or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › 1 million Apple TV sales seen as 'positive, but fairly immaterial'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

1 million Apple TV sales seen as 'positive, but fairly immaterial'

post #1 of 83
Thread Starter 
Though the Apple TV "hobby" is starting to take off, sales of the $99 set-top box just aren't enough to have a major effect on Apple's bottom line.

Reacting to Apple's announcement that the new Apple TV is expected to reach its one millionth sale this week, analyst Shaw Wu with Kaufman Bros. said in a note to investors on Wednesday that he views the figures as "positive, but fairly immaterial." If the device continues to sell a million units per quarter, it would amount to $400 million in annual revenue -- just a drop in the bucket for a company expected to earn $88 billion in revenue in its fiscal year 2011.

However, Wu said he believes the Apple TV is now positioned to become a "more material contributor and game changer in the TV space." But he believes a major catalyst for the set-top box would be the addition of an App Store, allowing users to download new applications for the Apple TV.

Wu estimates that about 40 percent of downloads from the App Store for the iPhone and iPad are games, and he believes that games could be a major selling point for the Apple TV.

"This capability isn't available today, but we believe it could be added fairly easily as Apple TV uses a similar A4 processor architecture as the iPhone, iPad and iPod touch," Wu said.

"One question many investors have asked us is how does Apple add multi-touch capability to a TV? Our answer is the ability to connect the Magic Trackpad, similar to adding multi-touch to its desktop Macs including iMac, Mac mini and Mac Pro. We also see the potential in other peripherals including game controllers."

He also added that many users want the device to be able to record TV programs for viewing later. He said the holdup is not a "technology issue," but is being held up because of "licensing terms."

Kaufman Bros. has maintained its "buy" rating for AAPL stock, and reaffirmed its price target of $395.
post #2 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Though the Apple TV "hobby" is starting to take off, sales of the $99 set-top box just aren't enough to have a major effect on Apple's bottom line.

Reacting to Apple's announcement that the new Apple TV is expected to reach its one millionth sale this week, analyst Shaw Wu with Kaufman Bros. said in a note to investors on Wednesday that he views the figures as "positive, but fairly immaterial." If the device continues to sell a million units per quarter, it would amount to $400 million in annual revenue -- just a drop in the bucket for a company expected to earn $88 billion in revenue in its fiscal year 2011.

However, Wu said he believes the Apple TV is now positioned to become a "more material contributor and game changer in the TV space." But he believes a major catalyst for the set-top box would be the addition of an App Store, allowing users to download new applications for the Apple TV.

Wu estimates that about 40 percent of downloads from the App Store for the iPhone and iPad are games, and he believes that games could be a major selling point for the Apple TV.

"This capability isn't available today, but we believe it could be added fairly easily as Apple TV uses a similar A4 processor architecture as the iPhone, iPad and iPod touch," Wu said.

"One question many investors have asked us is how does Apple add multi-touch capability to a TV? Our answer is the ability to connect the Magic Trackpad, similar to adding multi-touch to its desktop Macs including iMac, Mac mini and Mac Pro. We also see the potential in other peripherals including game controllers."

He also added that many users want the device to be able to record TV programs for viewing later. He said the holdup is not a "technology issue," but is being held up because of "licensing terms."

Kaufman Bros. has maintained its "buy" rating for AAPL stock, and reaffirmed its price target of $395.


Due to the low cost, I went ahead and asked for one from Santa I still don't see why they don't include a blu-ray/dvd/cd player and internal storage. I suppose it's price point. But they could offer an "AppleTVPlus" or something for $299. With a blu-ray player and storage, that would be a steal, and I think doable for them at that price point. The last hurdle is DVR, but that is much tougher as Steve has said (due to the cable industry's business model).
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #3 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Though the Apple TV "hobby" is starting to take off, sales of the $99 set-top box just aren't enough to have a major effect on Apple's bottom line.



It is just a hobby. The folks buying it don't really expect a finished product. Apple folks don't buy Blu-Ray players, so ATV is the best way to access Netflix, and for only $99 it works great.
post #4 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

The last hurdle is DVR, but that is much tougher as Steve has said (due to the cable industry's business model).

I believe you have the concept wrong from the start if you are thinking "Why is there no physical media player and how are they going to do DVR"

Well I can tell you iTunes is the reason for no physical media mate, Apple TV is 90% about selling content off the iTunes store and 10% about getting Apple's foot in the door of the living-room at a great price point.

When it comes to DVR; personally I feel it's so yesterday, I do not want to go though the bother to fast forward though commercials on a DVR for the small number of shows I would actually record.

DVR, plus the cost of the service actually works out to more money than if I were to just rent the HD shows from iTunes commercial free, Apple has done a wonderful job at making content available at pretty responsible pricing points.

Apple TV2 was the prefect gateway for me to completely cut the cable service coming into my home, obviously this will not work for everyone, however people looking for a minimal amount of content will see this is a winning choice.
post #5 of 83
Apple will increase the utility of ATV2 when they move itunes to the cloud, then they can charge us all the yearly fee for Mobileme to access itunes in the cloud.
post #6 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"One question many investors have asked us is how does Apple add multi-touch capability to a TV? Our answer is the ability to connect the Magic Trackpad, similar to adding multi-touch to its desktop Macs including iMac, Mac mini and Mac Pro. We also see the potential in other peripherals including game controllers."

Kinda like the Remote app for iPhones and iPads, right?
post #7 of 83
I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.
post #8 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Market_Player View Post

I believe you have the concept wrong from the start if you are thinking "Why is there no physical media player and how are they going to do DVR"

It depends on one's perspective.

Quote:

Well I can tell you iTunes is the reason for no physical media mate, Apple TV is 90% about selling content off the iTunes store and 10% about getting Apple's foot in the door of the living-room at a great price point.

I doubt that. When Steve Jobs talks about, say, the iPod, he says that he looks at iTunes as a "way to sell iPods." That's really been Apple's stance since the beginning. They aren't making gobs of money from the store, believe it or not. Most of their profits are from hardware. I don't see why the AppleTV is different.

Quote:

When it comes to DVR; personally I feel it's so yesterday, I do not want to go though the bother to fast forward though commercials on a DVR for the small number of shows I would actually record.

DVR, plus the cost of the service actually works out to more money than if I were to just rent the HD shows from iTunes commercial free, Apple has done a wonderful job at making content available at pretty responsible pricing points.

I don't think that's true for me. I DVR a lot of stuff. And there is a whole load of content one cannot get on iTunes.

Quote:

Apple TV2 was the prefect gateway for me to completely cut the cable service coming into my home, obviously this will not work for everyone, however people looking for a minimal amount of content will see this is a winning choice.

It doesn't work for most people. That's why the it's still a niche product. And, that's why I'm speculating on the next step. It depends...if Apple wants the AppleTV to someday be able to take the place of other content-providing hardware/services, it has to add features. Like it not, physical discs are still necessary, especially if you want true HD content and true theater-like sound. 720P is sufficient for regular TV viewing, but not for home theater. Add the compression to that, and it looks downright bad next to blu-ray and even an upconverting DVD player.

If it becomes a true media hub, it needs storage and and optical drive. Most of us don't want to fire up our Macbook Pros to stream a movie to the AppleTV. In fact, I don't even blu-ray support on my 2009 MBP. I would have to rip movies off an external drive.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the product. That is why I asked "Santa" for one! But consider this...how much pontential would this product have if it had what it does now (streaming, networking, iTunes, etc) as well as a blu-ray player and ability to store movies. What if it had a 1 TB drive? What if they found a way to work out DVR functionality (and I think they can)? Then, all you'd need is to purchase HD signal access. All of a sudden my $165 Verizon bill drops by $20-30 a month, and I don't have to deal with their horrible interface.

It's just a question of what Apple wants it to be someday. Right now it's a hobby product of sorts. It could be more.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #9 of 83
Apple TV combined with it's iOS siblings (as controls) will quietly become Apple's unofficial game console and it's answer to PS, Xbox and Wii..
post #10 of 83
I think the only way to defeat the cable companies and content owners is to turn appleTV into a trojan horse. Get people to buy it because it provides useful functionality that has little to do with traditional TV. Apple has been trying to take that approach, but so far it hasn't generated the volume necessary to make this an effective trojan horse. That's basically because creating such a trojan horse is easier said than done. Other than watch TV and play games, there just aren't a lot of other things that people want to use their TV for. The only other obvious thing is accessing the music/video/photo content in one's computer, and that's what AppleTV does well. But it doesn't appear to be enough to really drive mass adoption. Maybe adding app support will help, but other than games, I'm not sure what types of apps people would want to sue on their TVs (anything that I can think of would probably be better on an iPhone or iPad).
post #11 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)
Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.



The people reporting similar problems have found that by changing their DNS it fixes the problem.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...oogle_dns.html
post #12 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatsFan83 View Post

Kinda like the Remote app for iPhones and iPads, right?


Maybe we could use the Magic Trackpad for that? The controllers could be on the screen and we use the trackpad to control,zoom etc.


Just a thought!
post #13 of 83
Apple just took the hard drive out of the Apple TV so I do not see them adding it back in. There is no particular reason to add an optical disk to the player, it just raises the cost of the device to way over $99 plus making it bigger. A lot of people like DVRs but the economics are horrible, every cable company offers them with no-upfront cost. Apple would have to charge for the capability and add in circuits and software to talk to the cable companies servers. Not impossible but a lot of work for very little money.


The most likely changes I see going forward for the AppleTV3 would be to add back in some more SSM and allow game/app play using iPods, iPhones, Magic Trackpads etc. as touch controllers.
post #14 of 83
AirPlay is the killer app that has the potential to make ATV a huge success. It's cheap, easy and works incredibly well from a wide range of devices. As it's use is expanded and the masses figure out the magic, sales will surge. I wouldn't consider a home theater set up without one.
post #15 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

Maybe we could use the Magic Trackpad for that? The controllers could be on the screen and we use the trackpad to control,zoom etc.


Just a thought!

Why would you reply to someones comment without reading what they replied to??
post #16 of 83
"many users want the device to be able to record TV programs for viewing later"

As usual, many people are looking backwards while Apple is looking forward.

Sometimes this looking forward has blown up in their faces (see the Newton), but often it has worked out very well for them.

The DVR concept is old, and while there are still a lot of people who use it and like it, that isn't what Apple is concerned with. Apple is looking to the future where you don't need a DVR because a backlog of all TV shows will be available online. Heck, that day is almost here already. I had a PVR, but retired it once I figured out that it was much easier to just go to Hulu or the network's website and watch an episode that I missed.

As for DVD, that is yesterday's technology as well, with Blu-Ray and digital downloads replacing them. And I doubt the "bag of hurt" surrounding licensing of Blu-Ray has gotten any better.

Honestly, I think that if Apple wants the AppleTV to really take off they need to address the major TV market that is still grossly under served by internet TV, sports fans. They need to be focusing on inking deals with MLB, NFL, NBA, MLS, Nascar, etc. To offer packages like the one offered by Major League Baseball to pay a yearly fee and gain on-deamnd access to every MLB game over the internet. Sports fans typically have disposable income and a large desire to escape the constraints of traditional TV.
post #17 of 83
But where is the content??? It could be a nice box to own IF there was any content here in EUROPE. There are UK moviestore i guess but thers a lot of other countries here than that....

What do you do with something that has no content???
post #18 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.

Why do people always assume their personal experience is the norm? Apple doesn't need to improve service. You need to fix your problem.
post #19 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Due to the low cost, I went ahead and asked for one from Santa I still don't see why they don't include a blu-ray/dvd/cd player and internal storage. I suppose it's price point. But they could offer an "AppleTVPlus" or something for $299. With a blu-ray player and storage, that would be a steal, and I think doable for them at that price point. The last hurdle is DVR, but that is much tougher as Steve has said (due to the cable industry's business model).

Apple's decisions - even the seemingly small ones - are not arbitrary. On the contrary, they are very deliberate, and can usually be seen to be consistent with an overall goal. Steve likes consistency and focused goals.

There is a ton of evidence which suggests that one of Apple's goals is to kill off physical media and move entirely to digital distribution of all content. (Movies, music, software, etc.) Putting any type of disk reader on the Apple TV would not be inline with that goal. Not going to happen.

Thompson
post #20 of 83
AppleTV doesn't use a similar architecture. It uses the same architecture.
post #21 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleAddict2011 View Post

Apple folks don't buy Blu-Ray players

Well I'm an Apple user, I use one hell of a lot of Apple products and I've got a Blu Ray player.

Just because you use Apple products does not mean you won't own Blu Ray players etc!

On to the rest of the article, the App store..... Damn right captain obvious, this thing needs an app store badly, perhaps not so much for the US customers but for us Brits and the rest of the world.

The App store would allow the BBC to role out iPlayer within the UK for instance which would be a major selling point over here.

I love my new Apple TV but it's not nearly as awesome as it could so easily be.
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #22 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.

If you're having problems with insanely long download times, check to see if you're using OpenDNS or GoogleDNS. If you are, revert to your ISP's local DNS servers and you're likely to be shocked at the improvement. The problem is in way Akamai uses location intelligence based on your DNS server name to point you to the closest/fastest entry point to their 'wormhole'.
I did this and download times dropped from 30 hours to 'ready to play in 2 minutes'.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...oogle_dns.html
post #23 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.

Someone above pointed out the idea of checking your DNS server. Perhaps that would work for some people, but it doesn't help me. Something that did seem to help, though, is to rent in standard definition instead of HD. Obviously, there's a lot less data to stream in that case, and movies are ready to play more quickly and generally perform without a hitch thereafter. As a bonus, it costs a buck less. Of course, that won't help you for the cases where you WANT to watch in HD. Some people want HD all the time. I'm not so discriminating. If the movie is anything but a visual feast (e.g. Avatar, the Matrix, Lord of the Rings) I'm fine with standard definition.

Thompson
post #24 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

Love the concept, just thinking that the delivery systems are not quite ready.


I have mine on WiFi and it has never taken more than a minute (usually more like 30 seconds) for a HD movie to start streaming. Never had any interruptions during playback either.

We have a 16mb connection from AT&T U-verse which is in no way extraordinary today.


Matt
post #25 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Well I'm an Apple user, I use one hell of a lot of Apple products and I've got a Blu Ray player.

Just because you use Apple products does not mean you won't own Blu Ray players etc!

Me too. I have a Mac, iPod, original AppleTV and I also have Blu-ray. AppleTV for ripped movies, Blu-ray for movies to own. I have a 2 TB hard drive and running out of disk space. For me, it is not a big deal Apple does not include Blu-ray because I can get it from someone else.
post #26 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by wally626 View Post

Apple just took the hard drive out of the Apple TV so I do not see them adding it back in. There is no particular reason to add an optical disk to the player, it just raises the cost of the device to way over $99 .

Does it? I recently bought a Sony S570 Blu-ray player that has networking and WiFi built in. I can stream Pandora as well as NetFlix and Amazon on-demand video and a whole bunch of other services Sony has hooked up with. The price? $138. To me, that's a much better deal than $99 for Apple TV (or $99 for another Apple Express thingee) and the thing that's really great about it is that I'm not locked into one content supplier.

And while I realize that Apple is primarily in the store business to sell hardware, I think it would make sense for Apple to make the iTunes store available on these types of devices.
post #27 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Does it? I recently bought a Sony S570 Blu-ray player that has networking and WiFi built in. I can stream Pandora as well as NetFlix and Amazon on-demand video and a whole bunch of other services Sony has hooked up with. The price? $138. To me, that's a much better deal than $99 for Apple TV (or $99 for another Apple Express thingee) and the thing that's really great about it is that I'm not locked into one content supplier.

And while I realize that Apple is primarily in the store business to sell hardware, I think it would make sense for Apple to make the iTunes store available on these types of devices.

For people in the Apple bubble.. Own an iPhone or iPod or iPad or Mac then ATV is best for those kind of people.
post #28 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

For people in the Apple bubble.. Own an iPhone or iPod or iPad or Mac then ATV is best for those kind of people.

More like people in the iTunes store bubble. I have an original AppleTV but have never bought media from iTunes. AppleTV and Blu-ray does Netflix. Our AppleTV gets used more due to more movies but Blu-ray has better picture quality. Our family own a Mac, iPod, iPad and it's a close call on what is best.
post #29 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Though the Apple TV "hobby" is starting to take off, sales of the $99 set-top box just aren't enough to have a major effect on Apple's bottom line.


Well, that's 999,900 more sold than Google TV's...
post #30 of 83
Meanwhile, Blu-Ray players going for around the same price as Apple TV with similar internet capabilities in addition to backwards compatibility are really still doing quite okay...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_techne...lu-ray-players

Blu-Ray is an outstanding transition format. It covers DVD's of yesterday, Blu-Rays of today and streaming of tomorrow. It covers a lot of bases and truly offers the best audio and video experience of any format out there right now. It won't be going away anytime soon. Blu-Ray is a bona fide hit among consumers, being adopted at a rate faster than DVD players were ever adopted. Netflix is a huge part of that, again, for discs that work today and streaming for tomorrow.

Not so bad for a "bag of hurt..."

I still think Blu-Ray is a great product that only stands to gain more ground now that pricing has truly come down to consumer-friendly levels. Apparently I'm not the only one.

http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv...ext-year-0720/

Get back to me when Apple TV hits 10% of those numbers. Until then, Apple's VERY smart to keep it a hobby.
post #31 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by GmanMac View Post

Well, that's 999,900 more sold than Google TV's...

Google TV really is a different type of product. The comparisons are a little silly. None the less, Google TV is still a terrible, awful product. If you want to talk about a real "bag of hurt," start talking Google TV.
post #32 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Does it? I recently bought a Sony S570 Blu-ray player that has networking and WiFi built in. I can stream Pandora as well as NetFlix and Amazon on-demand video and a whole bunch of other services Sony has hooked up with. The price? $138. To me, that's a much better deal than $99 for Apple TV (or $99 for another Apple Express thingee) and the thing that's really great about it is that I'm not locked into one content supplier.

And while I realize that Apple is primarily in the store business to sell hardware, I think it would make sense for Apple to make the iTunes store available on these types of devices.

I have this player as well. Don't forget to add that you've also had Hulu Plus capability since day 1.

Not to mention built in DLNA capabilities that allow you to access music, pictures and video from your home network. Mine works great and I use it all the time. I didn't even have to set it up, it was just there when I turned the player on. I can also play .mkv files on it.
post #33 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcom006 View Post

Meanwhile, Blu-Ray players going for around the same price as Apple TV with similar internet capabilities in addition to backwards compatibility are really still doing quite okay...

Having similar internet capabilities isnt the same as having as useful or usable internet capabilities. Exhibit A: GoogleTV, which actually does a whole lot more if you create a spec sheet between the two products.

BTW, have you used a $99 Blu-ray player? If you do, note how long it takes to load a disc, the noise from the drive, the blocking, freezing at odd times, not to mention the incompatibility with newer discs and likelihood of HW failure. You get what you pay for.

Quote:
Blu-Ray is an outstanding transition format. It covers DVD's of yesterday, Blu-Rays of today and streaming of tomorrow. It covers a lot of bases and truly offers the best audio and video experience of any format out there right now. It won't be going away anytime soon. Blu-Ray is a bona fide hit among consumers, being adopted at a rate faster than DVD players were ever adopted. Netflix is a huge part of that, again, for discs that work today and streaming for tomorrow.

Bu-ray is great for the HEC, but not for the average PC. It also doesnt mean every fraking device should come with a Blu-ray drive.

BTW, Bu-ray isnt a huge hit with DVD outselling Blu-rays and with streaming media far exceeding Blu-ray around the world, in both number of videos and total streaming of videos.

Quote:
http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv...ext-year-0720/

Get back to me when Apple TV hits 10% of those numbers. Until then, Apple's VERY smart to keep it a hobby.

So the single product AppleTV cant be a success unless it sells 1/10th the units as all Blu-ray players sold around the world. How does that possibly make sense?
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 #34 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I still don't see why they don't include a blu-ray/dvd/cd player and internal storage. I suppose it's price point. But they could offer an "AppleTVPlus" or something for $299.

no blu/DVD because they set up all that download stuff and see that and streaming as the future. They tried the whole storage thing and it didn't sell plus DVR etc would require licensing of tech.

Despite what mr Wu says, one million units of this 'toy' in a quarter is still impressive. Especially if it continues at even half that rate. The point of this item is to push Apple's rentals etc. If they can show volume then they can get more networks on board push for a lower price or even a subscription of some kind (say like a season rental pass for $15 for SD instead of the $22 it would cost you one by one). Showing usage might also convince the nets to loosen up the rental restrictions. And who knows perhaps this would help them get their heads out of their butts and start crediting show buy back with proceeds from rentals and buys online rather than continuing to only look at the antiquated Nielsen system. Then fewer decent scripted shows would bite it two eps in.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleAddict2011 View Post

The folks buying it don't really expect a finished product.

Hardly. The folks buying this are 99.9% buying it because of what it is. They are not the ubergeek know it alls that hang out on boards like this proclaiming that everything sucks because it is not how they would do it, when they would do it at the price they would pay for it. The same geeks that don't get the concept that Apple et al are about money and sometimes that means making for the masses. And the masses seem to fine with the Apple TV just the way it is. They didnt get it because of what it could be in the future but what it is now.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #35 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Having similar internet capabilities isnt the same as having as useful or usable internet capabilities. Exhibit A: GoogleTV, which actually does a whole lot more if you create a spec sheet between the two products.

BTW, have you used a $99 Blu-ray player? If you do, note how long it takes to load a disc, the noise from the drive, the blocking, freezing at odd times, not to mention the incompatibility with newer discs and likelihood of HW failure. You get what you pay for.


Bu-ray is great for the HEC, but not for the average PC. It also doesnt mean every fraking device should come with a Blu-ray drive.

BTW, Bu-ray isnt a huge hit with DVD outselling Blu-rays and with streaming media far exceeding Blu-ray around the world, in both number of videos and total streaming of videos.

So the single product AppleTV cant be a success unless it sells 1/10th the units as all Blu-ray players sold around the world. How does that possibly make sense?

The newer players do not take near as long to load discs as they used to. Blame that on Hollywood anyways as it has everything to do with the endless anti-piracy checks occurring on disc and player simultaneously. It's no worse than buffering of streaming media.

My Sony BDP-S570 loads discs nearly instantly now and I've never had issues with discs not playing on any player I've owned, including the very first Blu-Ray player on the market which I still have on a TV, the Sony BDP-S1. Nowadays, if you have wi-fi built in, you should be getting semi-regular firmware updates that cover these bases. Apple products are no exception to update rules.

Blu-Ray IS a huge hit. Just because DVD's still outsell Blu-Ray (almost 15 years of market penetration on players will help with that...). As said, Blu-Ray players are being adopted at a faster rate than DVD players were. Was DVD not a hit? And again, what's great about these players is that they cover yesterday with DVD, today with Blu-Ray and all that streaming your talking about. It's a great product that will aptly help to usher in the streaming-only age.

1 million units given Apple's rabid fan-boy base and this holiday shopping season certainly isn't a failure, and one could suggest it's a success in some ways, but it's certainly not meaningful in any way yet. I'm not trying to suggest that it's a horrible product. It isn't. But it's a strange product. It's at the same time not up to par with today's technological standards as well as being a bit ahead of its time. The market most likely to latch on to such a product today isn't interested in it as it's too limited in terms of handling files and outputting HD audio and video. There are some really cool ideas behind Apple TV, but it's just not set to be a mainstream hit anytime soon. Apps and gaming could very well change that though.

And I never said anything about every product containing an optical drive of any sort. Wrong guy.
post #36 of 83
ATV is just a content delivery system.
AppleTV will never be considered a major slice of the pie if Apple doesn't factor the revenue from the resulting iTunes rentals into the equation.
post #37 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

I hope they improve the service soon. Previews work great, but have tried to rent a movie a few times and it failed every time. Long downloads, or it starts only to stop about 3 mins in. I even ran a network connection to the box, same issue. (Screaming network connection here at the home)

It may not have anything to do with iTunes or the AppleTV. Others have pointed out the whole DNS issue. But there is also the question of your ISP throttling large downloads. Some of them are doing it under the assumption that you are doing bit torrents etc. The notion that it could be a totally legal download escaped their brains when they set up their computers to jack speeds down on you.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #38 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcom006 View Post

There are some really cool ideas behind Apple TV, but it's just not set to be a mainstream hit anytime soon. Apps and gaming could very well change that though.

The AppleTV doesnt have to be a huge hit, because its not the AppleTV against all Blu-ray players. The AppleTV is just single product. Its the easiest way to stream Netflix, but outside of that its mostly just an iPod for your HEC.

As I stated, Blu-ray is great for the HEC, but Apple doesnt sell HEC equipment except for the AppleTV. outside of portable devices that make no sense for an optical drive, it sells PCs, most of which are notebooks which use 9.5mm optical drives that would $500+ for Blu-ray upgrade. However, I have a feeling that future Mac notebooks will be excluding the optical drive altogether.

Then there is there is their iTunes Store video and there lack of OS and professional app support for Blu-ray. There really is no reason to think Apple will ever include Blu-ray HW in their products.

That said, if Apple releases an SDK for the AppleTV this $99 device could be a huge hit for the 2011 holidays in a way that is currently unimaginable.


Quote:
And I never said anything about every product containing an optical drive of any sort. Wrong guy.

Mea culpa.
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 #39 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

Maybe we could use the Magic Trackpad for that? The controllers could be on the screen and we use the trackpad to control,zoom etc.


Just a thought!

Why would you suggest using a MacOs device when the AppleTv is based on iOS and there are iOS devices that could be used. And likely will be at the point that Apple opens up the ecosystem for apps on the AppleTV. Apps will likely be designed for the tv as a kind of display and the iPod, phone, pad as the controller. But it will likely be a limited set as many apps would have no benefit from such a system. They are meant to be mobile etc


Quote:
Originally Posted by habi View Post

But where is the content??? It could be a nice box to own IF there was any content here in EUROPE.

Thank the studios for that. Foreign broadcast, etc rights are a huge moneymaker. The studios negotiate piece meal so ey can make the most money. And since they, not Apple, Netflix have all the power in this game they get what they want while we are the losers in the end.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #40 of 83
I'll take the profits out of the $99,000,000 in sales.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › 1 million Apple TV sales seen as 'positive, but fairly immaterial'