of people have cable boxes, DVRs or satellite receivers. Any TV you buy still requires the use of a box from the service provider.
Maybe this new Apple TV will only have a bunch of HDMI ports... and finally an elegant interface to switch inputs.
What used to be listed as "HDMI1" on a normal TV... you can label as "DVR"
"HDMI2" is now labeled "DVD" or Blu-Ray"
There are no composite, S-video, or component inputs... but maybe a Mini Displayport.
And finally another input labeled
All of that sounds great... but if you still have to use the box below for most of your TV watching... what's the point?
You just used a strawman argument on YOURSELF. Hilarious. Apple is not going to release something like that.
The timing might just cause Apple to fail even if a good product is developed. A few years ago, when $2,000 TVs (in the Canadian market) were common, that was one thing but now you can get a decent set for less than $1,000. Combine that with uncertain economic times and you have a serious challenge for Apple in this market.
On the other hand, if Apple is innovative in terms of content delivery in a manner than makes sense cost-wise to the average consumer, that could fly. If that happens, I don`t imagine we`ll see an Apple TV here in Canada in 2012. Way too many regulatory hurdles to deal with for such a major change to happen in a matter of months. I think it more likely that such a change would come to the US and arrive on these shores roughly a year later.
I was planning on buying a new HD set in November 2012 but if this is the situation, I might just put off buying the new set until the Apple model is made available here in Canada. However, this only applies if the bottom line, over the long run, makes sense. If Apple gives me an alternative to paying as much as I do for my cable feed that saves me let's say $30 a month, for that I would gladly pay extra for an Apple set. Granted, we have two TVs in our household so that would mean having to replace two sets but even so, the idea of breaking free from the antiquated content delivery model offered by my cable provider is appealing.
Right now we have at least 40 stations, probably more, that we never go near. And in this day and age, to be paying a premium for HD content, seriously, how messed up is that. I wouldn't even mind a model in which a flat rate would allow for unlimited access to iTunes content. Add in some way of providing live feeds of items like sporting events and news coverage, plus serving up some ethnic content (i.e. international programming) each offered for an additional fee for those who want it, and you've got all the bases covered.
What I'm thinking is something like $30 a month for the unrestricted iTunes access, and $10 a month for any one of a sports package, news package, and international programming. Additionally, offer a rate of $50 a month for a pass that allows access to all of the above.
Tie the above into iCloud and you've got a compelling package. Initially there would be a cost to make the switch but if you save even maybe $20 a month, that's $240 a year and $2,400 over the 10-year span which would typically be the lifespan of the set. So let's say Apple offers a 32-inch set for $999, a 37-incher for $1,399 and a 42-incher for $1,699. Now that works, I think. If Apple were to go for higher price points, total fail.
By the way, if one didn't need all of the above and could save $30 a month (a lot of consumers fall into that category), that's $360 a year and that's $3,600 in 10 years. You could buy a 42-incher and a 32-incher for $2,698 and still wind up saving money. For that matter, set-top boxes are not cheap, not if one is looking at an HD PVR. If that functionality is built into the Apple units, that's another huge saving.
Come to think of it, done right, Apple could make this work even in tough economic times. We have ended up paying a lot to assemble the bits and pieces needed to watch a little TV. No set-top box, lower monthly fees, and a more rational organization of available content. Room for improvement over what we have today? More than a little.
One thing, though. Here in Canada service providers are starting to charge a premium for more bandwidth usage and I have to assume that whatever model Apple pursues, one is going to need a lot of Internet capacity to make it work. If those providers are allowed to charge excessively for more usage, those providers still get their pound of flesh and this goes nowhere.
That's a lot of inside baseball, so to speak...but I agree in principle. Apple might release a great product, but we'll see how successful it is. It will have to be much more than niche product like the AppleTV, which I assume Apple knows. It took my 3 years or so to finally get an AppleTV. That's because while it's cool, it's not necessary at all.
I've been wondering about this "true Apple TV" rumor. It would have to be something much more than just a great HDTV with an Apple TV built in. You'd have to replace part of what the cable box does, or it's just not worth it. I'd say that minimum, it would need it's own DVR that interfaces with the cable box. I'd like to see it have a blu-ray player as well. The problem here is price. A decent 37" TV is maybe $500-700 right now. Then there is the budget big screen market, where you can get a 55" TV for a grand. After that you have the premium market, which runs into $2000-$500 range.
We'll see.
You just used a strawman argument on YOURSELF.