or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple positioned to introduce connected HDTV within 2-4 years
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple positioned to introduce connected HDTV within 2-4 years

post #1 of 137
Thread Starter 
Apple is expected to join the lucrative home entertainment market, estimated to be worth $31.8 billion in the U.S. alone, in the next two to four years by offering a $2,000 Internet- and content-connected HDTV.

In a note to investors issued Tuesday afternoon, analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray said the move makes strategic sense for Apple, as the Cupertino, Calif., company has a history of success in redefining mature markets.

"As connected TVs gain traction, software, content and portability will become the key differentiators and Apple is uniquely positioned to deliver a premium all-in-one solution (different than Apple TV)," Munster wrote.

The analyst said he believes Apple will combine hardware, software and content in one product with a competitively priced $2,000 HDTV. When combined with a potential iTunes TV subscription plan priced between $50 and $90 per month, users would no longer have a need for their monthly cable bill.

Munster said Apple's established brand with iTunes and its 125 million accounts overlap into the U.S. HDTV market, which is projected to move 32.4 million units in 2010. He said an Apple-branded HDTV would "move the needle" for the market, with the hardware maker delivering a product that would serve as the replacement for an entire entertainment center, beyond just the display.

In addition, the established iPhone and iPod touch brands, along with the forthcoming iPad, could bring portability to the TV industry, allowing users to take their content with them and watch it anywhere. He said Apple's established brands puts the company in a "unique position," allowing it to be on the forefront of a coming line of HDTVs that will be constantly connected.



In his analysis, Munster said although HDTV shipments are up 268 percent in the last five years, average selling prices for the devices have dropped by 50 percent, and the market's revenue is expected to contract in 2010. He believes if Apple introduced a device that would negate the need for a Blu-ray player, digital video recorder, cable box and game console, the company's $2,000 HDTV could represent a significant change for the market.

He noted that Apple has a great deal of experience with high-definition displays on its iMac desktop. Late last year, Apple introduced a new, big-screen, 27-inch iMac desktop.

The need for a cable box and DVR could be replaced with an iTunes TV pass priced between $50 and $90 per month. And without separate components, consumers would no longer need to pay a professional installation fee.

Another important component of the living room experience is games, a business segment that Apple has found great success in, with the iPhone and iPod touch. With a connected TV with access to the existing App Store, Munster believes Apple could enter the market quite easily.

"Given Apple's recent success in portable gaming," the analyst wrote, "an all-in-one TV could be a logical next-step for the company to expand its reach further into the gaming market with limited risk using an existing technology infrastructure."

Even though the TV hardware market is currently a "challenging, low-margin business," the analyst said he believes Apple could "change the rules of the game" by offering best-in-class hardware, software and content at a premium price.

"If history repeats itself, Apple would find a way to compete in a commoditized market with a premium priced product," Munster said. "An Apple Television would address more than just the HDTV market, as it would likely include audio and video features that could replace the TV itself."



Rumors of an HDTV from Apple are nothing new, and Munster and Piper Jaffray have long been proponents of Apple entering the TV and set-top-box business.

Last September, Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer cooled speculation that the company might introduce its own set top box with integration with cable providers. The Apple executive said a new box, or functionality added to the existing Apple TV product line, just doesn't fit the company's business model.

A major factor in Munster's forecast calls for Apple to offer a subscription TV plan that would compete with cable operators. Apple is believed to have recently pushed the concept to networks, and while some showed interest, it is believed the company has since tabled that plan and instead pushed for 99 cent TV episodes.
post #2 of 137
Where's Ireland?
post #3 of 137
they need the content people to go along with it, and the content people are afraid of alienating the cable companies. It's just hard to see how to get from here to there.
post #4 of 137
Normally I would disregard anything Gene "Bullsh*t" Munster says, but he's pretty accurate here - Apple are good at re-defining established markets, and the TV market is approaching an inflection point where people will want their TV to do more.

I'd buy a TV with Apple TV functionality and ease of use built in. I can't figure out any of the advanced features on my Samsung.
post #5 of 137
All good, except that a 40" TV can be had for about $700, and will likely cost less in 2-4 years. And quality? Since when does your average consumer care about quality?

And BTW while I don't care about this possibility, it would be nice to see what develops. I think Piper Jaffrey is just making things up though.
post #6 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimguy View Post

Since when does your average consumer care about quality?

That's a fair point, a lot of people don't care about quality, but the average consumer does seem to care about "cool" and Apple has that in buckets.
post #7 of 137
You still need to pay for internet service. Kind of hard to download off of iTunes without it.
post #8 of 137
Throwing the gaming console and AV receiver in the mix is a cheap/unnecessary shot. That being said I still want my $30 a month iTunes TV pass.
post #9 of 137
I may be able to then do without my cable service but I would assume that with just using Internet service I would now use more than my cable provider (Comcast) would allow for a month and would be considered a bandwidth hog. This, or course, in the future will incur additional fees.
post #10 of 137

Am sorry but they must be smoking something ..

Here in Germany you can buy a great HDTV for under 1000 Euros ..
And the Apple TV ain't selling much at all already ..

On top they think people will pay what ? 60-90 a Month for a TV Service ? Where do they live ?
Not here thats for sure ..
Here Customers expect DSL / Landline Fone Service with a Landline to Landline Flatrate and TV for something that costs 60 or more ..

I Pay 60 EUROS for a 50MB Down 10Up stream DSL Line with a Landline and flat with a Tivo like Tv Receiver 60 Channels and Free Films / TV Shows plus Rental Film and Films ..
(T-Home Entertain)

You think i Pay another for a TV and subscription on top of this ? NEVER ..
BTW .. i am NO Apple Hater far from it i looooveee Apple .. ]
Oh Boy .. I did it again hihi ..

http://facebook.com/eastmanmusic
Reply
Oh Boy .. I did it again hihi ..

http://facebook.com/eastmanmusic
Reply
post #11 of 137
I like this. But wouldn't this mean Apple would also have to become its own cable/broadband company like Time Warner or Comcast? I'm not sure I fancy paying both a cable bill and an "Apple media" bill. I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable price for a media subscription that includes access to DVR, Game, Movie, TV, etc. "apps" each month while retaining the benefits of regular TV, provided I can also make personal backups of that media.

Also, in this imaginary scenario, I don't see Apple coming out with "only" a full-fledged TV. I can't imagine Apple not also buffing the current Apple TV to provide these features for those of us who already own our own, perfectly functional, "dumb" TVs.
post #12 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimguy View Post

Since when does your average consumer care about quality?

What the average consumer cares about is irrelevant. That's not Apple's target market.

They aim at the high-end of the consumer market (which results in higher margins). Apple dominates the U.S. luxury PC market (>$1000) at 91% marketshare.

Apple isn't catering to the crowd that is picking up $499 bargains at Wal-Mart.
post #13 of 137
$9 a month Netflix and a $99 Roku is the cheapest way to get unlimited use streaming movies and TV shows right to your HDTV.

Anything not able to be streamed is available via DVD. Suck it up while you can, Jobs want's to put a end to Netflix really bad as it's undercutting iTMS.
post #14 of 137
There's no doubt Apple would love to make something like this, but I don't see it at $2000 without a badass panel, nor will it be this simple.

It's true that a lot of consumers don't care about quality, but for those of us who do, that desire for me doesn't mesh with the narrow sort of offerings that Apple likes to offer. Personally, a TV for me should last around 10 years+. It needs to have a great picture and be easy to use. There's marketing BS that gets put in with TV's and other products that might help with the sale, but rarely gets used. I don't see iTunes going anywhere, but I don't know about buying a TV based on that.

My TV is not a computer. I don't want to actively be interacting with my TV unless I have my computer hooked up to it to show off some photos or videos or something. I want to sit on my butt, channel surf, and veg the F out. Interacting with a DVR is the most you'll get out of me, and that's only if there's nothing on. I'm not lazy in general, but when I'm watching TV that's my time to turn my brain off and relax, so if Apple wants to integrate iTunes, well go ahead, but it had better be trans-freakin-parent.
post #15 of 137
I remember about ten/ twelve years ago, not long after he'd returned to Apple, I read an interview where Jobs was talking about the future. The key word was 'convergence', and bit by bit we are seeing just that. Computer, music player, video, phone, game console - the boundaries between these previously separate devices are just melting away. That television merges in with everything else is inevitable.
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
post #16 of 137
I'm sure Apple has been working on an AppleTelevision for a while now... with the Google announcement last week, it looks as though Eric was taking notes in all of those board meetings!
post #17 of 137
There's no way Apple will ever enter a commodity market like TV sets. There are already so many different producers, models etc., it would be ridiculous. I don't care about Apple mindshare, quality or visibility, they'd be swamped.

It makes much more sense if Apple actually made the TV a more powerful and flexible home theatre add-on. Something that plugs into ANY TV on the market from an el-cheapo Westinghouse to high-end Sony or a B&O, or a Loewe:

Merge TV with a Mac mini and call it something Mac media or Mac theatre?
Or introduce a new, high-end model TV running iOS?
Or maybe something like an iPad with beefier specs, capable of supporting Full-HD output, capable of drive an entire home theatre system from your sofa with multi-touch.

The Mac mini route is for the geek and doable now. I'd vote for some sort of iOS device replacing the current TV.
Macintosh: It just WORKS!
Reply
Macintosh: It just WORKS!
Reply
post #18 of 137
Unless Apple has something unique to offer in terms of the physicality of the TV screen, there is no reason for them to do this. They can deliver all the software and content potential through a connected box such as the current Apple TV, without shipping and warehousing hundreds of pounds of glass and metal.
post #19 of 137
Is this a joke? How is a tv going to magically negate the need for a game console, blu-ray player (which Apple won't offer), audio receiver, and cable box? A single device couldn't possibly do all of those things well, and likely none of them. How will you watch live content without cable? How will you connect your surround sound system without a receiver? How will watch physical media without an optical drive? How are some crappy iPhone games supposed to replace an xBox 360 or PS3?

The tv market is not one Apple would do well in; pricing changes so fast Apple would never be able to keep up; new models come out in the spring for $1,799 and by Christmas you can pick them up for $1,050. If Apple isn't prepared to adjust prices accordingly they'll be collecting dust at the end of the isle; people pick tvs first and foremost by picture quality, and it's doubtful Apple will be able to keep up with the Panasonics and Samsungs of the world in that regard. Anyone who would be willing to spend $2k on an Apple-branded 40" television because it has a $229 Apple TV stuck inside is a complete tool.
post #20 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by macjock View Post

You still need to pay for internet service. Kind of hard to download off of iTunes without it.

I guess that makes it a one-sided comparison then.

The receiver skews it too, because TVs do include built-in speakers. The Apple counterpart is only stereo, so the TV's speakers should compare well enough.

My 50" plasma cost $1000 with taxes late last year.
post #21 of 137
A full fledged Apple LCD Television makes no sense to me. You end of witha very small slice of a high end TV market, competing for razor thin margins with companies that will have greater variety and much better distribution.

Making a box - a better Apple TV makes a lot of sense. Let people pick whatever set they want and connect it to a better box leverages all the expertise Apple already has with none of the risk of the consumer television market.

If Apple brings down the price of the Apple TV to under $99 or $150, and adds a few features, it would be a home run.

Though in some sense it already is successful - based on estimates I read here, it has outsold all other similar devices combined (linksys, dlink, netgear, etc, etc)
post #22 of 137
I like it! What size? 3D? 1080p?

And in Canada or UK or Mexico can Apple organize the content rights for those countries and argue with the local content regulators? And France, and ... and
post #23 of 137
Gene Munster says some pretty silly things, but this has got to be one of the silliest.
post #24 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastman View Post

On top they think people will pay what ? 60-90 a Month for a TV Service ? Where do they live ?
Not here thats for sure ..
Here Customers expect DSL / Landline Fone Service with a Landline to Landline Flatrate and TV for something that costs 60 or more ..

People here easily pays over $100 for cable TV. I am not sure why either.
post #25 of 137
Apple can make a TV if they want but I would not want the equivalent of all those other components integrated in a TV.

How about a standalone modular system with components such as a "System Integrator" with 4-5 each of Composite, Component and HDMI connectors along with a variety of audio inputs as well to connect to your existing hardware. Maybe several different models of this unit that add more connectors. Add to that a modular unit with a variety of outputs, there could be several different sizes of these units as well.

Make these integrate with the Apple Airport Extreme or Time Capsule. Yeah if you're output is going to a really good AV receiver and surround system you don't need an AV Receiver but if you don't have one, maybe a small unit to output to a small 2.1 or 5.1 speaker system could be another module as well. Add DVD, BlueRay, NAS and other modules as needed. All stacking on top of each other with a modular backplace for connectivity.

Let this all integrate with the Internet, iTunes and a bunch or other services and make it work by providing a better interface such as the iPhone, iPod Touch or iPAD be the universal remote somewhat like the Logitech Harmony universal remotes.

Let someone like Sony or Samsung make the TV.
post #26 of 137
60" Diagonal at that price and I'm interested! Seriously though, I don't see Apple NOT offering the same features what ever they are with Apple TV to connect to any make of HD TV ... I have that now after all with my Sony 60" and Apple TV. Unless Apple's TV offers something very different what's the hook? Unless it's 3D maybe? (kidding).
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #27 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cougar View Post

Gene Munster says some pretty silly things, but this has got to be one of the silliest.

Indeed. What an idiot.
post #28 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Where's Ireland?

It's that country near Great Britain. (Sorry, hard to resist.)

This is a good market for Apple to enter, but it has to be amusing to see anyone claim know precisely how Apple will price a product that isn't even rumored to exist yet, and even if does, would not for another 2-4 years. Look at how much luck anyone had guessing the iPad's price, and that was when it was at least known to exist.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #29 of 137
You would have a hard time to get people to subscribe to that here ..
Unless that would include a Full Sub to SKY TV .. (Sat Digital TV by Murdoch)
Oh Boy .. I did it again hihi ..

http://facebook.com/eastmanmusic
Reply
Oh Boy .. I did it again hihi ..

http://facebook.com/eastmanmusic
Reply
post #30 of 137
The smartest thing Apple could do is get iTunes streaming bundled into other manufactuers' televisions in the same way that Netflix Streaming, Amazon, VUDU, and Blockbuster are built into many HDTVs now. Let someone put in their iTunes username and password and stream purchased content from the iTunes store.
post #31 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory Bauer View Post

it's doubtful Apple will be able to keep up with the Panasonics and Samsungs of the world in that regard. Anyone who would be willing to spend $2k on an Apple-branded 40" television because it has a $229 Apple TV stuck inside is a complete tool.

They would undoubtedly buy their panels from Samsung and replace much of the Samsung electronics with their own. AppleTV++ and all content over the internet. No more cable. CableCos and Telcos will have to become good deliverers of internet and give up managing content.

How is a 40" TV more difficult to warehouse and sell than a 27" iMac?
post #32 of 137
Hello? Apple TV has yet to be a success.
It is hard to imagine Apple offering a compelling product for the living room, especially a TV for that matter.
Who will actually buy a new TV at a premium price just to have Apple on-demand services for the same price as cable?
Apple will have to offer better hardware than Sony and also offer a better experience than PS3/Xbox/Nintendo. Possible but very unlikely.
Furthermore, the movie/cable networks are afraid of giving Apple too much power after witnessing how Apple dominated the music biz. So even if Apple wants to be in the living room, I doubt they will get much support from the content providers.

No, the Apple TV is a good start. Just improve on it. I for one, would love to be able to run apps and surf the web on it. Open it up to developers Apple !
post #33 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by mex4eric View Post

They would undoubtedly buy their panels from Samsung and replace much of the Samsung electronics with their own. AppleTV++ and all content over the internet. No more cable. CableCos and Telcos will have to become good deliverers of internet and give up managing content.

How is a 40" TV more difficult to warehouse and sell than a 27" iMac?

mmm to the second part of the question ... because it's not a Mac maybe? Just a guess.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #34 of 137
the thing with 2-4 years is, nobody will remember these predictions.

If true, they'll most certainly dig it up like they have some insight.
If not, they will just pretend it never happened.
post #35 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

Normally I would disregard anything Gene "Bullsh*t" Munster says, but he's pretty accurate here - Apple are good at re-defining established markets, and the TV market is approaching an inflection point where people will want their TV to do more.

I'd buy a TV with Apple TV functionality and ease of use built in. I can't figure out any of the advanced features on my Samsung.

I don't see it.
  1. TVs are updated in different cycles than the perhipeals they're usually connected to. TVs with optical drives have never been widely popular.
  2. There is no on-size-fits-all philosophy that will work with TVs. What if I want 20" version for the bacthroom, or 30" for bedroom, etc.
  3. Outside of size, there are just too many styles and types to fit too many home settings.
  4. The margins on TVs are typically thin.
  5. Apple will severely limit it's sales potential in this already difficult market by making a few models of TVs with AppleTV software built in. The best option seems to be an appliance that connects to any TV and/or a licensing deal with a company like LG for AppleTV add-on for their TVs, similar to HP's MediaSmart TVs.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #36 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimguy View Post

All good, except that a 40" TV can be had for about $700, and will likely cost less in 2-4 years. And quality? Since when does your average consumer care about quality?

And BTW while I don't care about this possibility, it would be nice to see what develops. I think Piper Jeffrey is just making things up though.

You can buy a quality Panasonic plasma 42" for less than $600.
And buy quality I mean reliable and superior picture.
And buy superior picture I mean better motion resolution, response time (Micro vs Milli) color, and contrast. And buy better I mean $600 vs 1200 (plasma vs LCD) for about "equal" picture quality.

Apple would be smart to do this. I've often thought. Why don't networks upload the daily content once and allow users to view it when they want to. Example: Let's say "2 & 1/2 Men" is on at 8 o'clock on Tuesday. Why not instead, at midnight Monday/Tuesday, they make their entire days worth of viewing available, minus live events. That way if you wanted to watch 2.5 men at 6am you just tune to CBS and select it. No need for DVRing. On demand daily episodes.
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
post #37 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory Bauer View Post

Indeed. What an idiot.

I too can't see how this moron keeps his job...
post #38 of 137
iTV ...
post #39 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post

There's no way Apple will ever enter a commodity market like TV sets. There are already so many different producers, models etc., it would be ridiculous. I don't care about Apple mindshare, quality or visibility, they'd be swamped.

It makes much more sense if Apple actually made the TV a more powerful and flexible home theatre add-on. Something that plugs into ANY TV on the market from an el-cheapo Westinghouse to high-end Sony or a B&O, or a Loewe:

Merge TV with a Mac mini and call it something Mac media or Mac theatre?
Or introduce a new, high-end model TV running iOS?
Or maybe something like an iPad with beefier specs, capable of supporting Full-HD output, capable of drive an entire home theatre system from your sofa with multi-touch.

The Mac mini route is for the geek and doable now. I'd vote for some sort of iOS device replacing the current TV.

This makes more sense to me than an Apple TV screen.

I think the reason people want the all-in-one TV from Apple is that they already don't know how to hook up their cable box and program the remote let alone get Internet content on their TV. Non-tech people want easy above everything else. What we really need is a an integrated set top box that can easily switch between cable for local and network programming, HD antenna for free, uncompressed live sports, and internet media downloads. Geeks can do it now but the general population is clueless. It has to be easy or people won't buy it. And as mentioned above, I hate when they write you can get rid of your cable bill. You still need the Internet portion of the cable service. And you know that an Internet only service from the cable company is going to be rather pricey.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #40 of 137
In 2-4 years, one will easily be able to purchase 50' + LCD/1080p TV sets for US 1000.00 or less, so unless Apple sees fit to incorporate 3D technology (and every other modern technology) into their effort, it'll probably be a non-starter with all but the Apple-faithful.

Heck! I just purchased a Samsung 55' LED/3D TV with two sets of 3D glasses, internet/Netflix etc, capability, and a 3D BluRay player form best Buy this weekend for US 3300.00, which means the same package will be much less expensive in 2-4 years, so Apple had really best think this venture through (including the adoption of BD tech) before taking the plunge.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple positioned to introduce connected HDTV within 2-4 years