iCloud is your PVR. The tuner is obsolete with the other ingredients you list.
Yes, since all the TV channels now offer most of the there programming for streaming over the net PvR could indeed be optionnal, but understand not everything is available this way.
But no way you will be able to record a show into the cloud, this would generates WAY to much traffic and storage. Much easier to PvR into a netdrive or time capsule device over wifi.
ATSC tuner is required by law in both the US and Canada. This allows local channels to be received. Let me tell you those laws wont changed anytime soon and you sure dont want to open that can of worms.
I'm glad the word "analyst" starts with a particular word, because they have their head firmly inserted up theirs, and possibly others. There is NO WAY Apple would do this for one reason.
SHOCK AND AWE DISRUPTION
They are working on a TV that will disrupt the current craptastic offering by the other TV/electronics companies. Adding TV functionality to your iMac doesn't nothing but erode the iMac brand, confuse the value of the device and doesn't get Apple into the living room. Apple will come to the table with an offering that out thinks and out maneuvers the competition in a way that will make them scramble. They will get rid of the complex remotes and thousands of channels of crap. They will make watching TV fun and easy again.
Analyst has become a word of scorn and ridicule. We don't want to watch TV on our computers; Microsoft already tried this and it wasn't exactly a hit. Apple even toyed with it with Front Row and it wasn't a hit either.
Apple would be better off extending the capabilities of their AppleTV by either adding media apps like Netflix or just going all out and adding an SDK with app store and turning the AppleTV into a platform.
An Apple branded TV with no other inputs [meaning: no ports to attach third-party boxes] is just dumb and would be a market failure.
An Apple TV with ports would be pretty much just like any other TV, but with Apple stuff thrown in as an extra.
The Apple TV will instead be revolutionary. It will connect to any allowed optional input and output devices using wireless technologies.
It will work out of the box and connect with your Apple products.
It will also have many, many expensive add-ons from third party licensed companies.
It will work out of the box with your existing Apple ecosystem. You will (finally!) discard all the extra cluttered cruft that used to compose your "home entertainment system". The simulated 5.1 sound will be lauded, and sites like AppleInsider will review the latest external speakers. People will brag about their setups of iCloud, Time Machine and Airport Expess, and how they all are seamlessly integrated into their Macs and iPads and Apple TVs and work computer and everything except those horrible non-Apple machines.
People will ejaculate in their pants when they use their iPad as an integral part of the experience.
Analyst has become a word of scorn and ridicule. We don't want to watch TV on our computers; Microsoft already tried this and it wasn't exactly a hit. Apple even toyed with it with Front Row and it wasn't a hit either.
Apple would be better off extending the capabilities of their AppleTV by either adding media apps like Netflix or just going all out and adding an SDK with app store and turning the AppleTV into a platform.
A 32" iMac would be cool. It would bridge the gap. A person could use it as a computer or a TV. I think that they would have to change the base on it though. Maybe a removable base and then it could have wall mountable capabilities. Oh well I guess we will have to wait and see.
Working with the middle men is another way to go but with so many different cable network designs I'd think this would be harder than trying to be another competitor of cable an sat. Apple and MS have the money to pay the lump sums to the networks.
Plus, if they get Time Warner and Brighthouse, but not Charter there is a huge gap in their business model, but going right to the networks will make them nothing but dub pipes supplying internet access.
That certainly would be ideal... I am unsure how easy it will be to bypass the middle men, though.
One of the themes that Steve has stressed repeatedly is the difference between TV, where you're sitting far back, and PC's were you're sitting up close and how the two are totally different in terms of how engaged your brain is.
So for an analyst to say that Apple will again try to merge TV and PC functions in one machine only reveals an astounding level of ignorance and misunderstanding of the company he is analyzing.
I'm looking at a new iMac (my current one is an original G5) and this might move me a bit. Since we are already using 4 TVs in the house the buying decision will not be about a TV, but about new advances in the iMac technology.
What's to gain from this unless you're putting it on all Macs because it's Apple working with networks to become a major distributor of content like the cable/sat companies? If it's just adding a tuner to the iMac then this is pretty tame and go against the speculation that Apple's HDTV will have no tuners or any other inputs whatsoever, just a connection to Apple's distribution network.
If Apple TV is going to be driven by agreements with cable and satellite providers to handle the set-top box functionality, program guide, DVR, etc. -- and that's probably the way Apple would want to do it -- I think they'd want to work the bugs out with iMac before they launch what they're going to brand as a TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
One of the themes that Steve has stressed repeatedly is the difference between TV, where you're sitting far back, and PC's were you're sitting up close and how the two are totally different in terms of how engaged your brain is.
So for an analyst to say that Apple will again try to merge TV and PC functions in one machine only reveals an astounding level of ignorance and misunderstanding of the company he is analyzing.
Not necessarily. Apple's larger monitors are the same size as a lot of smaller living room TVs, and a lot of people are watching TV content on iMacs already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
People will ejaculate in their pants when they use their iPad as an integral part of the experience.
I don't see apple dealing with all the major networks working out package bundles and becoming essentially a "cable provider". Generally, Apple enters(or creates) a market when they see an opportunity to do something special. While Apple may make a tv, I doubt it. Its already a absurdly competitive market without large margins. If they do, it will be with a product that does something that no one else is doing. Just adding a tuner to front row is not their style. '
I would be interested to see them make a tv(arm or intel low voltage powered)that is compatible with the RVU standard:
This would not free us from the cable company, but it would at least get rid of the cable box. If they do allow some control of the interface(or say the interface can be offloaded to an Ipad or Ipod like remote), apple could potentially release TV with an amazing interface if nothing else. Add apps, airplay, and direct streaming of itunes content, and you might just have winner.
Yep. Back in the day when I worked in high-end A/V, people asked all the time if the TV we were trying to sell them had PIP. My standard response was to ask them if they had cable or satellite. If they had one or the other, I told them the PIP feature was useless as the TV's internal tuners would be superseded by the cable box or satellite receiver. In my 15 years as a residential A/V integrator, I can count on one hand how many people actually used PIP functionality. The exception was Cablevisions Explorer 8300 DVR. It actually utilized it's dual internal tuners to give you PIP via the set-top box.
A 32" iMac would be cool. It would bridge the gap. A person could use it as a computer or a TV. I think that they would have to change the base on it though. Maybe a removable base and then it could have wall mountable capabilities. Oh well I guess we will have to wait and see.
They have this already. With it, any VESA-100 compatible wall-mount/articulating arm will work.
No one really wants a full computer instead of their television.
I guess I am a "no one". I got rid of my TV long ago and have been using only iMacs and el Gato's eyeTV and good external speakers as my entertainment center. (of course I live in a small house and prefer to spend my money on quality items that give me the most bang for the buck). I would definitely buy an iMacTV.
I think they have to go beyond the cable/sat companies. They have to ink similar deals that the cable/sat companies did with large upfront payments for large bundles of stations. They will become another competitor to your TV viewing the way satellite slow did against cable.
The downside is for those that have cable for internet. If Apple et al. are mildly successful then you'll be dropping your TV subscriptions and going with internet only plans from your cable company. Since they buy their content from networks in large sums they need to maintain enough TV subscribers to make the purchase worthwhile. As this number drops so will their profit until it becomes a loss. This means a renegotiations with the networks, a raise in internet costs, throttle of internet, and/or capping your usage. This change will happen eventually and it will be the ugliest paradigm shift we've ever seen in technology.
I agree with you whole heatedly. If you notice it is usually the cable companies that keep trying to push data caps. Is it because their networks can't handle the traffic this creates? No, Dsl providers generally don't give two sh!ts what you are downloading and their networks generally don't have the peak capacity that cable does. The cable companies are petrified of becoming "dumb pipes" and will do (or try) anything to make sure that does not happen. Ugly paradigm shift doesn't even begin to describe what is going to happen.
Comments
iCloud is your PVR. The tuner is obsolete with the other ingredients you list.
Yes, since all the TV channels now offer most of the there programming for streaming over the net PvR could indeed be optionnal, but understand not everything is available this way.
But no way you will be able to record a show into the cloud, this would generates WAY to much traffic and storage. Much easier to PvR into a netdrive or time capsule device over wifi.
ATSC tuner is required by law in both the US and Canada. This allows local channels to be received. Let me tell you those laws wont changed anytime soon and you sure dont want to open that can of worms.
SHOCK AND AWE DISRUPTION
They are working on a TV that will disrupt the current craptastic offering by the other TV/electronics companies. Adding TV functionality to your iMac doesn't nothing but erode the iMac brand, confuse the value of the device and doesn't get Apple into the living room. Apple will come to the table with an offering that out thinks and out maneuvers the competition in a way that will make them scramble. They will get rid of the complex remotes and thousands of channels of crap. They will make watching TV fun and easy again.
Steve said there was no "go to market" solution...
Later, Steve said he "cracked it"...
Maybe the solution is to cause the "market to come to you"...
Apple would be better off extending the capabilities of their AppleTV by either adding media apps like Netflix or just going all out and adding an SDK with app store and turning the AppleTV into a platform.
Ah yes, PIP, the feature everyone asks for but no one uses.
I don't think I've ever used PIP once. Ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
An Apple branded TV with no other inputs [meaning: no ports to attach third-party boxes] is just dumb and would be a market failure.
An Apple TV with ports would be pretty much just like any other TV, but with Apple stuff thrown in as an extra.
The Apple TV will instead be revolutionary. It will connect to any allowed optional input and output devices using wireless technologies.
It will work out of the box and connect with your Apple products.
It will also have many, many expensive add-ons from third party licensed companies.
It will work out of the box with your existing Apple ecosystem. You will (finally!) discard all the extra cluttered cruft that used to compose your "home entertainment system". The simulated 5.1 sound will be lauded, and sites like AppleInsider will review the latest external speakers. People will brag about their setups of iCloud, Time Machine and Airport Expess, and how they all are seamlessly integrated into their Macs and iPads and Apple TVs and work computer and everything except those horrible non-Apple machines.
People will ejaculate in their pants when they use their iPad as an integral part of the experience.
Analyst has become a word of scorn and ridicule. We don't want to watch TV on our computers; Microsoft already tried this and it wasn't exactly a hit. Apple even toyed with it with Front Row and it wasn't a hit either.
Apple would be better off extending the capabilities of their AppleTV by either adding media apps like Netflix or just going all out and adding an SDK with app store and turning the AppleTV into a platform.
Appletv has netflix already.
"the simplest user interface you could imagine."
So brain waves, then. That's the simplest thing I can imagine. Just think what you want to watch and presto!
Working with the middle men is another way to go but with so many different cable network designs I'd think this would be harder than trying to be another competitor of cable an sat. Apple and MS have the money to pay the lump sums to the networks.
Plus, if they get Time Warner and Brighthouse, but not Charter there is a huge gap in their business model, but going right to the networks will make them nothing but dub pipes supplying internet access.
That certainly would be ideal... I am unsure how easy it will be to bypass the middle men, though.
Oh and ....
E
X
C
U
S
E
M
E
?
Are we engaging in signature
W
A
R
F
A
R
E
?
So for an analyst to say that Apple will again try to merge TV and PC functions in one machine only reveals an astounding level of ignorance and misunderstanding of the company he is analyzing.
What's to gain from this unless you're putting it on all Macs because it's Apple working with networks to become a major distributor of content like the cable/sat companies? If it's just adding a tuner to the iMac then this is pretty tame and go against the speculation that Apple's HDTV will have no tuners or any other inputs whatsoever, just a connection to Apple's distribution network.
If Apple TV is going to be driven by agreements with cable and satellite providers to handle the set-top box functionality, program guide, DVR, etc. -- and that's probably the way Apple would want to do it -- I think they'd want to work the bugs out with iMac before they launch what they're going to brand as a TV.
One of the themes that Steve has stressed repeatedly is the difference between TV, where you're sitting far back, and PC's were you're sitting up close and how the two are totally different in terms of how engaged your brain is.
So for an analyst to say that Apple will again try to merge TV and PC functions in one machine only reveals an astounding level of ignorance and misunderstanding of the company he is analyzing.
Not necessarily. Apple's larger monitors are the same size as a lot of smaller living room TVs, and a lot of people are watching TV content on iMacs already.
People will ejaculate in their pants when they use their iPad as an integral part of the experience.
Depends on what they're watching, I guess.
I would be interested to see them make a tv(arm or intel low voltage powered)that is compatible with the RVU standard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RVU_protocol
This would not free us from the cable company, but it would at least get rid of the cable box. If they do allow some control of the interface(or say the interface can be offloaded to an Ipad or Ipod like remote), apple could potentially release TV with an amazing interface if nothing else. Add apps, airplay, and direct streaming of itunes content, and you might just have winner.
I don't think I've ever used PIP once. Ever.
Yep. Back in the day when I worked in high-end A/V, people asked all the time if the TV we were trying to sell them had PIP. My standard response was to ask them if they had cable or satellite. If they had one or the other, I told them the PIP feature was useless as the TV's internal tuners would be superseded by the cable box or satellite receiver. In my 15 years as a residential A/V integrator, I can count on one hand how many people actually used PIP functionality. The exception was Cablevisions Explorer 8300 DVR. It actually utilized it's dual internal tuners to give you PIP via the set-top box.
A 32" iMac would be cool. It would bridge the gap. A person could use it as a computer or a TV. I think that they would have to change the base on it though. Maybe a removable base and then it could have wall mountable capabilities. Oh well I guess we will have to wait and see.
They have this already. With it, any VESA-100 compatible wall-mount/articulating arm will work.
No one really wants a full computer instead of their television.
I guess I am a "no one". I got rid of my TV long ago and have been using only iMacs and el Gato's eyeTV and good external speakers as my entertainment center. (of course I live in a small house and prefer to spend my money on quality items that give me the most bang for the buck). I would definitely buy an iMacTV.
I think they have to go beyond the cable/sat companies. They have to ink similar deals that the cable/sat companies did with large upfront payments for large bundles of stations. They will become another competitor to your TV viewing the way satellite slow did against cable.
The downside is for those that have cable for internet. If Apple et al. are mildly successful then you'll be dropping your TV subscriptions and going with internet only plans from your cable company. Since they buy their content from networks in large sums they need to maintain enough TV subscribers to make the purchase worthwhile. As this number drops so will their profit until it becomes a loss. This means a renegotiations with the networks, a raise in internet costs, throttle of internet, and/or capping your usage. This change will happen eventually and it will be the ugliest paradigm shift we've ever seen in technology.
I agree with you whole heatedly. If you notice it is usually the cable companies that keep trying to push data caps. Is it because their networks can't handle the traffic this creates? No, Dsl providers generally don't give two sh!ts what you are downloading and their networks generally don't have the peak capacity that cable does. The cable companies are petrified of becoming "dumb pipes" and will do (or try) anything to make sure that does not happen. Ugly paradigm shift doesn't even begin to describe what is going to happen.
It's a purely speculative report, sure, but me personally? I would buy such a product.
It's not going to happen. If they are to do a TV it will be a TV.